|WikiProject Wiltshire||(Rated C-class, Mid-importance)|
Living former villagers?
Any former Imber residents or children thereof out there?
- There's an interview with a surviving resident on http://www.bilderberg-mirror.org.uk/Dialect12Jan08.mp3 ; worth a read. Also, as the village has intermittent open days, maybe someone could go down and get some photos for wikimedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SteveLoughran (talk • contribs) 09:49, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
I would like to change the word "abandoned" as this is clearly the wrong word to use. Evicted, removed, evacuated, voluntarily relocated, or a mixture of all these are closer to the truth - but perhaps it is best left to those former residents to speak for themselves. If nobody posts by 1 June 2006, then I will change the words myself. Its such a sad story. Istvan 19:18, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
The poem that was removed and reinstated - it probably doesn't belong under the heading '2008 opening times' at least. Any suggestions for restructuring the article? Ktluma (talk) 19:10, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
I do believe the residents were nicknamed "Bungeys" supposedly over the hanging of a dog of the same name which was part of the local lore. I picked this up from books on the village during my time there between 1979-82. I didn't live there - was just there "At Her Majesty's Pleasure".Thunderer (talk) 04:16, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Evicted vs Evacuated
The people in the village were informed of the decision before they were told to leave. They did not have a choice but they took it stoically. The usage of evacuation suggests a passive movement from a locale of danger to another place of safety. This completely downplays what occurred, the War Dept wanted the village so they used wartime legislation to do it. There was no danger until the government created the circumstances in which an "evacuation" was required making it an "eviction". To me using the term "evacuation" is just post-modernist spin written by someone who has their own agenda. It's like saying a someone who decides to drown themselves did not commit suicide, er they just made a choice to swim to the bottom. Daft and an insult to the sacrifice made by these civilains and their families for the past 70 years. 184.108.40.206 (talk) 21:27, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
- Basically, you're right. The villagers were "evicted". When I, amongst others, gave evidence to the Defence Lands Committee in the early 1970's, the authorities had no idea that I would present the original "evacuation" letter at the hearings. The key paragraph contained the words "....until you can find another house, or until the Imber area is again open for occupation, whichever is the earlier". This would seem to imply that, at the time, the (then) War Office intended to return the village to civillian use after the war. The DLC were also visibly shocked by the evidence given by Richard Madigan, who as a serving soldier had assisted in the eviction of the villagers. He said quite clearly at the hearing that he and others were told quite clearly to inform the villagers that their eviction would be for six months, or the end of the war at the latest. Richard also put paid to the widely held myth that Imber was used for street fighting practice. It wasn't, it was just that the village was possibly in danger of overshoot of shells. Richard also informed the DLC that at the end of the war, the only damage was a couple of cracked windows. It was after the war that the village was seriously damaged by British troops. Richard's evidence moved several folk in the public gallery to tears and several members of the DLC looked ashen, including the chairman, Lord Nugent. Nevertheless, the DLC recommended that Imber be retained for military use. Frankly, at the time, I and others were speechless. Anyway thank you for your contribution. Regards,David J Johnson (talk) 22:02, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
- I think it is important to stick to the terms used at the time, and those used in reliable sources. So, it may be correct to say "evacuated". The problem with wording in relation to historical events is that the meaning and use of words can shift over time. That doesn't mean that we can't mention that this is something which some may consider to be an eviction, rather than an evacuation. But, we have to cite such things, and not just express our own beliefs. Danrok (talk) 22:33, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Danrok, Basically you're right too. The "evacuation" letter does read about "evacuate the main part of the Department's Imber Estate, including your dwelling." My own view, after many years of research, is that the area was evacuated - but that the villagers were evicted. Regards, David J Johnson (talk) 22:42, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
- Can that letter be found online anywhere? Danrok (talk) 19:46, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
Some of the reference links look broken. I am assuming that they refer to this book... Little Imber on the Down. If so, I can fix them. Can anyone can confirm, for sure, that they do refer to that book? Danrok (talk) 20:59, 2 April 2013 (UTC)