Militair verblijfsgebouw, Betonnen werken Ruigenhoek-De Gagel Utrecht

English translation

The text above is the record as published by the Rijksdienst voor het Cultureel Erfgoed, in Dutch. The English below is a machine translation made by TreeAlive, not by the Rijksdienst voor het Cultureel Erfgoed; it has not been checked by a person. Where the two differ, the original is the record. Report a translation error: privacy@treealive.com

Description

Cluster 32. Remains / Reconstruction of trenches.

NEW HOLLANDIC WATERLINE

Introduction

REMAINS / RECONSTRUCTION OF TRENCHES as (restored and reconstructed) remains and traces of field fortifications, particularly dating from mobilisations of the twentieth century. Trenches are usually channel or gallery systems dug in wartime or under threat of war to protect soldiers from enemy fire. They were created extensively in the First World War, but also much earlier, such as in the sixteenth to nineteenth centuries when they were laid out in our regions during sieges of cities. The excavated earth usually lies as a rampart on the front side and thus forms a covering. In the run-up to the Second World War, trenches were constructed on a large scale in connection with concrete structures (group shelters Type P and cast-steel cupola casemates Type G) and so-called 'group nests' also came into being according to this pattern. The trenches from this period were dug works, often reinforced with wooden and concrete elements. Trenches usually have a more or less zigzagging or angular course to optimise cover and fields of fire. After the war, virtually all trenches and group nests were levelled, but here and there visible traces and remains are still present, such as within the complex Works between Fort Ruigenhoek and Fort De Gagel south of Fort Ruigenhoek, where part of it was restored / reconstructed around 2000. The trench formed part of a system of living field fortification, which was laid out by military personnel themselves in the run-up to the Second World War. The levelling of the terrain in this area was not thoroughly carried out after the war, with the result that traces and remains remained recognisable. The part made visible again extends southwards, starting from a point approximately forty metres south of the nearest group shelter Type P. Traces and remains of other parts - in particular of the northern part of the former trench - are to be expected.

Description

REMAINS / RECONSTRUCTION OF TRENCHES south of Fort Ruigenhoek, consisting of a roughly northeast-southwest running gully consolidated by wooden structures and provided with several sharp and shallow kinks. The total length is approximately forty-five metres and the width at the base is one to two metres. The reconstruction of the trench is composed of outward-facing (hardwood) paling rows and boarding, with on one side a low earth rampart, by which the (in principle temporary) work in the field - from a distance - is scarcely perceptible. Entrance and cross-branch on the east side. The trench formed part of the system of the so-called living field fortifications, of which remains and traces in the immediate vicinity - and in particular in the vicinity of the annex group shelter Type P - are to be expected.

Valuation

The REMAINS / RECONSTRUCTION OF TRENCHES in the complex Works between Fort Ruigenhoek and Fort De Gagel are of general interest on account of:

* Cultural-historical values as components of the New Hollandic Waterline as designed by C.R.T. Kraijenhoff and initially realised from 1815 by him, Jan Blanken and major-engineer Willem Offerhaus and subsequently strengthened and improved by others over approximately 125 years.

* Architectural-historical values, in particular as an expression of military-strategic building, which is based on: a. the system of inundation and access defence (nineteenth and twentieth centuries), b. the race with increasingly strengthening offensive means (twentieth century), c. the system of 'living' field fortification in depth (twentieth century).

The component is a relatively rare - and through the reconstruction readily recognisable - example of a defensive work laid out in mobilisation time as intended to be temporary.

* Archaeological values on account of possibly present traces in the soil of earthen, wooden, masonry or concrete trenches, blockages, structures and the like.

* Ensemble value and situational values as a component of the New Hollandic Waterline. Also on account of the functional and physical cohesion with the other components of the complex.

* The component has become fairly rare and is in its present form representative because this temporary defensive installation has remained recognisable in its physical context and cohesion.

* The component is reasonably well preserved because it has remained perceptible and recognisable especially thanks to restoration and reconstruction in situ.