excavations at Tara

Seanachai

Hello , just wondering if anybody knows what the story is with the current excavations underway at Tara?. A friend dropped in as he was passing by and said there is fencing and gates erected around the mound of hostages and what appears to be sections of clay removed.

da_shivsta

nope - no idea. I just did a really interesting essay however on all of the corruption malarky with Tara and Carrickmines and such.... I know it's old news :P
If I find anything out I'll post here

GhostInTheRuins

Yeah I was talking to the archeologists a few months ago while they were examining it. They were showing me their radar equipment and geo-phys stuff. It was cool to see!

Anyway they told me that it was leaking inside for the last few years. He says that they didn't think that it was put together correctly from when it was excavated back in the 50's (or was it 60's?) because no drawings or plans were taken about how it was built when they took it apart. So the plan is to take it apart and kind of rebuild it.

The most worrying thing that he told me though, was that the OPW were thinking that they might have to permanently close it off so that you won't be able to get near it, and the reason he said was because during the summer some stupid 70 year old american fell off it, over the entrance to the chamber, and broke her hip. :rolleyes:

GhostInTheRuins

In case you're wondering what it looks like now:

Riamfada

I thought it had already been done Perhaps they are stabalising the structure below the soil?

edit: just read GINTR post

Reoil

Is that not ruining the mounds?
If you tear something apart and throw it back together in 2012, does that not make it a mound from 2012?

Degsy

Did they actually find anything?

Gee Bag

The mound was excavated a long time ago, the finds are on display in the National Museum in Kildare Street. They have their own special exhibition.

After it was originally excavated, the mound was put back togehter again. In the last ten or so years it started to get a bit flakey (leaks, subsidence, etc.) so the OPW have started to take it apart in order to rebuild it again.

Riamfada

Reoil wrote: »

Is that not ruining the mounds?
If you tear something apart and throw it back together in 2012, does that not make it a mound from 2012?

These are the questions that keep academics (and no one else) awake at night.

GhostInTheRuins

A bit of an update. They've put these signs up around the mound explaining what the problem was and what their plan for restoration is. It looks like they'll be adding a bit of a brick wall around the entrance stones, a bit reminiscent of the newgrange entrance in a way.

Anyway the plans and info is here. I won't embed the images because I'm uploading them at full size so ye can see all the detail.

http://omg.wthax.org/DSC01876.jpg

http://omg.wthax.org/DSC01872.jpg

http://omg.wthax.org/DSC01873.jpg

http://omg.wthax.org/DSC01874.jpg

http://omg.wthax.org/DSC01875.jpg

And here's how it looks today.

cfuserkildare

Hi,

Just a quick question,
Has anybody documented the carvings on the stones at the ectrance to the mound of prisoners?

I took pics a couple of years ago but do not remember any official reference to them.

Cheers.

GhostInTheRuins

Ah yeah, they've been well documented over the years.

GhostInTheRuins

A year and a half later and they seem to be mostly finished.

The soil has been replaced and reseeded and the entrance has been newgrange'd. There's still fencing all around it so I can't see how much the chamber itself has changed.





I don't mind it, it's definitely not the worst "reconstruction" that's been done.

Coles

The stonework looks a bit Apres-Famine Catholic Church, no? Or possibly 2005 Cavan McMansion?

Certainly no one will mistake it for the original.

Mountainsandh

woaww... I know nothing about nothing here, but it really looks Cavan McMansion to me

dr gonzo

GhostInTheRuins wrote: »

A year and a half later and they seem to be mostly finished.

The soil has been replaced and reseeded and the entrance has been newgrange'd. There's still fencing all around it so I can't see how much the chamber itself has changed.





I don't mind it, it's definitely not the worst "reconstruction" that's been done.

Ah, good and Disneyfied, just how we like our national monuments. Bless the OPW's little cotton socks, they sure do try.

Ali Isaac

At least it's being maintained, though, rather than allowed to fall apart.

dr gonzo

Ali Isaac wrote: »

At least it's being maintained, though, rather than allowed to fall apart.

In this case, considering the MoTH has already been totally excavated, it is fair enough that it has been stabilised. In other cases, such as the Boyne valley, I would be far less enthused about the levels of intervention and reconstruction that have happened to these monuments in the recent past.

pog it

Anyone got a picture of the original entrance?

robp

pog it wrote: »

Anyone got a picture of the original entrance?

That dry stone walling would like dodgy in the suburbs while in a Neolithic passage tomb it is appalling.

pog it

Beautiful pic Rob.

With that in mind they definitely overdid it in the restoration but as said, better to have it restored than for it to fall in!

slowburner

Does anyone know if the lintel in robp's wonderful picture is original?

dr gonzo

slowburner wrote: »

Does anyone know if the lintel in robp's wonderful picture is original?

I'm almost sure it is alright, but dont take my word for it!

Coles

slowburner wrote: »

Does anyone know if the lintel in robp's wonderful picture is original?

I'd say it is, but it looks like it's wedged between the entrance stones and driving them apart as it drops down. I can imagine this process happening over thousands of years with water freezing and expanding between the stones. But that's precisely what I'd expect a 5000 year old tomb to look like and hopefully the OPW won't sort it out with some mock Georgian pillars.

cfuserkildare

Is it just me? or does that look like an industrial drill mark on the left side of the lintel?

Maybe not as original as we all think!

Tordelback

GhostInTheRuins wrote: »

I don't mind it, it's definitely not the worst "reconstruction" that's been done.

Oh it's pretty close.

slowburner

cfuserkildare wrote: »

Is it just me? or does that look like an industrial drill mark on the left side of the lintel?

Maybe not as original as we all think!

It does look a little more regular than you'd expect.
I'd love to see a photo showing the underside of the lintel, if anyone is up that way

Early stone splitting technique results in conical apertures because the technique involved chipping or pecking initially, and possibly followed by a more abrasive boring action later.
Like this curious little stone - which is probably a waste piece from a similarly shaped stone to the lintel shown above.



This piece of schist (in a probable prehistoric quarry) shows a sequence of discontinued bore holes to create a slab. The split was either discontinued or the remainder was used in the megalith nearby and this is the waste piece.



Great clip here showing stone splitting with steel chisels.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIYWTEiabpc

Coles

The more I see that 'renovation' the angrier I'm getting.

robp

Coles wrote: »

The more I see that 'renovation' the angrier I'm getting.

I want to give them the benefit of the doubt that had a reason for this but I am stumped why they didn't mimic the more irregular speculated Newgrange (re)constructed façade.



Or even the original corbelling inside Newgrange

Coles

robp wrote: »

I want to give them the benefit of the doubt that had a reason for this but I am stumped why they didn't mimic the more irregular speculated Newgrange (re)constructed façade.

I just don't see the need for it. Is it to stop people climbing the mound? that won't work, and in 10 years time the stone facade will have tumbled down and been trampled into the dirt. Archaeological litter for further generations to figure out.

slowburner

At a wild guess, I suspect it's down to the tendering process.
The latest stone mason must have tendered the lowest price etc.
The dry stonework is of a very, very high standard. This has to be admitted.
It's just that it's in the wrong place and the mason has worked the stones. The first builders used whichever stones came to hand.

It will probably weather in - in a couple of thousand years or so.