Comments for The Heritage Journal

Comment on Hill of Tara – UNESCO Tentative List by steve white

steve white — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 11:10:16 +0000

im thinking that navan fort was rejected precisely because it wasn’t submitted as joint nomination with all the other royal sites in Irelan

Comment on “Preservation by record” : a dirty little lie? by heritageaction

heritageaction — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 10:31:20 +0000

Of course though, it is also possible to learn much without totally destroying a monument. In addition, partial investigation and then preservation in situ for further investigation by posterity using better and less destructive techniques gives far more opportunity for learning. So the “learning” issue is hard to sustain as reasonable if there’s no actual necessity to destroy everything.

And yes, sand quarrying isn’t very noble. Yet there’s hardly a quarry that isn’t held up as just that – “we’ll convert it to a wetland nature reserve afterwards” – which is exploiter talk for “it’s much cheaper to fill the hole up with water so we’ll say we’re doing that as a public service!”

Comment on “Preservation by record” : a dirty little lie? by Ann

Ann — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 09:48:31 +0000

Just thinking, but when they empty a grave they find, or any archaeological location, digging out bit by bit, taking away artefact by artefact – and even bone by bone – do they not do exactly the same? It is sometimes either let it buried and pass on a chance to learn, or haul it up.

But yes, I also admit, in this case that argument is less valid. My hopes are with the barrow. (Quarrying does not seem a ‘noble enough’ cause for destruction.)

Comment on Hill of Tara – UNESCO Tentative List by heritageaction

heritageaction — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 14:22:15 +0000

Thanks Steve, give us a few days and we’ll look into it, but to answer one of your questions, I do not think that there is any groups here in England campaigning for Navan Fort, or Tara even, sadly.

Comment on Hill of Tara – UNESCO Tentative List by steve white

steve white — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 20:45:22 +0000

are any uk groups for campaigning around these issues, have any in particular taken in interest in navan fort, Emain Macha, if ireland was going to make a serial nomination why not make it a joint transboundary submission with the uk and included with the The Royal Sites of Ireland (Cashel, Drin Ailinne, Hill of Uisneach, Rathcroghan Complex and Tara Complex):

it would fit with them wouldn’t it? im not sure,im not barking up the wrong tree am I.

navan fort isn’t on their tentative list and im not sure it was suggested recently, it hard to find out how the come up with these lists.

Transboundary properties
134. A nominated property may occur:
a) on the territory of a single State Party, or
b) on the territory of all concerned States Parties having
adjacent borders (transboundary property).
Decision 7 EXT.COM 4A
135. Wherever possible, transboundary nominations should be
prepared and submitted by States Parties jointly in conformity
with Article 11.3 of the Convention. It is highly recommended
that the States Parties concerned establish a joint management
committee or similar body to oversee the management of the

http://whc.unesco. org/archive/ opguide08- en.pdf

but

Navan Fort
Navan Fort has been nominated in the past to qualify for inclusion in the World Heritage List, but doesn’t feature anymore on the country’s current Tentative List.

Year Decision Comments
1989 Rejected Does not meet WHS requirements
1988 Rejected Important for UK but does not meet WHS requirements
1988 Tentative list Submitted as tentative site by State Party

can’t find the actually docs on that… can you?

http://whc.unesco. org/archive/ repbur88. htm

Navan Fort 490 United Kingdom

Although the Bureau recognized the importance of this property for the cul-
tural heritage of the United Kingdom, it considered that Navan Fort did not
possess the outstanding universal value which would justify its inscription on
the list.

Comment on World’s Oldest Statue by baza

baza — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 23:44:15 +0000

I’ve seen this in the archaeology museum in Amman:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/44560863@N06/4096891948/

Comment on About Heritage Action by Barbara Davies

Barbara Davies — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 16:22:36 +0000

Wonderful! So happy to learn of your aims and action, through reading your helpful review of ‘Spirit of Portland,’ which a friend has just introduced me to. Living in Cornwall, with its many ancient sites, I’m naturally very encouraged to learn of your work, and I’ll follow up the connection by subscribing to your journal.

Comment on Bremore. Quo Vadis? by Gordon

Gordon — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 22:51:05 +0000

Thank you very much John.

I’ve spent the last week or two trying to get my head around it and I feel blacker than ever. Even the smaller (is that any way to put it?) details. NAMA’s landlord. Richard Barrett’s comment on pursuing the ‘Hilton Hotel’ case to the end; “his house is gone”. The wording on the Drogheda Port website.

Comment on Bremore. Quo Vadis? by John Farrelly

John Farrelly — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 15:27:38 +0000

Great work, great writing.
However the Irish government seems destined to carry on its “cancer cell economics”. This growth for growth sake is not open to reason and in the end will undo us.

Comment on Redneck archaeology! by Petrov

Petrov — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 09:46:52 +0000

Hi,

I don’t whether to laugh or cry. Are you telling me this activity is legal?

As Cicero said, “O Tempo! O Mores!”

Yours in Disgust,

Petrov