WAC??

shipwreck

OPinions??

Was only out one day myself due to pressing work committments, but I enjoyed it!

Tara seminar fairly touchy me thought....

Meathlass

shipwreck wrote: »

OPinions??

Was only out one day myself due to pressing work committments, but I enjoyed it!

Tara seminar fairly touchy me thought....

What do you mean op? I wasn't at it (couldn't afford it myself) but a colleague was and said that the Tara bit she was at (seminar as well I think she called it so not sure if it's the same one) was very unprepared and when people stood up for archaeological practices in ireland and asked some of the tara people had they read the dept. guidelines they said they hadn't. She said it was quite embarrassing as there were a number of foreigners there.

Riamfada

I didn't make it to the Friday seminar which was the one with the public discussion I think. I believe Maggie Royanne proposed that WAC take an anti-M3 stance but WAC didn't vote either way. I did however make the Thursday Plenary. There were 220 people there and speakers included Mary Deevy (NRA), a local resident from Navan, Maggie Royanne (UCG), The State Archaeologist Brian Duffy, Donald Murphy (ACS) and some save Tara campaigners (names escape me).

Mary Deevy outlined the decision making process of the M3, Mr Murphy outlined excavations. Most strikingly was the local resident who vigourously stated his support for the road. He mentioned that local residents only gave their consent to the road if the Hill of Tara was protected. He stated it was and still is but the protest has moved to the "area" of tara.Local residents were informed by tara campaigners that the road was going through the hill. When locals found this to be false info they lost all local credibility.

Maggie Royanne stated that her site reports had been altered to lessen the archaeological importance of sites along the M3. There was no discussion at this meeting and this point wasnt raised again as far as I am aware.

There was 1 tara protester in the room but it didnt really kick off.

It was stressed that archaeology does not take priority when determining routes. Disruption to local communities, cost ect all have to be factored first. Thats why the current route may not be best for archaeology but is best for local communities and society.

Hope that helps


The rest of WAC was great crack. Made a few lectures and met a few folks. There was bronze weaponry displays, fulacht fiadh brewing, bronze casting and currach sailing as well as cave art practicals.

Meathlass

Grimes wrote: »

I didnt make it to the friday seminar which was the one with the public discussion I think. I believe Maggie Royanne proposed that WAC take an anti-M3 stance but WAC didnt vote eitherway. I did however make the thursday Plenary. There were 220 people there and speakers included Mary Deevy (NRA), a local resident from Navan, Maggie Royanne (UCG), The State Archaeologist Brian Duffy, Donald Murphy (ACS) and some save tara campaigners (names escape me).

Mary Deevy outlined the decision making process of the M3, Mr Murphy outlined excavations. Most strikingly was the local resident who vigourously stated his support for the road. He mentioned that local residents only gave their consent to the road if the Hill of Tara was protected. He stated it was and still is but the protest has moved to the "area" of tara.Local residents were informed by tara campaigners that the road was going through the hill. When locals found this to be false info they lost all local credibility.

Maggie Royanne stated that her site reports had been altered to lessen the archaeological importance of sites along the M3. There was no discussion at this meeting and this point wasnt raised again as far as I am aware.

There was 1 tara protester in the room but it didnt really kick off.

It was stressted that archaeology does not take priority when determining routes. Disruption to local communities, cost ect all have to be factored first. Thats why the current route may not be best for archaeology but is best for local communities and society.

Hope that helps


The rest of WAC was great crack. Made a few lectures and met a few folks. There was bronze weaponry displays, fulacht fiadh brewing, bronze casting and currach sailing aswell as cave art practicals.

Sounds great, thanks for the report. I'm sorry I missed it but couldn't justify the time off work and the expense of attending i'm afraid. Obviously as an archaeologist I'd love if road decisions were made on just the archaeological basis alone but community, noise pollution and environmental factors all have to come into play. The whole fuss over 'saving Lismullin' also seems to have died a death.

the-jojo-axiom

To be honest, the Tara Plenery was a tad one sided, and the farcical man spouting on about ley lines didn't help the Tarawatch side. They should have known he wouldn't be taken seriously by a lecture hall full of professionals. Friday's closing session was a bit more interesting, as I felt there was a bit more of an equal playing field, even though a lot of the foreign delegates looked bewildered with the whole thing. It was unfortunate that the great week that it was had to end like that.....

lostexpectation

Grimes wrote: »

I didn't make it to the Friday seminar which was the one with the public discussion I think. I believe Maggie Royanne proposed that WAC take an anti-M3 stance but WAC didn't vote either way. I did however make the Thursday Plenary. There were 220 people there and speakers included Mary Deevy (NRA), a local resident from Navan, Maggie Royanne (UCG), The State Archaeologist Brian Duffy, Donald Murphy (ACS) and some save Tara campaigners (names escape me).

Mary Deevy outlined the decision making process of the M3, Mr Murphy outlined excavations. Most strikingly was the local resident who vigourously stated his support for the road. He mentioned that local residents only gave their consent to the road if the Hill of Tara was protected. He stated it was and still is but the protest has moved to the "area" of tara.Local residents were informed by tara campaigners that the road was going through the hill. When locals found this to be false info they lost all local credibility.

still spinning that lie, still disagreeing with the experts that tara is an area are we grimes?

the only people using the phrase 'through the hill of tara' were people like that guy, because he ignores the current knowledge on the area either.

example http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=54414910&highlight=fenwick#post54414910

i keep telling you need to do some catchup reading.

http://www.nuigalway.ie/archaeology/Tara_Archaeology-Ireland.html
The evidence for a royal demesne around Tara is unequivocal. It is attested to both archaeologically and historically. The Hill of Tara, which is the religious focal point in this landscape, is situated a little west-of-centre. The high concentration of archaeological sites suggests that the Tara-Skryne valley was an important axis through this landscape and a primary settlement from prehistory to the Middle Ages. The genesis of the royal demesne (Ferann Ríg) lies in prehistory and comes into sharp focus in the later Iron Age when a series of defensive earthworks was built to create a cordon sanitaire from Ringlestown around the north of the hill to Rath Lugh, a promontory fort that guards the northern end of the Tara-Skryne valley and, of course, the Hill of Skryne itself.

None of this is new. This analysis was published in various places during the mid 1990s and was central to the archaeological assessments of the route options procured by Meath County Council and the NRA. Both firms of consultants reported, in unambiguous language, that the route options between Tara and Skryne risked encountering a multitude of sites and threatened the integrity of the Tara landscape.
One of them reported that in recognition of the Discovery Programme's work in identifying this landscape, the zone of protection around Tara had been extended to an area about 6km in diameter and that some of the route options ran through this zone.

It was stressed that archaeology does not take priority when determining routes. Disruption to local communities, cost ect all have to be factored first. Thats why the current route may not be best for archaeology but is best for local communities and society.

archaeology takes priority for archaeologist writing reports on archaeology, its not mary deevy job to speak up for peoples homes that might be disrupted that's somebody elses job.

apparently brian (how the hell did i get the job) duffy kept saying 'i just dig where im told to'.
although i though it was his job to decide where to dig.

Riamfada

I was simply giving a quick summary of the speakers points and wasnt spinning anything. The views of the main players in the Tara/m3 discussion certainly are not influenced by my own. Im exceptionally tired of this arguement , especially as the road is almost built. If you are really pushed please re read my post that you quoted out of context and show me where I did anything other than give a rundown of both sides of the meeting and then waste some more webspace with a reply. I dont think I said that Mary Deevy stated that people's homes need to be protected so why you stuck her name in there when she was one of a number of speakers just indicated your own deamonisation of the woman.

G

buffalo

On a lighter note, I can confirm that attacking defenceless pieces of fruit with Bronze Age weaponry was indeed great fun. Kudos to Alan Peatfield!*


*His name is "peat field", and he's an archaeologist - is that hilarious to anyone else?

Riamfada

It was hilarious. Some poor lad gave it a go and lobbed the sword at the melon and hit the wooden post. Alan's face dropped.

ednwireland

marget cowan replies to maggie ronayne todays irish times if anyones interested

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2008/0722/1216627319721.html

lostexpectation

Grimes wrote: »

I was simply giving a quick summary of the speakers points and wasnt spinning anything. The views of the main players in the Tara/m3 discussion certainly are not influenced by my own. Im exceptionally tired of this arguement , especially as the road is almost built. If you are really pushed please re read my post that you quoted out of context and show me where I did anything other than give a rundown of both sides of the meeting and then waste some more webspace with a reply. I dont think I said that Mary Deevy stated that people's homes need to be protected so why you stuck her name in there when she was one of a number of speakers just indicated your own deamonisation of the woman.

G

never willing to back up your argeuments are you go do some reading grimes instead of waiting around for the bulldozers to win the arguement for you.

i never said you mentioned deevy, it just her and mr underqualified(*) seem to be confused as to what their job is.

wac said there's no problem with planning in this country, larf :eek:

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2005/1205/1132330268617.html

Nutlog!!!

The focus of this thread is WAC people, lets keep to the topic shall we!

Any Tara/M3 debates should be carrried out in a dedicated thread...my opinion.


As regards the contacts lists handed out during WAC, a number of people seem to have had their contact info published without their consent :eek:. Well, when I say a number I mean 2 that I know...but that's still somewhat unsettling. Anyone have any similar experiences?

lostexpectation

Nutlog!!! wrote: »

The focus of this thread is WAC people, lets keep to the topic shall we!

Any Tara/M3 debates should be carrried out in a dedicated thread...my opinion.


As regards the contacts lists handed out during WAC, a number of people seem to have had their contact info published without their consent :eek:. Well, when I say a number I mean 2 that I know...but that's still somewhat unsettling. Anyone have any similar experiences?

wac made a statement on tara and i mentioned various things i heard said there, how is it not relevant or you too trying pretend your don't have a position on tara like every other arch here?

Riamfada

This thread is muddled by some of us wishing to talk about the M3 and some wishing to discuss other events at WAC. I think both are to large to be discussed in the one thread at the same time. That goes for me aswell. Lostexpectation, if you want a discussion on Tara feel free to start a new thread and you will recieve dedicated responses to your questions.

Nutlog: I noticed that there is a list of emails in the back of the WAC book. It includes everyone who worked at WAC. Thank god mine wasnt in there ! Im at bit perplexed as to why it wasnt. I mean, I do feel a bit left out and unwanted.

Nutlog!!!

lostexpectation wrote: »

wac made a statement on tara and i mentioned various things i heard said there, how is it not relevant or you too trying pretend your don't have a position on tara like every other arch here?

First of all, my apologies lostexpectation, you were well within your rights to voice opinions about any aspect of WAC including the M3, i didn't mean to seem like I was trying to drown out discussion, discussion which should go on. I just think there's a point when an argument grows beyond its parent thread. I'd be happy to discuss the M3 ini a dedicated thread.
Secondly: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055340449 - hasn't really been looked at, but I just thought I'd suggest this thread as a possible venue for discussion.

Grimes: Yeah I noticed that, sure 'tis all well and good, I just remember some people sayin they didn't agree to their contact details bein made available. I don't think they really care anyway so the point is probably moot. Sure just my 2 cents!

boneless

Did anybody get a chance to taste the beer brewed in the replica Fulacht Fia by any chance? I got out to UCD too late for the session! :mad:

Nutlog!!!

Ah yeah 't'was good alright.
There were a number of brews, some of them quite suspect but most of the stuff they had bottled was gorgeous, like a fruity Coopers sparkling.

buffalo

It was tasty stuff alright! I wonder what happened all the leftover beer - they had about twenty 3litre bottles stashed under the table... methinks an archaeology party was had on Friday night!

...as well as most other nights from what I hear.