 |
| Fantastic fieldtrip to survey the Hell-Fire Caves |
 |
| Had fun making a wordle of two chapters of my dissertation, on the Irish Hell-Fire Clubs |
 |
| Hoped across the sea to visit the folks and survey the Hell-Fire Club of Dublin, Montpelier |
Showing posts with label irish. Show all posts
Showing posts with label irish. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 17, 2013
My life in pictures from the last month and a half
Monday, August 5, 2013
Quote of the day: on the men and women of Ireland
Looks mattered in the past. Quoting from Thomas Dineley's tour of Ireland in 1797, this paragraph details the look of men and women in Ireland:
He paid more attention to the women...well-bottomed, ever growing, strangely proportion and with enormous legs... Thanks Dineley!
He paid more attention to the women...well-bottomed, ever growing, strangely proportion and with enormous legs... Thanks Dineley!
Tuesday, May 8, 2012
Bog buddies, just more tourist tat?
Archaeologists are used to the ethical questions involved with bog bodies.....but what about tourist tat?
An industrious company has set up to sell "Bog Buddies", little characters and motifs (men, women, sheep, hearts, shamrocks) carved from bog materials. Not a terrible idea considering the lack of enterprise following the recession, and the fact that tourists will buy anything. They look nice enough when framed, but really, there doesn't seem to be a great deal of skill in the carving, and certainly not enough to justify the €14 price tag for the smallest piece in the cheapest box, or €40 for a small framed heart.
I also wonder if they really thought through the name "bog buddies" - did they actively seek association with millenia-old corpses?
Thursday, September 15, 2011
Ireland's utter stupidity when it comes to its heritage
Prepare for sarcasm and rage.
Some genius has come up with an idea to get rid of that pesky need to protect historic buildings by removing them from a protected register. The Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht want all structures from 1700 taken off the Record of Monuments and Places. Just a blanket removal - you know, because nothing interesting or important was built after 1700 (grrrrrr) (canals, industrialisation, Georgian-era architecture, etc.). The Department made some hazy comment about not all counties being consistent in their recording of such buildings, is that meant to be an excuse for this ridiculous planned change? This type of "standardisation" will not, as they posit, "ensure that all elements of the built heritage continue to be adequately protected". The whole thing smacks of budget cuts and sneaky back door planning deals.
I am so full of rage about all this! It is utterly disgraceful. Compare this, like another archaeologist quoted in the original article did, to American or Australian heritage and how they treasure the last 300 years. They have heritage from much farther back than that, but they also understand that the past few hundred years shaped the modern world they live in. Every aspect of the past should be treated with the same regard, whether 10,000 years ago, 1,000 years ago or 100 years ago. Setting such a cut off point is arbitrary and destructive. It states, in effect, that history and archaeology from the last 300 years is less important than what came before.
In my own experience, many archaeologists excavating sites tend to disregard the 18th century in their reports, preferring to focus on the medieval, bronze age, etc. (based on my reading of archaeological reports from Limerick city). This proposal justifies that bias.
As an example of this bias even before such a proposal has been sanctioned:
In Askeaton, Co. Limerick, the Office of Public Works (OPW) was instructed to repair the unstable quay walls of the 18th century Hell-Fire Club (one of only two such clubs in Ireland), in addition to repairs to the castle (13th-16th century) on the same site. This year when I went to visit the site for some recording work, one of the wonderful men working there informed me that budget cuts were now in force. All the repairs to the 18th century building were cancelled, while work still continued on the castle. The men on site, fearing for the club house thoughtfully left some scaffolding lattice over the brickwork which had been partially cleaned and destabilised. Preference was given to protecting the castle. When I asked for any reports on this, any evidence of discussion and justification for the work, it seemed that that doesn't really exist in the public domain (I'm going to try to track it down with gusto soon). I'm not annoyed that they are repairing the castle, it needs and deserves it. It is just terribly worrying that such an unusual building as the Hell-Fire Club is left to crumble because it is from a later time period.
I don't want to just focus on my own studies, so here is an unbiased Wikipedia recounting of some important things that happened in the last 300 years, unedited:
I could rant some more, but I think it's best if I stop now. Still fuming. May return to this topic in the future.
EDIT: Loads more useful information on the issue here http://irisharchaeology.ie/2011/09/proposal-to-de-list-archaeological-and-historical-sites-that-post-date-1700/
Some genius has come up with an idea to get rid of that pesky need to protect historic buildings by removing them from a protected register. The Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht want all structures from 1700 taken off the Record of Monuments and Places. Just a blanket removal - you know, because nothing interesting or important was built after 1700 (grrrrrr) (canals, industrialisation, Georgian-era architecture, etc.). The Department made some hazy comment about not all counties being consistent in their recording of such buildings, is that meant to be an excuse for this ridiculous planned change? This type of "standardisation" will not, as they posit, "ensure that all elements of the built heritage continue to be adequately protected". The whole thing smacks of budget cuts and sneaky back door planning deals.
 |
| I'm sure a rage comic could be made of this fiasco |
I am so full of rage about all this! It is utterly disgraceful. Compare this, like another archaeologist quoted in the original article did, to American or Australian heritage and how they treasure the last 300 years. They have heritage from much farther back than that, but they also understand that the past few hundred years shaped the modern world they live in. Every aspect of the past should be treated with the same regard, whether 10,000 years ago, 1,000 years ago or 100 years ago. Setting such a cut off point is arbitrary and destructive. It states, in effect, that history and archaeology from the last 300 years is less important than what came before.
In my own experience, many archaeologists excavating sites tend to disregard the 18th century in their reports, preferring to focus on the medieval, bronze age, etc. (based on my reading of archaeological reports from Limerick city). This proposal justifies that bias.
As an example of this bias even before such a proposal has been sanctioned:
In Askeaton, Co. Limerick, the Office of Public Works (OPW) was instructed to repair the unstable quay walls of the 18th century Hell-Fire Club (one of only two such clubs in Ireland), in addition to repairs to the castle (13th-16th century) on the same site. This year when I went to visit the site for some recording work, one of the wonderful men working there informed me that budget cuts were now in force. All the repairs to the 18th century building were cancelled, while work still continued on the castle. The men on site, fearing for the club house thoughtfully left some scaffolding lattice over the brickwork which had been partially cleaned and destabilised. Preference was given to protecting the castle. When I asked for any reports on this, any evidence of discussion and justification for the work, it seemed that that doesn't really exist in the public domain (I'm going to try to track it down with gusto soon). I'm not annoyed that they are repairing the castle, it needs and deserves it. It is just terribly worrying that such an unusual building as the Hell-Fire Club is left to crumble because it is from a later time period.
I don't want to just focus on my own studies, so here is an unbiased Wikipedia recounting of some important things that happened in the last 300 years, unedited:
 | |
|
I could rant some more, but I think it's best if I stop now. Still fuming. May return to this topic in the future.
EDIT: Loads more useful information on the issue here http://irisharchaeology.ie/2011/09/proposal-to-de-list-archaeological-and-historical-sites-that-post-date-1700/
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
How to make me grind my teeth
Using the "Mother Goddess" name in vain...!
It's not all bad - an interesting subject, lots of fun archaeological facts, funky hair, trade routes, and an Irish focus.
BUT... then they have to go and RUIN it by talking about the "Mother Goddess". Honestly, there just simply is not much in the way of evidence, just wild speculation.
For your reading pleasure, get the full article here.
The section that really pushed my buttons is:
"The bodies served as offerings to the goddess of the land to whom the king was wed in his inauguration ceremony. According to Kelly, both men’s multiple injuries may reflect the belief that the goddess was not only one of the land and fertility, but also of sovereignty, war, and death. “By using a range of methods to kill the victim, the ancient Irish sacrificed to the goddess in all her forms,” he says."
This seems like a bit of a leap to me - stating that the bodies were an offering to the Mother Goddess....hmmmm...
I just can't bring myself to believe this absolute link with the Mother Goddess - prove it to me! Send me some evidence I can sink my teeth into! Convert me! I am sure Mr. Kelly of the National Museum of Ireland knows a billion times more than me, so I am very confused by all of this.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)