I'd like to launch a historic debate about those we call Flandrians.
The difference between Flandrian and Flemish, in my view, is that Flandrian is a strictly cycling term while Flemish is mainly geographic/geopolitic. My grandad (Walloon from Brussels) thought that Flandrians only came from the 2 provinces (East & West Flanders) as opposed to Flemish who may come from Antwerp, e.g. I think the term Flemish in that sense is a misuse of language because, for me, Flemish only come from the 2 provinces mentioned above (that is from the West of the Schelde).
The roots for the concept Flandrien are very hard to trace back. But we can say that before WWI it referred to track riders (source: De Flandriens, book from Canvas) from East and West Flanders who fought against each other but partnered when they rode abroad.
During the Interbellum, road races were created in Flanders (RvV becomes internationally recognized) and the Flandrians became road riders.
Edwig van Hooydonck describes them as "Flemish peasants who chose cycling to avoid the hardship of farm work. Nowadays, there are none of them anymore. Briek Schotte was the last of them."
I think he has a point. That means that the Flandrians were not strictly cobble specialists and that Schotte's nickname was not nostalgia but historical truth. All the rest is myth building by the great journalist Karel van Wynendaele in his "Rijke van Vlaamsche Wielerleven"(Kingdom of the Flemish Cycling Life): i.e. The Flemish need wind, mudder, rain, etc.
The later champions didn't come from the peasanry. Fred De Bruyne was the son of an electrician. He worked in a factory in Ghent. De Vlaeminck was the son of a hawker. He worked in a printing house and in the textile industry. And the Dutch-speaking Belgian champions were not all Flemish. Van Looy and van Steenbergen came from the Kempen, Ockers from Antwerp, Verbeeck, Impanis and Merckx from Brabant and Vanderaerden from Limburg, while the vast majority of them came from West Flanders during the Interbellum.
After the WWII and mostly in the late sixties when the route of Paris-Roubaix radically changed, Flandrians are meant to referred to cobble specialists because it's where the Belgians got most of their success.
I don't like the idea of Tour of Flanders or Paris-Roubaix being Flandrian classics because it suggests that both races are very similar. Their palmarès are very different. Some of the best riders on the Tour of Flanders were much more consistent on the Ardennes classics than on Roubaix and some of the best riders of Roubaix were more consistent on Milan Sanremo than on Flanders, for example. Only in recent years - when the pseudo-champions become too specialized - do we have the impression that both races are somewhat similar.
What do you think?
The difference between Flandrian and Flemish, in my view, is that Flandrian is a strictly cycling term while Flemish is mainly geographic/geopolitic. My grandad (Walloon from Brussels) thought that Flandrians only came from the 2 provinces (East & West Flanders) as opposed to Flemish who may come from Antwerp, e.g. I think the term Flemish in that sense is a misuse of language because, for me, Flemish only come from the 2 provinces mentioned above (that is from the West of the Schelde).
The roots for the concept Flandrien are very hard to trace back. But we can say that before WWI it referred to track riders (source: De Flandriens, book from Canvas) from East and West Flanders who fought against each other but partnered when they rode abroad.
During the Interbellum, road races were created in Flanders (RvV becomes internationally recognized) and the Flandrians became road riders.
Edwig van Hooydonck describes them as "Flemish peasants who chose cycling to avoid the hardship of farm work. Nowadays, there are none of them anymore. Briek Schotte was the last of them."
I think he has a point. That means that the Flandrians were not strictly cobble specialists and that Schotte's nickname was not nostalgia but historical truth. All the rest is myth building by the great journalist Karel van Wynendaele in his "Rijke van Vlaamsche Wielerleven"(Kingdom of the Flemish Cycling Life): i.e. The Flemish need wind, mudder, rain, etc.
The later champions didn't come from the peasanry. Fred De Bruyne was the son of an electrician. He worked in a factory in Ghent. De Vlaeminck was the son of a hawker. He worked in a printing house and in the textile industry. And the Dutch-speaking Belgian champions were not all Flemish. Van Looy and van Steenbergen came from the Kempen, Ockers from Antwerp, Verbeeck, Impanis and Merckx from Brabant and Vanderaerden from Limburg, while the vast majority of them came from West Flanders during the Interbellum.
After the WWII and mostly in the late sixties when the route of Paris-Roubaix radically changed, Flandrians are meant to referred to cobble specialists because it's where the Belgians got most of their success.
I don't like the idea of Tour of Flanders or Paris-Roubaix being Flandrian classics because it suggests that both races are very similar. Their palmarès are very different. Some of the best riders on the Tour of Flanders were much more consistent on the Ardennes classics than on Roubaix and some of the best riders of Roubaix were more consistent on Milan Sanremo than on Flanders, for example. Only in recent years - when the pseudo-champions become too specialized - do we have the impression that both races are somewhat similar.
What do you think?
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram