You cannot blame the restorators of then for our newly gained knowledge now. So no, I would not call it fake, but indeed not entirely correct. I enjoyed the tour, thanks! Inspirational!
Thanks for the reply and we certainly agree with you. De Waele was a very respected man and did great work, to the best of his intentions. And let's be honest, there are also abandoned castles to be found troughout Europe which nobody visits, exactly for that reason. So there's something to say for both sides. Nice you enjoyed it and feel free to subscribe / share the channel, we are still very small so that helps us a lot!
De Waele had to choose between various time periods. He decided to restore the castle to what it might have looked like in the 12th century, but unfortunately his interpretation was quite 'romantic', to say the least. The end result belongs in the 15th century rather than the 12th, except for the ramparts. I think De Waele could have done a slightly better job, with the knowledge he had at the time (not so much different from what we know today), but it's certainly not the worst restoration either. At least it saved the castle. I have more issues with the late 20th century concrete and glass additions.
@@jacquesmertens3369 Thanks for the reply. Those las two things are new for us, where are they? That sounds even worse, although one can argue that the concrete could be necessary to prevent collapse and is the best option (if it's done in an invisible way)
@@HisRep There's the ticket office to start with, and the staircase next to it. 10:17 (among others) shows the staircase on the left side of the ticket office. The staircase is modern, with concrete underneath. It leads to a concrete platform with a metal/glass superstructure. From there you can turn left, enter the building (to the place you have described as Roman gallery), only to find even more concrete and modern, metal stairs. It's a horrible addition, certainly not hidden. The "Roman gallery" happens to be a place often used by groups of school children, which would explain extra safety measures (similar to the worn winding stairs which have been replaced with new stones), but I find it unacceptable. What's next? Metal railings to prevent you from falling off the ramparts? It's a medieval castle, not a playground.
0:17 "which means the count's rock". No, it means the count's castle. The word "steen", just like the German word "Stein" can refer both to a stone and to a castle. In this case: a castle. 1:20 The history of the Gravensteen can be traced back to as early as 845. Some sources even claim the oldest fort on this location dates from the 8th century. 2:12 "present-day Palestine"? The Kingdom of Jerusalem coincides more than 90% with present-day Israel. 6:50 "original niches" They're actually from around 1895. Only the ramparts and the lower floors/cellars are almost authentic, whatever is on the east side and top floors has been rebuilt in a rather inauthentic way. You have pointed this out yourself at the end of the video (Roman Gallery, 13:54), therefore I find it surprising that you would refer to the niches as 'original'. 8:49 "In the times Belgium was part of the Netherlands it was here that peace treaties such as the Peace of Münster and the 12 Years' Truce were proclaimed to the citizens." The territory we now call Belgium has been under Dutch rule for just 15 years, between 1815 and 1830. The treaties you refer to are from the 17th century and didn't even concern Flanders. Also, the castle was never a place where anything would be 'proclaimed to the citizens'. They would use the nearby market square for that purpose. In the Middle Ages the castle was a courthouse and a jail. It was built as a warning to the citizens, certainly not a place where ordinary citizens would be allowed (except to be judged or incarcerated).
@@andriesscheper2022 Yes, that's in fact what I wrote. A castle is an enforced stone building. That's why so many castles have names ending in -steen (or -stein in Germany).
Thanks for the detailed comments. 00:17 - yes we know, we fixed it in the comment's, a nasty translation mistake because also wikipedia names it "castle's Rock'. Hard lesson to not use wikipedia as source.... 01:20 - that's in fact a little less certain. we've read the french and dutch articles from Joseph de Waele about the history of the castle, and also a lot of other more recent sources. Regarding the origins take a look a the sources of Christine Laleman, she's an authority of the castle. Those traces back to 845 are not that certain. There even are sources of a Roman predecessor there but that's even less certain. So we summarized that part and used the most certain starting point. 2:12 - yes, but we used de Waele as sources for this (written in 1925 and earlier) and there's a politicall part on this too that we don't want to get too deep in 6:50 - the niches were largely intact in the wall parts and have only been polished, the source is Joseph de Waele. 08:49 - again, this is as stated in de Waele but also in a pamphlet of 1962 of the University of Leiden. Your definition of the countries is too modern. Belgium basically only exists after the Belgian Revolution. Before that, there were (among others) Bourgundian counts and graves, but also and most importantly Belgica or: the Habsburg Netherlands. Also in those days, Belgium and the Netherlands were basically under one rule for long periods of time between 1480-1580, and also in a way until around 1800. The peace of munster basically split the Northern and the Southern (of which Ghent was a part) Netherlands. BUT also the concept of "country" is a very modern interpretation but in those days that concept was also different as we use and know it now. So they were definately proclaimed there, and by "to the citizens' we don't mean saying it out loud on a public square. The Peace of Munster was in fact "proclaimed" (=signed) in a lot of cities, because there were a lot of local counts / leaders who had to agree with it and sign the documents for the lands which they ruled.
Which source woulld date the Gravensteen to the eight century? If you are referring to a comital castle, it was initially located on the site of the current Duivelsteen. When the counts relocated to the location of the Gravensteen is actually unknown. My personal suggestion, based on a charter of Arnold I giving the land between Schelde and Leie - and therefore the city of Gent with the initial comital castle - to the Saint Peter's abbey, that it happened in the tenth century under the rule of Arnold, but many have suggested that it happened later under Baldwin IV, particularly in the context of his conflicts with the German emperoro around the year 1000.
@@aquilamxp6267 Wikikids mentions it, among others. But I fully agree that there is no evidence to support this theory. Ghent became a city in the 8th century, that much is true, but I doubt that they had the means or the need to build a fortification of any sort during that era. Excavations under the Gravensteen have not produced any material that can be traced back to the 8th century. This makes sense because the oldest part of town is near St Bavo Abbey, so if any defense was constructed it must have been in that area, not where the Gravensteen is located. And obviously the abbey itself was already a fortified structure. Most historians seem to date the Gravensteen to 845 under Baldwin I, but that was before the Viking invasions of the late 9th century. My personal opinion is that the first castle dates from the end of the 9th century, after the Viking invasion, under Baldwin II. By that time the town borders had indeed reached the location of the Gravensteen.
The restoration was meant for the World Exhibition in Ghent in 1913. In fact, many buildings were restored to a medieval model, which would be attractive to the visitors of the World Exhibition. The way Bruges is immensely popular as a kind of Disney medieval city.
We didn't know that one... we did our previous video about the Belfry of Bruges (ruclips.net/video/cvKc_75LCQM/видео.html) but that has not been "romantized". Which buildings are examples of this in Bruges? Time to dive into that one too...
Not quite, Marc. The restoration started in 1887, long before Ghent won the bid to organise the World Fair. When they started the restoration they had no idea about the World Fair yet. The only thing the World Fair did was speed up the process because suddenly there was more money available.This happened in 1907, and I suppose that's the year the World Fair was awarded to Ghent. Unfortunately, architect Joseph De Waele died in 1910 and as from 1911 most of the available money was spent on building the fair itself and no longer to improve the castle (which had already opened to the public in 1907). The restoration continued between 1910 and 1913 but at a reduced pace.
@@jacquesmertens3369 That's also good to know. Have you found photos of Joseph de Waele somewhere? We were suprized that we weren't able to find any of him (or Stephane Mortier). Would have made it a bit more personal to add some photos...
@@HisRep Surprised as well, knowing that both De Waele and Mortier have designed so many buildings in Ghent. There is an archive just a few hundred meters from where I live where a few documents that belonged to De Waele are stored, but I doubt it contains photographs of the man himself. There's probably more to be found in the archived publications of the Société historique et archéologique de Gand, or via relatives of Auguste De Maere, the engineer who was in charge of the restoration until his death in 1900.
@@jacquesmertens3369 He ofcourse lived in an age when photography was relatively new, but since we even found a color photogrom from 1890 of Gravensteen itself (used in the documentary) we indeed expected at least something. Mortier is even of a more recent age. What is the name of the archive? In case we return to Ghent for another building by him, it's nice to know we could take a look there.
Yeah, we've read that story a couple of times. Altough its ofcourse great, we chose not to include it in the video because this is mainly the first thing you learn from the castle so everybody knows about it. But the most important one is that as a rule we only cover things until World War 2... it's an easy one to distinguish between history and more modern times :)
@@MarcDelaere-d1z Nice, was that when the epic "attack" video over the bridge (which also contains horseriders etc) shot? I remember that video but can't find it anymore unfortunately.
@@HisRep not that time but our group was in the time the go to groep woensdag there was something to do in the gravendeel but then the politieke Chanel and it was all done no more budget
Het gravensteen is as real as ik can be ! In somme country's they take no care of there historical buildings and letting is vanish... Why would we build a fake castle in the 1900 's ?? In Belgium we have annother fortress, a impressive one ! the fortress of Bouillon ; If youre in the valley and see the fortress high above you, you feel youreself verry small.
HistoryRepeated.The name of the city should be spelled and pronounced as GENT. (not Ghent) the name GENT derives from the ancient Celtic GANDA. The Gravensteen was not solely a 'place of punishment'. The castle served governmental institutions, from 1350 to 1378 it was the seat of the Hofraad, the Judicial Court, from 1407 to 1778 it was the seat of the Council of Flanders, and the Kasselrijraad court of the Leenhof from Oudburg, which was held by the burggraven or castle constables for the counts of Flanders. Burghers could not be tortured unless first having been tried by the justices. You don't mention the oval curtain wall of the castle numbers 24 towers, the town walls also had 24 towers. You don't mention the site of the blue stone on the adjacent Veerleplein. You don't mention the barbican, which is now a rare feature among the castles in Flanders. You do refer to the great tower as donjon, (Keep, in English) but afterwards you incorrectly name it a dungeon, of 30m high. Dungeon= an underground prison cell. Throwing holes is an incorrect name for machicolations, being an opening between corbels of a parapet/floor, by which the garrison could assail besiegers with missiles.
You cannot blame the restorators of then for our newly gained knowledge now. So no, I would not call it fake, but indeed not entirely correct. I enjoyed the tour, thanks! Inspirational!
Thanks for the reply and we certainly agree with you. De Waele was a very respected man and did great work, to the best of his intentions. And let's be honest, there are also abandoned castles to be found troughout Europe which nobody visits, exactly for that reason. So there's something to say for both sides.
Nice you enjoyed it and feel free to subscribe / share the channel, we are still very small so that helps us a lot!
De Waele had to choose between various time periods. He decided to restore the castle to what it might have looked like in the 12th century, but unfortunately his interpretation was quite 'romantic', to say the least. The end result belongs in the 15th century rather than the 12th, except for the ramparts.
I think De Waele could have done a slightly better job, with the knowledge he had at the time (not so much different from what we know today), but it's certainly not the worst restoration either. At least it saved the castle. I have more issues with the late 20th century concrete and glass additions.
@@jacquesmertens3369 Thanks for the reply. Those las two things are new for us, where are they? That sounds even worse, although one can argue that the concrete could be necessary to prevent collapse and is the best option (if it's done in an invisible way)
@@HisRep There's the ticket office to start with, and the staircase next to it. 10:17 (among others) shows the staircase on the left side of the ticket office. The staircase is modern, with concrete underneath. It leads to a concrete platform with a metal/glass superstructure. From there you can turn left, enter the building (to the place you have described as Roman gallery), only to find even more concrete and modern, metal stairs. It's a horrible addition, certainly not hidden. The "Roman gallery" happens to be a place often used by groups of school children, which would explain extra safety measures (similar to the worn winding stairs which have been replaced with new stones), but I find it unacceptable. What's next? Metal railings to prevent you from falling off the ramparts? It's a medieval castle, not a playground.
@@jacquesmertens3369 Totally agree with you. Luckily, we did "miss" that part at our visit.
Thank you to reddit for this one.
Also, it aint a medieval doc without Green Sleeves
Thanks, great to hear that you liked it. And yes, we did do that on purpose ;-)
Cheers!
Greensleeves!!!! for the win
Great video indeed, did you know a lot of british castles were built in the same style afterwards?
0:17 "which means the count's rock". No, it means the count's castle. The word "steen", just like the German word "Stein" can refer both to a stone and to a castle. In this case: a castle.
1:20 The history of the Gravensteen can be traced back to as early as 845. Some sources even claim the oldest fort on this location dates from the 8th century.
2:12 "present-day Palestine"? The Kingdom of Jerusalem coincides more than 90% with present-day Israel.
6:50 "original niches" They're actually from around 1895. Only the ramparts and the lower floors/cellars are almost authentic, whatever is on the east side and top floors has been rebuilt in a rather inauthentic way. You have pointed this out yourself at the end of the video (Roman Gallery, 13:54), therefore I find it surprising that you would refer to the niches as 'original'.
8:49 "In the times Belgium was part of the Netherlands it was here that peace treaties such as the Peace of Münster and the 12 Years' Truce were proclaimed to the citizens."
The territory we now call Belgium has been under Dutch rule for just 15 years, between 1815 and 1830. The treaties you refer to are from the 17th century and didn't even concern Flanders. Also, the castle was never a place where anything would be 'proclaimed to the citizens'. They would use the nearby market square for that purpose. In the Middle Ages the castle was a courthouse and a jail. It was built as a warning to the citizens, certainly not a place where ordinary citizens would be allowed (except to be judged or incarcerated).
The word 'steen' in the name just means it's an enforced stone building, like the Frisian word 'stins'.
@@andriesscheper2022 Yes, that's in fact what I wrote. A castle is an enforced stone building. That's why so many castles have names ending in -steen (or -stein in Germany).
Thanks for the detailed comments.
00:17 - yes we know, we fixed it in the comment's, a nasty translation mistake because also wikipedia names it "castle's Rock'. Hard lesson to not use wikipedia as source....
01:20 - that's in fact a little less certain. we've read the french and dutch articles from Joseph de Waele about the history of the castle, and also a lot of other more recent sources. Regarding the origins take a look a the sources of Christine Laleman, she's an authority of the castle. Those traces back to 845 are not that certain. There even are sources of a Roman predecessor there but that's even less certain. So we summarized that part and used the most certain starting point.
2:12 - yes, but we used de Waele as sources for this (written in 1925 and earlier) and there's a politicall part on this too that we don't want to get too deep in
6:50 - the niches were largely intact in the wall parts and have only been polished, the source is Joseph de Waele.
08:49 - again, this is as stated in de Waele but also in a pamphlet of 1962 of the University of Leiden. Your definition of the countries is too modern. Belgium basically only exists after the Belgian Revolution. Before that, there were (among others) Bourgundian counts and graves, but also and most importantly Belgica or: the Habsburg Netherlands. Also in those days, Belgium and the Netherlands were basically under one rule for long periods of time between 1480-1580, and also in a way until around 1800. The peace of munster basically split the Northern and the Southern (of which Ghent was a part) Netherlands. BUT also the concept of "country" is a very modern interpretation but in those days that concept was also different as we use and know it now. So they were definately proclaimed there, and by "to the citizens' we don't mean saying it out loud on a public square. The Peace of Munster was in fact "proclaimed" (=signed) in a lot of cities, because there were a lot of local counts / leaders who had to agree with it and sign the documents for the lands which they ruled.
Which source woulld date the Gravensteen to the eight century? If you are referring to a comital castle, it was initially located on the site of the current Duivelsteen. When the counts relocated to the location of the Gravensteen is actually unknown. My personal suggestion, based on a charter of Arnold I giving the land between Schelde and Leie - and therefore the city of Gent with the initial comital castle - to the Saint Peter's abbey, that it happened in the tenth century under the rule of Arnold, but many have suggested that it happened later under Baldwin IV, particularly in the context of his conflicts with the German emperoro around the year 1000.
@@aquilamxp6267 Wikikids mentions it, among others. But I fully agree that there is no evidence to support this theory. Ghent became a city in the 8th century, that much is true, but I doubt that they had the means or the need to build a fortification of any sort during that era. Excavations under the Gravensteen have not produced any material that can be traced back to the 8th century. This makes sense because the oldest part of town is near St Bavo Abbey, so if any defense was constructed it must have been in that area, not where the Gravensteen is located. And obviously the abbey itself was already a fortified structure. Most historians seem to date the Gravensteen to 845 under Baldwin I, but that was before the Viking invasions of the late 9th century. My personal opinion is that the first castle dates from the end of the 9th century, after the Viking invasion, under Baldwin II. By that time the town borders had indeed reached the location of the Gravensteen.
And check out the castle of Godefroy in Bouillon!
That one looks nice, thanks for the suggestion!
The restoration was meant for the World Exhibition in Ghent in 1913. In fact, many buildings were restored to a medieval model, which would be attractive to the visitors of the World Exhibition. The way Bruges is immensely popular as a kind of Disney medieval city.
We didn't know that one... we did our previous video about the Belfry of Bruges (ruclips.net/video/cvKc_75LCQM/видео.html) but that has not been "romantized". Which buildings are examples of this in Bruges? Time to dive into that one too...
Not quite, Marc. The restoration started in 1887, long before Ghent won the bid to organise the World Fair. When they started the restoration they had no idea about the World Fair yet. The only thing the World Fair did was speed up the process because suddenly there was more money available.This happened in 1907, and I suppose that's the year the World Fair was awarded to Ghent. Unfortunately, architect Joseph De Waele died in 1910 and as from 1911 most of the available money was spent on building the fair itself and no longer to improve the castle (which had already opened to the public in 1907). The restoration continued between 1910 and 1913 but at a reduced pace.
@@jacquesmertens3369 That's also good to know. Have you found photos of Joseph de Waele somewhere? We were suprized that we weren't able to find any of him (or Stephane Mortier). Would have made it a bit more personal to add some photos...
@@HisRep Surprised as well, knowing that both De Waele and Mortier have designed so many buildings in Ghent.
There is an archive just a few hundred meters from where I live where a few documents that belonged to De Waele are stored, but I doubt it contains photographs of the man himself. There's probably more to be found in the archived publications of the Société historique et archéologique de Gand, or via relatives of Auguste De Maere, the engineer who was in charge of the restoration until his death in 1900.
@@jacquesmertens3369 He ofcourse lived in an age when photography was relatively new, but since we even found a color photogrom from 1890 of Gravensteen itself (used in the documentary) we indeed expected at least something. Mortier is even of a more recent age. What is the name of the archive? In case we return to Ghent for another building by him, it's nice to know we could take a look there.
Last time the castle was used as a fortress was by a group of students on strike because beer prices rose
Yeah, we've read that story a couple of times. Altough its ofcourse great, we chose not to include it in the video because this is mainly the first thing you learn from the castle so everybody knows about it. But the most important one is that as a rule we only cover things until World War 2... it's an easy one to distinguish between history and more modern times :)
Wow.
I slept there in the knight's hall
Wow, that must have been a unique experience
@@HisRep yep we were there with a medieval reanacking group, they even gutted a wild boar for the audience
@@MarcDelaere-d1z Nice, was that when the epic "attack" video over the bridge (which also contains horseriders etc) shot? I remember that video but can't find it anymore unfortunately.
@@HisRep not that time but our group was in the time the go to groep woensdag there was something to do in the gravendeel but then the politieke Chanel and it was all done no more budget
Paperback DK Eyewitness Book of MEDIEVAL LIFE.
Discover Medieval Europe - from life in a country manor to the streets of a developing town.
Het gravensteen is as real as ik can be ! In somme country's they take no care of there historical buildings and letting is vanish...
Why would we build a fake castle in the 1900 's ??
In Belgium we have annother fortress, a impressive one ! the fortress of Bouillon ; If youre in the valley and see the fortress high above you, you feel youreself verry small.
Thanks for the reply and the suggestion of the castle of Bouillon, we'll put that one on a lst for a future video, it looks great.
HistoryRepeated.The name of the city should be spelled and pronounced as GENT. (not Ghent) the name GENT derives from the ancient Celtic GANDA.
The Gravensteen was not solely a 'place of punishment'. The castle served governmental institutions, from 1350 to 1378 it was the seat of the Hofraad, the Judicial Court, from 1407 to 1778 it was the seat of the Council of Flanders, and the Kasselrijraad court of the Leenhof from Oudburg, which was held by the burggraven or castle constables for the counts of Flanders. Burghers could not be tortured unless first having been tried by the justices.
You don't mention the oval curtain wall of the castle numbers 24 towers, the town walls also had 24 towers.
You don't mention the site of the blue stone on the adjacent Veerleplein.
You don't mention the barbican, which is now a rare feature among the castles in Flanders.
You do refer to the great tower as donjon, (Keep, in English) but afterwards you incorrectly name it a dungeon, of 30m high. Dungeon= an underground prison cell.
Throwing holes is an incorrect name for machicolations, being an opening between corbels of a parapet/floor, by which the garrison could assail besiegers with missiles.
Paperback DK Eyewitness Book of CASTLE.