Accessing archaeological information and data

dr gonzo

As a follow on from a somewhat valid point by our own member cfuserkildare, a very good idea was hit upon about the perceived availability of archaeological information and data. As a person who is already aware of what is available publicly, for the most part, I am extremely biased against the notion that Ireland is bad at disseminating this information, at least at less detailed level. For example, Ireland is exceptionally bad at site record publications, but of course, this is not what a member of the public is after.

With this question in mind I have borrowed the idea from another thread and started this new one to both open dialogue about what is required to better inform the public about the heritage of this incredible country, as well as being, perhaps, a useful point for the a list of available resources. Im not sure what the best way to approach this is, but it is certainly imperative that people discuss what they would like to know more about and perhaps one of us can provide a resource that fits the bill.

Fries-With-That

Hi Dr Gonzo,

I am somewhat in agreement with the poster that suggested that information about or archaeological past is not widely available.

If you don't know where to look, or what to look for, how can you access the information you think you might need.

I think as a nation we are remarkably ignorant of what surrounds us.

We covered very little on our nations heritage when I was at school, I remember a few chapters in a history book when I was in primary school.

Would it not be a good idea to produce a small information booklet for each county in Ireland, naming the known national monuments, where they are located, and a glossary of explanations as to what each one was used for.

If each child was given a copy of this booklet, this information would over a few years be absorbed by the public at large.

32 booklets wouldn't be that difficult a task, it could also have a report a new monument section and a protect our monuments section,and a why metal detecting is never a good idea section, and most importantly a section listing websites that people can visit where further information can be found.

I suspect the level of anger would rise also when more and more people realise what has been destroyed in the name of progress.

People don't know because it isn't taught, people destroy what they don't understand.


Fries.

Simon.d

Fries-With-That wrote: »

I think as a nation we are remarkably ignorant of what surrounds us.

We covered very little on our nations heritage when I was at school, I remember a few chapters in a history book when I was in primary school.

I think there's a big reform coming in the way History/Heritage is taught in schools, with a much greater focus on the story behind archaeology in the immediate locality.. Some hopefully that imbalance may be addressed somewhat..

A bit on it here: http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/ruairi-quinn-history-has-a-very-bright-future-in-our-junior-cert-classrooms-29193503.html

bawn79

Fries-With-That wrote: »

Hi Dr Gonzo,

I am somewhat in agreement with the poster that suggested that information about or archaeological past is not widely available.

If you don't know where to look, or what to look for, how can you access the information you think you might need.

I think as a nation we are remarkably ignorant of what surrounds us.

We covered very little on our nations heritage when I was at school, I remember a few chapters in a history book when I was in primary school.

Would it not be a good idea to produce a small information booklet for each county in Ireland, naming the known national monuments, where they are located, and a glossary of explanations as to what each one was used for.

If each child was given a copy of this booklet, this information would over a few years be absorbed by the public at large.

32 booklets wouldn't be that difficult a task, it could also have a report a new monument section and a protect our monuments section,and a why metal detecting is never a good idea section, and most importantly a section listing websites that people can visit where further information can be found.

I suspect the level of anger would rise also when more and more people realise what has been destroyed in the name of progress.

People don't know because it isn't taught, people destroy what they don't understand.


Fries.

Sorry to be disagreeing with you Fries as we are normally on a similar page.

Maybe we grew up at different times but I remember learning a lot about history while in primary school in the 80s. It probably depends on the teacher you had etc. We learnt about newgrange, ring-forts, vikings and the early christain periods. We also heard about folklore regarding Fionn McCool and the Fianna, Tir na Nog and An Tain.

The idea of a small booklet is how do you condense it into something small. For instance the North Tipp Archaeological Inventory is A4 sized and almost 500 pages with over 2500 sites. How do you condense this down?
There are plenty of websites online that cover some of the more interesting sites - just google castles north tipp or megalithic tombs north tipp.

Also are you just putting out a looting guide to where to metal detect?

Regarding damaging national monuments - I really don't know how anyone wouldn't know that this is wrong. Its like any anti-social behaviour. People know its wrong but they still do it anyhow.

I'm going to have to go back to the old fairies story. I know growing up in the country - that you were told not to damage a ring-fort because they were protected by the fairies. I know I never damaged a ring-fort growing up and still won't!

Fries-With-That

bawn79 wrote: »

Sorry to be disagreeing with you Fries as we are normally on a similar page.

Maybe we grew up at different times but I remember learning a lot about history while in primary school in the 80s. It probably depends on the teacher you had etc. We learnt about newgrange, ring-forts, vikings and the early christain periods. We also heard about folklore regarding Fionn McCool and the Fianna, Tir na Nog and An Tain.

The idea of a small booklet is how do you condense it into something small. For instance the North Tipp Archaeological Inventory is A4 sized and almost 500 pages with over 2500 sites. How do you condense this down?
There are plenty of websites online that cover some of the more interesting sites - just google castles north tipp or megalithic tombs north tipp.

Also are you just putting out a looting guide to where to metal detect?

Regarding damaging national monuments - I really don't know how anyone wouldn't know that this is wrong. Its like any anti-social behaviour. People know its wrong but they still do it anyhow.

I'm going to have to go back to the old fairies story. I know growing up in the country - that you were told not to damage a ring-fort because they were protected by the fairies. I know I never damaged a ring-fort growing up and still won't!

We're still in agreement, we covered those chapters too, but the point I was making was that its covered in a very small way. I had finished school by the early 80's with very little knowledge of the history of Ireland.

My daughters were taught more of ancient Egypt than they were about Ireland.This leading to a fascination with everything Egyptian to the extent that their rooms were covered in Egyptian paraphernalia.

I don't really see the issue with condensing the information, there may be over 2500 sites but many are the same so if you have 30 different types of sites, that could be condensed into 15 pages giving a brief outline of each type of site.

Bigger or more common sites could be given a single page.

The other points you make about damaging monuments and the stories around fairies protecting ringforts, etc., were to be lauded, sadly phisogery doesen't work anymore.

The last point about a looting guide for the metal detector enthusiast, is well made but look at it this way if more people knew what was there, would they be more aware of exactly what the person with the metal detector was doing to our heritage.

I'll give you an example, I know a local farmer that gave permission for a friend of his sons to have a poke around with his metal detector, he found several items over a few days and proudly put his bounty on display on the dining room table.

He had found an old pistol, a few old Irish and English copper and silver coins, and various bits and pieces of cutlery.
The stuff that they didn't know what it was along with the rusty bits they just dumped.

My point to the farmer was what was dumped was probably more important than what was retained.

The farmer had no problem letting someone use a metal detector on his land, he's an educated man and has travelled around most of Europe but was ignorant as to what might be under his own two feet.

robp

Fries-With-That wrote: »

We're still in agreement, we covered those chapters too, but the point I was making was that its covered in a very small way. I had finished school by the early 80's with very little knowledge of the history of Ireland.

My daughters were taught more of ancient Egypt than they were about Ireland.This leading to a fascination with everything Egyptian to the extent that their rooms were covered in Egyptian paraphernalia.

I don't really see the issue with condensing the information, there may be over 2500 sites but many are the same so if you have 30 different types of sites, that could be condensed into 15 pages giving a brief outline of each type of site.

Bigger or more common sites could be given a single page.

This isn't an entirely new idea. There is an excellent leaflet on the range of monument types in Ireland and their chronology. I am not sure who produces it or where to find it though. Here is another decent example. What is a new idea (I think) is making it local and distributing it in schools. The NRA also are excellent at showcasing their archaeological work.

Fries-With-That

robp wrote: »

This isn't an entirely new idea. There is an excellent leaflet on the range of monument types in Ireland and their chronology. I am not sure who produces it or where to find it though. Here is another decent example. What is a new idea (I think) is making it local and distributing it in schools. The NRA also are excellent at showcasing their archaeological work.

That is exactly the kind of booklet I had in mind, wouldn't it be fantastic if they were available on a county specific basis.

Imagine the interest this would spawn in our heritage and local history.

RDM_83 again

How do people feel that the various finds databases aren't publicly available, I understand the rational behind restricting access but the finds and the information regarding them could be regarded as the property of the irish people so information about them shouldn't be restricted to researchers.

cfuserkildare

Booklets would be a start, (or already are), as long as more is made easily available.

RDM_83 again, Thats what I was sort of saying so amin total agreement.

robp

RDM_83 again wrote: »

How do people feel that the various finds databases aren't publicly available, I understand the rational behind restricting access but the finds and the information regarding them could be regarded as the property of the irish people so information about them shouldn't be restricted to researchers.

Which databases? If a site is published everything found will be in the published inventory. Of course there is a lot of unpublished material in museums. I think its a logistical issue. The National museum has about 4 million objects, and always is growing rapidly. At the moment they are really struggling with staffing shortages so I don't think inventorising 4 million objects would be priority.

RDM_83 again

cfuserkildare wrote: »

Booklets would be a start, (or already are), as long as more is made easily available.

RDM_83 again, Thats what I was sort of saying so amin total agreement.

I actually should have really re read my post properly, because my view is actually that detailed access should be restricted, but that I completely understand why others would view that this should not happen

robp wrote: »

Which databases? If a site is published everything found will be in the published inventory. Of course there is a lot of unpublished material in museums. I think its a logistical issue. The National museum has about 4 million objects, and always is growing rapidly. At the moment they are really struggling with staffing shortages so I don't think inventorising 4 million objects would be priority.

I'm fairly certain there is a number of databases containing finds information (I think just type and location) possibly in excel format that legitimate researchers can get from the national museum. I'm not sure if this includes finds from sites, rather stray finds. I'l can try and find out more details, this is simply going of my memories of several years ago.

robp

RDM_83 again wrote: »

I'm fairly certain there is a number of databases containing finds information (I think just type and location) possibly in excel format that legitimate researchers can get from the national museum. I'm not sure if this includes finds from sites, rather stray finds. I'l can try and find out more details, this is simply going of my memories of several years ago.

OK Fair enough. yet I wonder, typically research is published so I presume their results are published? I really have no experience in this area.

RDM_83 again

robp wrote: »

OK Fair enough. yet I wonder, typically research is published so I presume their results are published? I really have no experience in this area.

True enough, well apart from the commercial site reports that haven't been , but in terms of stray finds apart from the spectacular ones I don't know if they would be.
And anyway there's a big difference between information buried in individual research papers and a database of geolocated finds (by type) that can quickly be pulled into a GIS or map application to show where these finds are concentrated, for both the intellectually curious with no harmful intent and unfortunately the metal detectorist .

slowburner

RDM_83 again wrote: »

True enough, well apart from the commercial site reports that haven't been , but in terms of stray finds apart from the spectacular ones I don't know if they would be.
And anyway there's a big difference between information buried in individual research papers and a database of geolocated finds (by type) that can quickly be pulled into a GIS or map application to show where these finds are concentrated, for both the intellectually curious with no harmful intent and unfortunately the metal detectorist .

It is every citizen's right to access the topographical files in the National Museum, by appointment. It is one of the finest resources available.

Sadly, very sadly, there are well known detectorists who are known to the staff of this institution, that exercise this right for their own nefarious purposes.
And there's nothing that can be done about it.
That's the line we all have to think about - how much information can we share without wondering who is lurking behind our backs?

cfuserkildare

Hi,

"That's the line we all have to think about - how much information can we share without wondering who is lurking behind our backs? "

Unfortunately that is a bit of a paranoic statement.

How do we differentiate between somebody new to archaeology and somebody who may have alterior motives?

This sort of thinking creates a state of mistrust.

REgarding "Sadly, very sadly, there are well known detectorists who are known to the staff of this institution, that exercise this right for their own nefarious purposes.
And there's nothing that can be done about it."

I thought there were ways of reporting illegal activity to the gardai, and the NMI / NMS.

robp

cfuserkildare wrote: »

Hi,

I thought there were ways of reporting illegal activity to the gardai, and the NMI / NMS.

By then the horse has bolted. If the site is damaged there is no going back. The scientific knowledge of our past is destroyed forever. Even if you can pre-empt that some thug is about to break the law it is impossible to monitor them 24/7.

We are very lucky how much info is publicly available. I have worked in archaeology in Canada where the precise location of sites is not disclosed for fear of grave robbers. I believe in some cases this is also necessary in England.

Mountainsandh

I think there is plenty of information online and in print, which is great.
However, I disagree with the perspective above, that would imply that sites should be kept quiet, for fear of looters.

I'm French, and back in France I'm sure they have the same problems with MD, and vandalism, and yet, most sites are boasted about, and well sign posted.

Anyone who has been to France will know what I mean : signage starts on

Motorways (those big brown signs), and then in villages and towns, all places of interest are well signposted.

It's a wonderful asset for small places to have a historical site nearby, and something that locals are usually proud of.

I find it is often difficult to find sites in Ireland, and when you do, it's hit or miss whether there will be information signs or not.

I also find that when there are signs, they are really good, informative, the information is easily understood and digested by anyone, and it is usually comprehensive enough.

Maybe if there were more signs, and if heritage sites were broadcasted more, it would make them public enough that people, local and otherwise, would be more aware of potential looters or vandals ? how do you protect or supervise something that you don't know about, or that you don't know the value of ?

I'm in co Waterford, and lucky that in Dungarvan there is an excellent little museum with a fantastic website, but I find that a lot of places throughout Ireland don't seem to have enough museums, small as they may be.

It seems a lot of excavated items end up in Dublin, and I think that is wrong. It's been pointed out on here often how flints and coins are common enough to have a low commercial value, so how come these are not displayed in the nearest townland village/small town to where they have been found ?

Again in France, you will often find small museums in small towns, where a collection of all that "belongs" to this area has been deposited : art, litterature, inventions, music, history, prehistory, fossils, crafts and trades... all may be kept in the same premises, but these will give locals and tourists a wonderful snapshot of all that is interesting and precious to this corner of the world.

It's a pity that a giant deer skeleton, arctic foxes, bears, or mammoth's bones found in Dungarvan's caves for example, may not be displayed in Dungarvan. Even reproductions, if the original items are too fragile/valuable to display.

It's not all about the written word, a lot of people will respond to reproductions or the genuine artefacts, but may not been so keen to check online for heritage, or take the drive up to Dublin to visit a museum with said artefacts.

slowburner

I fully agree that there should be local museums displaying local finds. Far too many end up in dark and dusty vaults.
I think that this is a product of the law - finders are obliged to report finds to the National Museum (or an accredited museum, or the Gardaí) within 96 hours and the NMI is obliged to collect the find.
99% of the time, finds end up in the NMI's stores.
I guess the thinking is that finds need to be in a central repository to enable researchers to research - the reality is that artefacts are no longer stored centrally, so the thinking is somewhat outdated.
Would it be so difficult for researchers to visit finds stored in local museums?
In a sense, finds kept in local museums would have marginally more 'context'.
Researchers visiting the local area might well be given additional information which would not be available at the NMI's stores.
The presence of a local museum might also encourage locals to release finds stored away in attics and sheds etc., where they do no good at all.

Assessing which finds could or should be displayed locally and which nationally is the tricky part.
Against this, many finds require specialist treatment and conditions for storage and the NMI is probably the best institution to properly conserve vulnerable finds.

With regard to the question of highlighting archaeological sites: I fail to see any advantage in keeping a site 'hidden'. Treasure hunters will find it no matter what, and they regularly do.
Highlighting a site has several advantages. More visitors means greater protection, local pride and interest, and the probability of greater care of the site itself.

Mountainsandh

Look at these examples of little museums :

http://www.musee-cruzy-acap.fr/ in 2007, Cruzy boasted 948 inhabitants .

http://www.ville-saintdizier.fr/musee,3852/ This brilliant museum has samples of metalwork which is an important industry in the area, a section on birds, since a local man was a collector ornithologist, and wide ranging archeological finds that all have something to do with sites in the area. Saint Dizier is a small town of 25 000 inhabitants, and approx another 20 000 in the surrounding area. It's probably a little bit bigger than Athlone for example.

There are many more officially and state linked museums linked at this site :
http://www.culture.gouv.fr/documentation/museo/museo-carto.htm

Some belong to big towns or are lucky to be in more populated/better off regions, some are in small and less "popular" areas.
The site itself does state that a lot of private enterprise museums are not listed.

It's interesting to browse and see what has been done in areas where they had less to show.

Not archeology related but I visited La maison du Saumon a few weeks ago, http://www.aquariummaisondusaumon.com/ , the building looks modern and big, but it's actually pretty small.
None of the tanks in there have anything exceptional, they have salmons, trouts, pike, and various common varieties of fish to be found in French rivers. The most interesting displays were models showing the challenges and clever ideas engineers came up with to facilitate fish transiting via dams etc... such as a fish lift, fish ladders, etc...
There is a tactile pool, with goldfish
It's great, and a massive attraction to the small town of Brioude, 6700 inhabitants.
A lot of salmon and other interesting fish in the Suir...

robp

Mountainsandh wrote: »

Look at these examples of little museums :

http://www.musee-cruzy-acap.fr/ in 2007, Cruzy boasted 948 inhabitants .

http://www.ville-saintdizier.fr/musee,3852/ This brilliant museum has samples of metalwork which is an important industry in the area, a section on birds, since a local man was a collector ornithologist, and wide ranging archeological finds that all have something to do with sites in the area. Saint Dizier is a small town of 25 000 inhabitants, and approx another 20 000 in the surrounding area. It's probably a little bit bigger than Athlone for example.

There are many more officially and state linked museums linked at this site :
http://www.culture.gouv.fr/documentation/museo/museo-carto.htm

Some belong to big towns or are lucky to be in more populated/better off regions, some are in small and less "popular" areas.
The site itself does state that a lot of private enterprise museums are not listed.

It's interesting to browse and see what has been done in areas where they had less to show.

Not archeology related but I visited La maison du Saumon a few weeks ago, http://www.aquariummaisondusaumon.com/ , the building looks modern and big, but it's actually pretty small.
None of the tanks in there have anything exceptional, they have salmons, trouts, pike, and various common varieties of fish to be found in French rivers. The most interesting displays were models showing the challenges and clever ideas engineers came up with to facilitate fish transiting via dams etc... such as a fish lift, fish ladders, etc...
There is a tactile pool, with goldfish
It's great, and a massive attraction to the small town of Brioude, 6700 inhabitants.
A lot of salmon and other interesting fish in the Suir...

I don't think anyone wants to keep sites secret. This policy only works in a small number of cases. there is no policy to the effect that I am aware in IE. I agree that local museums are great. Reproductions are wise idea here, because there has been a huge increase in theft of museums and churches around Ireland. there is a real decrease in respect for heritage in recent years. For instance you will see plenty of people defending church looters online. For this reason Dublin is best for originals.

There are probably places in Ireland where a local museums would be good addition. The State is particularly cash starved at the moment so now is a time when volunteer groups need to step in to meet the gap. I visited a great example of a local volunteer group taking over a local site from a big company at Lough Gur recently. Its well worth a visit. Yet I don't think there is a general shortage of museums in Ireland. See here

Even in Co Waterford look at Lismore. A town of less than a 1,000 people and they have an excellent local museum with fantastic reproduction's.