Seen & Found

slowburner

Neutronale wrote: »

Pull that sucker out of there, put on mantle, 2,000 years of history right there

You'd be amazed how many people actually have that attitude.

Neutronale

slowburner wrote: »

You'd be amazed how many people actually have that attitude.

Its already been taken out of archaeological context by the wall builder, just replace with nice rock

slowburner

Neutronale wrote: »

Its already been taken out of archaeological context by the wall builder, just replace with nice rock

The wall is in fact, part of a superbly preserved ringfort.
The original context was lost a long time ago when the mason picked up the convenient stone.
Now it has entered, not only the structure of the wall, but the very fibres of the web of history and prehistory surrounding this magnificent national monument.
This bronze age site was in use up until the late medieval period. Think how important the quern is in indicating the continuity of habitation in this place.

One of the most important concepts in archaeology is the palimpsest - a bit like peeling the layers of skin from an onion.
A find, no matter how trivial, can indicate the presence of a people at a particular period.
This humble stone is one layer of this rath's palimpsest.
Finds are not always stratigrapically arranged, as in this case, but it is a clear pointer to habitation before the construction of the rath.

I think it tells a better story where it is then on somebody's mantelpiece, and I worry that anyone here would think otherwise.

Neutronale

slowburner wrote: »

The wall is in fact, part of a superbly preserved ringfort.
The original context was lost a long time ago when the mason picked up the convenient stone.
Now it has entered, not only the structure of the wall, but the very fibres of the web of history and prehistory surrounding this magnificent national monument.
This bronze age site was in use up until the late medieval period. Think how important the quern is in indicating the continuity of habitation in this place.

One of the most important concepts in archaeology is the palimpsest - a bit like peeling the layers of skin from an onion.
A find, no matter how trivial, can indicate the presence of a people at a particular period.
This humble stone is one layer of this rath's palimpsest.
Finds are not always stratigrapically arranged, as in this case, but it is a clear pointer to habitation before the construction of the rath.

I think it tells a better story where it is then on somebody's mantelpiece, and I worry that anyone here would think otherwise.

Aha, that changes everything, the quern stays

Mountainsandh

I absolutely do not condone even thinking of removing such a stone in such context, but Slowburner, looking at the bigger picture, wouldn't people doing such a thing be participating themselves in another palimpsest ?

After all, their crumbled and overgrown semi-di with such a remarkable mantelpiece might well be archeology for post-comet/nuclear disaster generations ?

Isn't that exactly what some farmers did when they reincorporated found sheila na gigs to their farm walls ? (I think there's supposed to be such a case in co Waterford or Tipp near me, never saw it and wouldn't know where to look though).

The Knockboy Church near me has reused ogham stones as window mantels (technical word ?) too.

slowburner

Mountainsandh wrote: »

I absolutely do not condone even thinking of removing such a stone in such context, but Slowburner, looking at the bigger picture, wouldn't people doing such a thing be participating themselves in another palimpsest ?
After all, their crumbled and overgrown semi-di with such a remarkable mantelpiece might well be archeology for post-comet/nuclear disaster generations ?

I suppose they would, but archaeology is learning about past people from the physical evidence they leave behind. If the evidence is not in context or the physical connection to a place is broken, then the evidence can only inform us about itself - not about the place where it was deposited.
The purpose of archaeology is not to collect artefacts - it is not treasure hunting.
A find is really only an indicator of what happened, and when it happened in a particular place. We want to know when people were present in a place and the most reliable way of doing this, is by dateable physical evidence present in an undisturbed context.

Their remarkable mantlepiece would have no connection to its place of origin. It would just be an isolated stone without any continuity of connection to the past.
If something is removed from its original context, all it can tell us is that it was taken out of its original context.

Isn't that exactly what some farmers did when they reincorporated found sheila na gigs to their farm walls ? (I think there's supposed to be such a case in co Waterford or Tipp near me, never saw it and wouldn't know where to look though).

The Knockboy Church near me has reused ogham stones as window mantels (technical word ?) too.

Yes indeed.
Stones were often reused and still are, even decorative/carved ones, but the earlier they were reused, the less likely they were to have been transported far from their original context.
Nowadays, things can end up on a Chinese mantlepiece within 24 hours.

Mountainsandh

What I meant was not so much that the piece would "speak" about itself, but it would tell about the people who picked it and uprooted it.

Just like we can infer from people reusing religious on non religious artefact whether they reverred or respected the ancients, or not, what was important to them, or not, what society of their time was like.

The fact that the piece would be found on a modern mantelpiece, devoid of context and history, and yet older in age to its surroundings, would tell a lot about the vanity of the people who plundered it, their non existent or different religious beliefs (if it was a religious piece), their love for materialism, etc...

I am looking at it from the point of view of the archeologist of next century studying us (or them, be they Chinese or otherwise), not the piece in question really.
For that archeologist, there will be a context, and layers.
There will be the remains of a hair straightener and possibly some HD tv fixtures, some other 21st century objects, and in the middle of that, a strikingly older period object, possibly of a remote provenance on the planet.

Imagine if you found an Irish Sheila Na Gig in a 19th century Chinese mining settlement. The item has lost some context but found a new one.

bawn79

littlemac1980 wrote: »

So I had to take a detour to Work Today due to a jack-knifed truck on the main road. I had to go by Ardpatrick near the Ballyhoura Mountains, in Cork.

I saw what was clearly the ruins of a substantial sized structure on a hill just to the South-West (about 200-300 metres) of the town.

So when I got to work I checked out bing maps and noted the structure was clearly visible on it.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/78280664@N03/8570685375/in/photostream

http://www.flickr.com/photos/78280664@N03/8571775968/in/photostream

But then when I checked the Osi maps - I noticed that while the Church in Ruins (w Graveyard) and Round tower which appear to be visible in Bing Maps to the South of the extensive ruins I've mentioned, are noted in the Osi, there is no record of anything else to explain the extensive ruins just North of Those.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/78280664@N03/8571776042/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/78280664@N03/8571776022/

Any ideas?

A monastery perhaps?

I visited this great spot a few years ago and recorded some info from the local information boards as linked.

http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/site/11386/ardpatrick.html

It says "A series of earthen banks and enclosures near the summit date from the Iron Age (500BC - 500AD). Its later adaption as a monastic settlement suggests that it had a religious significance prior to the arrival of Christianity."

littlemac1980

bawn79 wrote: »

I visited this great spot a few years ago and recorded some info from the local information boards as linked.

http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/site/11386/ardpatrick.html

It says "A series of earthen banks and enclosures near the summit date from the Iron Age (500BC - 500AD). Its later adaption as a monastic settlement suggests that it had a religious significance prior to the arrival of Christianity."

Wow thanks for that link and the answer.

I imagine at some point in the past it must have been a wonderful sight located as it is on a hill close to the some of the steepest parts of the Ballyhoura range - which wouldn't have been covered in coniferous trees back then either.

Neutronale

The reuse of the neolithic "passage tomb" at Knowth is quite interesting. It was chosen as a site for a village during the early medieval period...

Knowth, Co. Meath
Grid reference: N99677343 (299674/273437)
SMR No: ME019-030
Reference: Eogan 1968; Eogan 1974; Eogan 1977; McCormick & Murray 2007.

Knowth is a large multi-period burial and settlement complex that was utilised from the Neolithic until
post medieval times. During the early medieval period, there were two main phases of activity on the
site – a bivallate raised enclosure; and an unenclosed settlement.

The Neolithic passage tomb mound was the focus of the first early medieval phase at Knowth. During
the seventh and eighth centuries two concentric ditches were excavated into the mound. No internal
domestic features were identified but both occupational and dating evidence was present in the
enclosure ditches and mostly within the outer enclosure ditch.

Artefacts from this phase included a sherd of E ware and a single-edged bone comb from the lower
fills of the inner enclosure ditch. The former demonstrates that the inner enclosure was in use
between the sixth and mid-seventh centuries. Bronze items included a potential ear scoop, two
possible spoons and three penannular brooches with zoomorphic terminals. A melon bead was also
uncovered.

A small mixed cemetery of crouched, flexed and extended burials was associated with the passage
tomb, some contemporary with this first early medieval phase. The final group of burials included
three seventh- and eighth-century disturbed extended inhumations.

The first phase of early medieval activity at Knowth ceased by the end of the eighth century and
occupational evidence during the following century is absent. In the tenth century a large unenclosed
settlement was established. This included 15 houses, nine souterrains, five metalworking areas,
cobbled and paved surfaces and many hearths. The houses were rectangular with rounded corners
and some examples had central hearths on stone floors; and some of the souterrains were associated
with the houses.

Many crafts and industries were practised on the site, including ironworking, bronze-working, goldworking
and enamelling, as well as stone-working, bone-working and antler-working. Leather and
textile also appears to have been produced on site. Artefacts from this phase were more abundant
than that of the earlier phase and included many items of personal adornment. These included a
range of metal ringed and stick pins dating between the tenth and thirteenth centuries, bone pins,
belt buckles, bone combs and jet bracelets. Functional items were represented by iron knives,
needles, seven quern stone fragments, grindstones, a horse bridle and flint scrapers.

http://www.emap.ie/documents/EMAP_Report_5_Archaeology_of_Livestock_and_Cereal_Production_WEB.pdf

Neutronale

Excellent pic of souterrains at Newtownbalregan...

Wibbs

Great pic N. Really shows the scale of those structures.

bawn79

I spotted this recently on a new aerial photo on google earth. (The rectangular formation)

http://goo.gl/maps/Ao9Ct

Doesn't appear on the bing maps

http://binged.it/YiMU30

Any ideas what it might be?

Coles

In mythology Cnoc Gréine is a very special place, and it is bound to be covered with layers and layers of archaeology. Certainly seems to be a lot going on in the satellite images.

bawn79

Coles wrote: »

In mythology Cnoc Gréine is a very special place, and it is bound to be covered with layers and layers of archaeology. Certainly seems to be a lot going on in the satellite images.

I've read a few bits and pieces about Cnoc Greine but other that it being related to the hill of the sun I haven't found any more specific mythology regarding it.

Anything more specific that you might know of?

slowburner

That rectilinear enclosure is also visible in the OSI 2005 orthophotography.
There is no record of a rectilinear enclosure on either the 1st or 2nd edition maps but there was a circular rath at that precise location;
http://maps.osi.ie/publicviewer/#V1,575346,645561,6,8

It's a curious one.
Was the original rath reshaped sometime later? Or did the original survey lose something in translation? It is interesting and definitely deserves further investigation.

The SMR only lists a mound at that site ( L1024 - 012 ).

Is that a barrow at the southern boundary wall in the next field southwest of the rectilinear enclosure? It's listed as an enclosure (L1024-156). It looks to me like a ring barrow which has been intersected by a later wall.

Coles

bawn79 wrote: »

I've read a few bits and pieces about Cnoc Greine but other that it being related to the hill of the sun I haven't found any more specific mythology regarding it.

Anything more specific that you might know of?

Here's some stuff to get you started. Link

The word 'grian' in local names sometimes commemorates, not the sun, but a woman ; for though primarily meaning the sun, it was anciently (being a feminine noun) a favourite female name, applied of course in the sense of brightness and beauty. Kilgreana near Gralbally in Limerick, is understood by the people to mean Grian's church; but there are other places in Carlow, Mayo and Waterford, with this name, in the slightly varying forms of Kilgreany and Kilgraney in which probably the first syllable represents colli ; the whole meaning sunny wood.

The most interesting example of the occurrence of this word in local nomenclature as a woman's name, is Knockgrean, a hill rising over the village of Pallas-Grean in the county Limerick. The lady "Grian of the bright cheeks," from whom this place was named, was an enchantress; and the hill, which before her time was called Cnoc-na-gcuradh [Knock-nagurra], the hill of the champions, was her favourite haunt.

Five young champions, the sons of Conall, came one time to attack the sidh [shee] or fairy mansion of Grrian's father, Firae ; and they destroyed the sidh, and slew besides, one of Grian's young handmaids. But they paid dearly for this cruel deed; for the vengeful sorceress overtook them on their return, and transformed them all into badgers.

When Conall heard of the fate of his five sons, he set out immediately, bent on vengeance, to seek for the enchantress ; and when he arrived at Knocknagurra, he found her asleep on the hill. She started up as he approached, and a contest took place between them, in which Conall nearly succeeded in killing her. When she found herself worsted in the fight, she planned a stratagem to bring him within the power of her sorcery; and she said, pretending to recognise him then for the first time, "Is it thou, Conall? " Conall answered "It is I." "Come near me," said she, that I may give thee a blessing." So Conall came close to her, and she immediately shook ashes on him. He retired at once from her presence, but the withering spell of the ashes overcame him ; and when he had come to a certain mound he died there, so that the mound was named from him, Carn Conaill.

Grian had no better fortune ; for no sooner had Conall left her than she lay down and died of her wounds. And ever since, the hill has borne the name of Cnoc-Greine or Knockgrean, in memory of the enchantress, Grian of the bright cheeks. About a quarter of a mile from the village of PallasGrean, which lies at the foot of the hill, there is a large fort, now called the moat of Pallas ; this is the original sidh or fairy mansion of Firae and his daughter : and from it the village took its name : — Pallas-Grean, i. e. the fairy-palace of the lady Grian. There is also an ancient fort on the top of the hill, which now goes by the name of Seefin; and this was no doubt Grian's own residence.

The enchantress Grian has been long forgotten in the neighbourhood ; and the name of the place is now supposed to be derived directly from the sun. Accordingly the townland lying adjacent to the village on the west side, is called Sunglen ; and near the village of " Pallas-Grean New," at the Pallas station of the Waterford and Limerick railway, is the townland and residence of Sunville; both named under the erroneous impression that Knockgrean meant the hill of the sun.

bawn79

Thanks Coles - I've been up and around the hill a few times. Very hard to figure out what is going on up there.


http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/site/9632/cnoc_greine.html

I know there was a definite mound up on top of the hill (not the picture on the link above) and a lot of different earthworks.

All info that you may have would be greatly appreciated. Even if you would like to PM me - I can give you my email address if you have any other stuff on it.

slowburner

There are plenty of fine photographers who post in this forum.
- More would be welcome
Even so I thought I would share these two images of the same site, to demonstrate how much can be revealed (or hidden) by changes in the light.

Fries-With-That

Mountainsandh wrote: »

Isn't that exactly what some farmers did when they reincorporated found sheila na gigs to their farm walls ? (I think there's supposed to be such a case in co Waterford or Tipp near me, never saw it and wouldn't know where to look though).

I have a memory of this in Tipperary where back in the early 80's a guy pointed out a carved stone in the façade of his newly constructed house, that he had taken from a local castle. I was shocked that someone could just steal a carved stone and proudly display it on the front of his house for all to see.

slowburner

The piers of my next door neighbour's gate are constructed from the quoins of a ruined C11th church.
Whether the church was ruined before or after the material was 'salvaged', I don't know.
It's a common though despicable practice.

Poor Uncle Tom

slowburner wrote: »

It's a common though despicable practice.

It's the oldest form of recycling.

I think the 'despicable' aspect comes from the sense of loss someone feels at the realisation that some artifact once formed part of a larger structure which would have been seriously impressive to see and experience in todays world.

However, the salvage of stones from the decayed rubble of some ancient building would not have been seen as willful destruction, say 30 or 50 years ago, and of course it is worth noting that the person who 'rescued' the artifact probably had nothing to do with the initial destruction of the original structure.

I would also ask where the 'original' structure sourced all of its materials, I would guess that a plethora of earlier structures sacrificed their defining cells to help shape the form which is being mourned as the source of the despicable loss.

I'm not saying any of this to excuse the theft of artifacts, just to explain the re-use of some materials like stones, etc, regardless of how worked the stones may be.

slowburner

Sure.
I hope that we have moved on from this form of recycling though.

Poor Uncle Tom

I have a memory from when I was very very young, my dad used to bring the milk to the creamery on his horse and cart but in the 1960's the creamery truck used to call around to local areas to collect the milk from milk stands, each farmer built his own one. My dad took up an old flag stone from in front of a derelict thatch house in the farmyard and brought it to the roadway and flattened out a section of the wide stone fence and put the flag stone on the finished area for the milk churns to rest on for collection.

In the 1990's a local building was being extended and needed a flat door head for a wide wall and used the self same flag stone, which now frames a door opening, but as a head rather than a flag and only two miles from where I remember it being taken from. I smile any time I consider that, because I am the variable in that sketch, not the stone or it's myriad of uses. That particular stone could have experienced 5, 10 or 20 incarnations before I came along and decided to remember that first day I witnessed it being exhumed from in front of that empty family home. God only knows how many more incarnations that particular stone has in store for it before it is reabsorbed into some mantle somewhere in the distant future.

There are stone fences around my old with stones which had many uses, I have identified a scuffle stone, a grinding stone, another flag stone and a gate heel support all on one stone fence, it's like a treasure trove. I can lose hours just wondering about the people who used them down through the years and about who actually fashioned them first.

Remember, every single fence is made up of hundreds of stones gathered from all over the place, a lot of which had other uses before being discarded and collected. I like to think it's not the stone that loses usefulness but rather the person using it loses ability, need or interest.

Anyway I've rambled on enough.

slowburner

Wonderful post.
You have just become an archaeologist.
Without your knowledge of the history of these stones, they would eventually become nothing more than builder's rubble, broken and forgotten at the bottom of a big yellow iron bucket.
You have recorded the history of an artefact and moreover, you have recorded a story more fully than anyone will ever be able to in the future, solely by investigating whatever remains of the stone.

On my travels, which frequently involve looking at stones, I often think; that's a great stone - it would make a great head, step, sill etc. And then I wonder, if I thought that, surely someone else before me thought the same thing? They probably did but it might have been just too awkward or difficult to transport.
Or did that useful looking stone originally come from a place where it had been cut to fit?
I will probably never know, nor will anyone else.

This, just to describe the importance of your intimate knowledge of your stone's provenance and the stories it can now tell.
That's archaeology.

Mountainsandh

Weee... I think I found something !
Of course need your expert eyes to look on this.

This is very near me, so I'd be able to take pics from the road, maybe not go in yet as there are excitable sheep in there, not until I meet my neighbours anyway.
The Bing map imaging I was looking at is dated 2013, Google maps are ancient and won't zoom this clear so can't double check on that.

Ring enclosure that seems small to be a ringfort ? (see size of shed opposite). Nothing marked on OSI and NMS map.
This is on a hilly site facing East.

http://binged.it/ZVLjfh

edit : townland Bonatouk or Monatouk co Waterford (the border to South Tipp is just across there)

slowburner

Great find.

Almost certainly an early Bronze Age ring barrow with an eroded fosse, possibly earlier.
At between 25 - 30m, the size is just right.
There might just be the remains of an outer bank in a semi circle to the right of the barrow. There may also be a rectilinear earthwork about 15m due north.
Is there an entrance to the north-east?

I would advise that you make contact with the landowner as soon as you can - before the growth gets too heavy.
I have never once met a landowner who was not interested to find out about what is on their land and very often they can tell you about other potentially interesting things nearby.
When you visit the site, don't confine yourself to just the barrow - get to know the surroundings - the overall context.
Explore the ditches and uncultivated areas.
Ask yourself 'Why was this place chosen to bury the dead?' and imagine the landscape without modern structures or forestry. Views from the barrow can be extremely important.
It's always worthwhile to make a habit of exploring the field boundaries too, especially if they are a dry stone wall construction. Stones cleared from the field may have been part of the barrow at some point so you should look for worked stones.
Familiarise yourself with recorded monuments in the locality if you haven't already. It a tradition in Ireland that you should be able to see three fairy forts from the one you are beside.
It's quite possible that this earthwork will be very difficult to see at ground level. With any luck, you might be able to see a difference in the soil or grass.
It can be useful to photograph the site in low evening or morning sunlight - probably the morning in this case.

The only other possibility is that it is the footprint of a cattle feeder. Scrolling back through the OSI timeline shows no cattle feeder there from 1995 to 2000 - or any sign that there had been one there. I don't think it is a product of a cattle feeder, but had to say it all the same.
It is just barely visible as a crop mark on the OSI 2000 image.

You will need to fill out the Monument Report form after you have been for a site visit and eliminated the cattle feeder option (after chatting to the landowner).

Don't forget to bring:

• a (long) measuring tape
• a ranging rod, or something else easily recognisable for scale. My walking stick doubles as a ranging rod with carved rings at 20cm intervals.
• a compass
• and of course, the camera
• a picnic :P

You will need to measure the inside diameter, the outside diameter, the height and width of the fosse.
Google Earth is good for noting the height above sea level.
The ITM coordinates can be obtained from the OSI website. Centre the barrow in the crosshairs and hover your mouse over it. When the cursor changes from 'pan' to an arrow, read off the coordinates from the status box at the bottom left of the window.


It just goes to show the value of searching at a macro level.
I firmly believe that intensive local searching is the very best way for an improved national inventory of monuments. We have more remote sensing tools in our hands now than ever before.

Mountainsandh

Thank you so much Slowburner !

I just drove by the place, didn't see the land owners yet, but I see them often and will talk to them, I think they'll be interested. Light is totally flat today nothing photos would be useless.

The structure is actually visible from the road, albeit from a lower vantage point, and so not very obvious. There are no visible stones that I can see from the road.

I've never seen cattle in there, just sheep, but the farmers do have a few cattle as well so you never know. But the cattle feeders that they are using in their other fields are much smaller I have to say (they only have a very small herd for calves I think, sheep is their thing).

Could it be just a pockmark caused by a puddle ? This is really down from the mountain slope.

As regards position, I think this would be a pretty obvious bronze age spot. There is a cairn on top of the mountain (Broe Mountain, with Knocknafallia right behind it), that would be behind the structure, very close. Pretty much across from the structure looking East-South East, there are 2 spots with standing stones : a pair in one spot I think are actually Ogham stones, and a single stone too. There are no ringforts facing it that I know of (need to look more closely), but there is an enclosure that has been roughly handled throughout the years (according to records), that would have been within line of sight if the current forestry wasn't there (I think).

I need to look at the NMS closely again, and the good news is that I will have a lot more free time from the start of June to go take pics, measure, etc... If the farmers confirm that there was no cattle feeder there, or that they didn't have a hand in this, I will probably be back on here to ask lots of silly questions to try and do things right Slowburner, thanks again.:)

Mountainsandh

Ring enclosure across from it.

Poor Uncle Tom

A good news story about returning artifacts in today's paper...

http://www.heritageireland.ie/en/ShannonRegion/ScatteryIslandCentre/

It seems that two carved stones, removed by a Captain Kennedy in the 1860's are to be returned to Scattery Island as part of a Gathering Ceremony later this year.

The stones, originally carved around the 12th or 14th century's were kept by the Captain in his own garden and found their way into a graveyard in Kilrush. The priest asked the local school teacher to take them away to protect them some 50 or so years ago. The retired school teacher has now contacted the local heritage group to repatriate the stones onto the island.