Skip to main content
Read page text

Page Text

ARCHAEOLOGY

IRELAND Volume 3 Number 1 Spring 1989 Published Quarterly CONTENTS Editorial............................................. 2 News.................................................3 County Focus, Leitrim........................... 6 Sweathouses: Puzzling and Disappearing. 10 On a Lost Mount from The Cross of Cong.. 14 Recent Trial Excavations in Galway City ... 17 Conservatives Lose Out in Museum Race.21 Underwater Archaeology......................26 Archaeological Prospection...................30 Events..............................................34 Bookview..........................................35 Letters............................................. 38

ED ITORIAL TEAM Gabriel Cooney Emer Condit Paul Gosling William O'Brien Nicholas Maxwell Brian Williams P R O D U C T IO N Kevina Kell Una MacConville Nicholas Maxwell D E S IG N Catherine MacConville CARTOONS Aidan Walsh C IRCULATION Una MacConville Printed by—Craftprint Ltd Typeset by—Wordwell Ltd and Brunswick Press Published by Wordwell Ltd—Academic Publications, 9 Herbert Lane, Dublin 2, Republic of Ireland. Tel. 01612542. Fax 01-611896 Views expressed in the magazine don’t always reflect the views of the editors.

ARCHAEOLOGY DELIMITED As always the contents o f this issue o f Archaeology Ireland dem onstrate the diversity o f interests and topics th a t come under the heading o f archaeology. Interestingly a number o f the news items and articles raise directly o r indirectly the thorny question o f how we actually define what archaeology is. Anthony Weir for example writing about sweathouses comments on the their lack o f protection both in N o rth ern Ireland and the Republic. One reason for this, apart from the general very low percentage o f monuments th a t are afforded legislative protection, may be that sweathouses seem predom inantly to date from after AD 1700. They thus fall outside what has been the normal dating cut-off point in archaeological surveys and consequently have less chance o f being noted as worthy o f protection. O f course, if archaeological surveys were to cover the p o s t-1700 period the am ount o f labour, tim e and finance involved would be greatly increased. M a jo r groups o f monuments th a t would then have to be considered are sites related to industrial archaeology, country houses, farmhouses in the vernacular building tradition and the townscapes of the eighteenth, nineteeth (and twentieth?) centuries. Is this spreading the tentacles o f archaeology into some areas o f the past th a t are more properly catered for by o th e r interests? On the other hand is it really possible to justify the implication th a t archaeology ends at a set date in the past?

One common perception o f both rural and urban archaeological monuments is th a t they exist as seperate items in the modern landscape. Very often however, complexes o f sites occur which form a landscape themselves and between the visible monuments beneath the present day surface there may be ju s t as im portant evidence as that showing above ground. This concept o f an archaeological landscape o r area has been given an im portant boost by the recent Supreme Court ruling th a t a proposed Sligo County Council refuse dump in the Carrowmore passage tom b cemetery constituted a contravention o f the council’s own development plan and the N a tional M onuments Acts. Now we should expect action from the Office o f Public Works to p ro tect and present the archaeological landscape a t Carrowmore and with the backing o f the Supreme C ourt decision to actively use the concept o f archaeological areas much more widely.

2

Skip to main content