68 replies to this topic

[seanachai]

FourWinds,

My statement does not invalidate that “particular argument”, nor does it weaken my case.  Look, we know that based on the radiocarbon dates for the section of the henge unearthed in pre-tomb levels, 3030 – 2190 BC, that the Mound of the Hostages could not have been built prior to, or at the time Newgrange and Knowth were constructed, around 3200 BC. That only leaves two possibilities:

1)  That the Mound of the Hostages was built at some point during the time Newgrange and Knowth were in use.  

Tara is roughly 15 km as the crow flies from Newgrange and Knowth, and considering that they were royal burial and ceremonial sites, it’s logical that the high kings of Ireland would have visited them during the time they were in use.  As such, if the Mound of the Hostages had been built during the time Newgrange and Knowth were in use, then it would likely have been constructed and decorated at least as elaborately as Newgrange and Knowth.  A parallel to this would be the Egyptian Dynasties, when they went from building pyramids to underground burial chambers.  Obviously a huge difference in scale, but not in the elaborate manner in which they were constructed and decorated.

2)  That the Mound of the Hostages was constructed sometime after Newgrange and Knowth fell into disuse.

We know that the mounds at both Newgrange and Knowth slipped, sealing the passageways, which is one logical explanation as to why they fell into disuse.  Another is that they fell into disrepair, and the passageways silted over.  Whatever the reason, if they fell into disuse prior the Mound of the Hostages being built, then the knowledge of how Newgrange and Knowth were constructed may have been limited, which would explain its crude construction.

Scenario #2 seemed the most likely, which is why I stated in my paper “The time frame cited by Dr. Twohig for the construction of Duma na nGiall, is also that assigned to Newgrange and Knowth. Given the tomb’s rather crude construction as compared to those, it stands to reason it was built after they had fallen into disuse.”

[Cian McLiam]

seanachai, on 18 November 2007, 6:39, said:

FourWinds,

My statement does not invalidate that “particular argument”, nor does it weaken my case.

Since it was me that first raised the objection, let me just respond with a simple example that might show the difficulty. Say John slaps Tracy and the toast pops out of the toaster immediately after. Your claim is similar to someone saying that by slapping Tracy, John caused the toast to pop. You would have to prove there is a connection between the slapping and the toast popping (or that a tomb being crude means it came after an elaborate one). Simply saying 'Look, John clearly slapped Tracy, you can't dispute that' is no proof of the connection between the two propositions. Similarly, saying that there is proof that the MOTH came after Newgrange/Knowth does not prove your proposition that it 'stands to reason' that crudeness can be used to judge the chronology. There are crude tombs being built before and after Newgrange/Knowth.

Quote

Look, we know that based on the radiocarbon dates for the section of the henge unearthed in pre-tomb levels, 3030 – 2190 BC, that the Mound of the Hostages could not have been built prior to, or at the time Newgrange and Knowth were constructed, around 3200 BC. That only leaves two possibilities:

Hang on a sec, that only leaves two possibilities? Why two? Why not twenty six or one hundred and eleven? There's surely a myriad of possibilities including no link between the people and times of Newgrange and those of Tara.

Quote

1)  That the Mound of the Hostages was built at some point during the time Newgrange and Knowth were in use.  

Tara is roughly 15 km as the crow flies from Newgrange and Knowth, and considering that they were royal burial and ceremonial sites, it’s logical that the high kings of Ireland would have visited them during the time they were in use.

There were High Kings of Ireland during the Neolithic?! How do you know that Ireland as a political entity even existed? It's more likley there were tribes, chiefdoms or smaller communities but I'm interested to hear the evidence for royal burials and rituals of the Neolithic Kings of Ireland.

Quote

As such, if the Mound of the Hostages had been built during the time Newgrange and Knowth were in use, then it would likely have been constructed and decorated at least as elaborately as Newgrange and Knowth.  A parallel to this would be the Egyptian Dynasties, when they went from building pyramids to underground burial chambers.  Obviously a huge difference in scale, but not in the elaborate manner in which they were constructed and decorated.

Good grief. There are plenty of satellite tombs of simpler and less ornate designs being built right in the Boyne Valley at the same time.

Quote

2)  That the Mound of the Hostages was constructed sometime after Newgrange and Knowth fell into disuse.

We know that the mounds at both Newgrange and Knowth slipped, sealing the passageways, which is one logical explanation as to why they fell into disuse.  Another is that they fell into disrepair, and the passageways silted over.  Whatever the reason, if they fell into disuse prior the Mound of the Hostages being built, then the knowledge of how Newgrange and Knowth were constructed may have been limited, which would explain its crude construction.

Scenario #2 seemed the most likely, which is why I stated in my paper “The time frame cited by Dr. Twohig for the construction of Duma na nGiall, is also that assigned to Newgrange and Knowth. Given the tomb’s rather crude construction as compared to those, it stands to reason it was built after they had fallen into disuse.”

More sensible, but, there is also the equal possibility that technology and architecture had advanced after Newgrange and Knowth fell into disuse, they were building some pretty complex structures in Carrowkeel and Loughcrew well before Newgrange and Knowth so I do think it's unlikely they could only muster up a simple tomb centuries after. Doesn't fit the general progressive nature of architecture. However, given the variation in design and ornateness of the satellite tombs at Newgrange and Knowth, it's likely there were different criteria and reasons for building an undifferentiated passage as against a cruciform one that had nothing to do with knowledge of how they were built. Knowth has one of each. I doubt they forgot how to build a cruciform tomb with corbelled roof by the time they got round to constucting the western passage.

[seanachai]

Cian,

In my statement I said “It stands to reason…” so let me reason it through in more detail for you.

1) Based on the radiocarbon dates of the henge section found in pre-tomb levels during the excavation of the Mound of the Hostages, 3030 to 2190 BC, we know that the mound had to have been constructed after the henge fell into disuse, not 3350 – 3100 BC as Dr. O’Sullivan insists.  Therefore, the Mound of the Hostages could not have been built prior to or at the time Newgrange and Knowth were constructed.  

2) Conor Newman narrowed down the construction date for the henge at Tara to 2500 – 2300 BC.  (What he based his statement on, I have no idea, though considering he spent 5 years on the Tara Survey, I’m sure he had ample evidence to support his belief.)  Split the difference and call it 2400 BC.  I’ve never found any data as to how long it was in use, but given that other ceremonial sites were in use for several hundred years, I’d suspect for at least 100 years.  That takes us to roughly 2300 BC.  Then, as stated in my hypothesis, came the other monuments on the hill. Those would probably have been constructed over a period of 100 years or more and remain unchanged for another 100 years at the least. Now we’re looking at 2100 BC if not later. By that time, Newgrange had not been in use for at least 100 years.  According to the UNESCO Advisory Body Evaluation, the Brú na Bóinne Complex fell into disuse around 2200 BC.

http://whc.unesco.or.../659/documents/

3)  After construction of the main mounds at Newgrange and Knowth, other satellite passage tombs were constructed, though none as ornate, complex and grand in scale.  So the knowledge of how to build such tombs was obviously passed on, but how much of that was lost or became somewhat hazy over the centuries between the last satellite tomb, around 2400 BC, and the Mound of the Hostages 300 to 400 years later. The Tara Complex, like Brú na Bóinne was a royal site according to the historical records.  The Mound of the Hostages was constructed after the Boyne Complex fell into disuse.  Personally, I don’t think that’s just coincidence.  

So now it comes time to construct the royal tomb, the Mound of the Hostages, for the high king, who for years must have heard stories about Newgrange and Knowth and would surely have visited those sites, after all they were on 15 km away from Tara and clearly visible.  The knowledge of how to build a passage tomb has been passed down, but it’s not likely the architects ever built one, since the last passage tombs in the Boyne and Ghabra/Skyrne valleys were built 300 to 400 years earlier.  Yes, they might have gone back to Knowth and Newgrange to study them, but they were in disuse and partially defaced.  Having the knowledge of how a passage tomb was built, is entirely different than actually constructing one. Yes, the Bell-Beakers arrived around that time, but it’s not likely they built the Mound of the Hostages, since they were the ones who defaced the satellite tombs at Knowth. “Some traces of deliberate destruction of smaller satellite tombs at Knowth and collapses of the great cairn at Newgrange, mark the end of the Neolithic culture of megalithic passage tombs, and the advent of the Early Bronze Age Beaker People in Ireland.”  Wikipedia

There’s no link between the “people and times of Newgrange and Tara”. You might be correct… at least up until the time the henge at Tara was constructed, as there appears to be little if any activity in the area that would indicate it was inhabited or in use as a ceremonial site.  However, only two monuments have ever been excavated on the Hill of Tara, out of the hundred or so that exist either in the landscape or detected by geo-survey, and the results of only one of those has been published.  As for the surrounding valley, the only sites I’m aware of are Lismullin, Roestown and most recently Soldier Hill.  Whether those or any others indicate a settlement prior to construction of the henge, I couldn’t say.

As for the henge and post-henge era at Tara, there are several issues to take into consideration. First and foremost, is that Tara is only 15 km to Newgrange and Knowth.  So for your statement to be true, it would mean two entirely separate groups, located only kilometers from each other, lived in total isolation for nearly 4,000 years. (From the time the henge was constructed around 2400 BC to the last high king in 1318 AD  http://en.wikipedia....ings_of_Ireland ) I can’t begin to count the number of articles and books I’ve read discussing the trade and cultural exchange between Ireland and civilizations hundreds if not thousands of kilometers away.  Now, will we ever find a Neolithic version of “Kilroy Was Here”?  It’s possible. As I stated in item 20 of my paper, many of the carvings on the kerbstones at Knowth may well be an early form of heraldry. For those of you unfamiliar with the phrase “Kilroy Was Here”

http://en.wikipedia....Kilroy_was_here

Beyond that, there’s evidence that the Brú na Bóinne Complex was resettled during the late Iron Age. (see UNESCO Advisory Body Evaluation) Additionally, the ancient manuscripts mention that the kings of Ireland were taken to Newgrange for burial. One story has it that King Cormac refused to be buried there, because it was a cemetery of idolaters. Against his wishes, members of his clan took his body across the Boyne to Newgrange, but the river "swelled up thrice" and he was eventually buried on consecrated ground.  So throughout the area’s history the inhabitants of Tara not only knew that Newgrange and Knowth were royal burial sites, they visited them.

You stated “Hang on a sec, that only leaves two possibilities? Why two? Why not twenty six or one hundred and eleven? There's surely a myriad of possibilities including no link between the people and times of Newgrange and those of Tara.”

Unless you have evidence of a 4th dimension, either something is in use or it’s not in use.  There’s no in between.

As to your comment about high kings during the Neolithic period.  High kings.  Pagan kings.  Take your pick.  The term high king is just the most frequently used. “High King of Ireland (Irish: Ard Rí na hÉireann) refers to legendary, pagan kings of Tara. It also refers to later kings, who were, depending on the period, either the most powerful king of their day, or, in later times, exercised authority over most of Ireland.” “While the traditional list of those bearing the title High King of Ireland goes back thousands of years, into the second millennium BCE, the earlier parts of the list are largely mythical. It is unclear at what point the list begins to refer to historical individuals, and also at what point these individuals can genuinely be said to be "High Kings" in the later sense of the word.” Wikipedia

You asked “How do you know that Ireland as a political entity even existed?”

I never stated or implied that Ireland existed as a political entity.  However, the term political entity depends on how you view the definition - a unit with political responsibilities.  If you’re questioning the term “high kings of Ireland” that’s been around for centuries, and refers to the geographic area known as Ireland, rather than a political entity, at least up until the 9th century. “Most scholars believe that the idea of the High Kingship was a pseudohistorical construct of the eighth century that placed a king of all Ireland atop the fragmented pyramid of kingship which actually existed at that time. This notion of a high kingship acted as a spur to greater centralisation and was converted into political reality by the middle of the ninth century.” Wikipedia

“Good grief. There are plenty of satellite tombs of simpler and less ornate designs being built right in the Boyne Valley at the same time.”

There are only some 40 passage tombs within the Brú na Bóinne Complex, and yes they are simpler and less ornate, but that has no bearing on the crude construction of the Mound of the Hostages.  Furthermore, they were not built at the same time as the Mound of the Hostages.  As I already mentioned, the last satellite tombs were built around 2400 BC, which is 300 to 400 years prior to when the Mound of the Hostages could have been constructed.

You commented that “However, given the variation in design and ornateness of the satellite tombs at Newgrange and Knowth, it's likely there were different criteria and reasons for building an undifferentiated passage as against a cruciform one that had nothing to do with knowledge of how they were built. Knowth has one of each. I doubt they forgot how to build a cruciform tomb with corbelled roof by the time they got round to constructing the western passage.”

I have no doubt there were different criteria for those satellite tombs.  The two most likely would be that the satellites were for the wives, as in the case of the satellite tombs at Giza, or for lesser “nobles”, but here again that has no bearing on the crude construction of the Mound of the Hostages.

You stated “More sensible, but, there is also the equal possibility that technology and architecture had advanced after Newgrange and Knowth fell into disuse, they were building some pretty complex structures in Carrowkeel and Loughcrew well before Newgrange and Knowth so I do think it's unlikely they could only muster up a simple tomb centuries after. Doesn't fit the general progressive nature of architecture.”  

Carrowkeel and Loughcre, by all accounts and from looking at photographs of the sites, are not as complex as the main tombs at Newgrange and Knowth. While I’d agree that some “technology and architecture” did advance, that advancement did not occur over short period of time.  The Neolithic Age alone lasted for nearly 2,000 years in Ireland and passage tombs in Ireland date back as far as 4300 BC. That tells me that there weren’t any significant advancements.  

As for the “general progressive nature of architecture” one need only look at ancient civilizations such as the Egyptians, Incas, Aztecs and Romans, where over time, technology and architecture actually regressed.

Carrowkeel and Loughcrew were not constructed “well before Newgrange and Knowth”,  3300 to 2900 BC according to Dr. Eoin Grogan.  Below are 6 samples on both sites, the average of each sample and the total average.

             Carrowkeel                                                          

3200 to 2400 BC-----2800 BC          
3400 to 3100 BC-----3250 BC
3300 to 3100 BC-----3200 BC
3000 to 2000 BC-----2500 BC
3500 to 3000 BC-----3250 BC
3300 to 3000 BC-----3150 BC

        Average-----3025 BC

              Loughcrew

3500 to 3300 BC-----3400 BC            
3500 to 3300 BC-----3400 BC
3200 to 3000 BC-----3100 BC
3300 to 3100 BC-----3200 BC
3500 to 3300 BC-----3400 BC
3200 to 3000 BC-----3100 BC
                                          
       Average-----3241 BC

The majority of the tombs at Carrowmore were constructed between 4300 and 3500 BC.  Those I’d consider being built “well before Newgrange and Knowth”.

Having answered all your questions, let me close by saying that you and FourWinds have beat this subject to death. For me it’s gone beyond the point of boring, as I’m sure it has for other members on this site. I know Kevin is. When I initially posted the link to my paper, I did so fully expecting some criticism, but your posts have gone well beyond that, to the point of relentless and vehement attacks.  It’s my understanding that that’s not what the forum is about. So enough already!  Don’t bother responding to this post, as I’m not going to answer posts from either of you any longer.

If other members on this site would like to comment on or discuss any items in my paper that have not already been discussed, please do so.

[seanachai]

Over the past two months I’ve come across some extremely interesting evidence that necessitated a short rewrite of my paper “Orthostat, The Mound of the Hostages”, the most dramatic of which was revealed in a topographical gradient map of Tara.

In an email several weeks ago, Conor Newman informed me that the palisaded structure Professor O’Riordain unearthed beneath The Mound of the Hostages, was a 13m timber enclosure. “The pre-mound feature, which is, as I recall, a 13m diameter feature, only part of which was uncovered by the excavators, and swung around to the north-west. Admittedly, in 1997 I speculated that a very faint elliptical geophysical anomaly that we had come across in 1992 appeared to extend under MoH and might be the pre-mound enclosure mentioned in one of the early dispatches issuing from the excavation (remember the MoH report was not available at the time, so we were trying to make the best sense we could of what data was available in print: nowhere was the projected ground plan described or illustrated), but this proved not to be the case because they go in opposite directions. Moreover, we have not been able to get any higher resolution on the faint anomaly so far. The pre-mound enclosure is precisely that; pre-mound and is still the earliest identifiable archaeological feature on the Hill of Tara.”

In item 3 of my paper, I mentioned the 16m and 25m timber enclosures Professor O’Riordain unearthed in the pre-earthworks phase of Raith na Senad, during which time the area was used for several burials.  That being the case, it seemed logical that the 13m enclosure would also have been used for the same purpose.  The problem I kept running into though, was that the remnants of the posts were found in pre-tomb levels, until it dawned on me that the posts, after being removed or burned down to ground level, rotted away to below the level of the human remains.  In short, the remains have been associated with the wrong monument!!!  (see item 17 of my paper for a more detailed explanation)

http://www.knowth.co...a-orthostat.htm

Upon contacting Dr. Newman regarding the foregoing, he stated “The truth, Sean, is that I have not really looked in earnest at the question of the association or otherwise of the earliest burials at MoH with the 13m enclosure. I am not saying that I agree, I just don’t disagree; but then I do not have all the information at my fingertips.  It is, however, an interesting hypothesis and one worthy of exploring. I would be more inclined to see general continuity anyhow between enclosure and tomb, except for the fact that they appear to be eccentric to one another which to the modern mind is counter-intuitive.” In addition to Dr. Newman, I also contacted Dr. O’Sullivan regarding this matter.  I know he received my emails, as I have the electronic receipts, though as of yet, he has not responded, which if I were wrong, he would have jumped on immediately, since he was the one that associated the remains with the Mound of the Hostages.  My hope is that both Dr. Newman and Dr. O’Sullivan are “exploring” this issue.

As seen on the engraving of the carvings on the orthostat, I theorized that one of An Forradh’s ramparts and V-sectioned fosses, was concealed within the mound seen in the landscape today.  I was wrong!  There wasn’t just one, but rather four (4), which I discuss in item 6 of my paper. The following link is to an insert of the engraving and topo grad map:

http://www.knowth.co...-orthostat3.htm

(Note: the image is the property of The Discovery Programme and may not be reproduced without their written consent)

Also in my paper, I discussed four mounds that formed a linear barrow cemetery, of which there was a similar cemetery located just above Raith Laoghaire. (see Model of Tara, bottom of page)

http://www.knowth.co...-orthostat4.htm

In my rewrite, I also discuss the issue surrounding the time frame for the construction of Tech Cormaic (item 8) and the size differences between Raith Laoghaire and An Forradh on the orthostat, as opposed to the site maps. (item 15, para. 2)

[Cian McLiam]

Can you provide the exact source for the dating of Carrowkeel and Loughcrew please? I haven't been able to find a source for these or anyone that knew about them but would live to see some actual dating results from these two complexes.

[seanachai]

Cian McLiam, on 2 June 2008, 12:20, said:

Can you provide the exact source for the dating of Carrowkeel and Loughcrew please? I haven't been able to find a source for these or anyone that knew about them but would live to see some actual dating results from these two complexes.

The results I cited were simply from a dozen or so articles I came across on the internet.  I'd check my browser history, but it's been so long since my post, they've been deleted.  If I recall though, none of them went into any great detail on the radiocarbon results, which is what I assume you're looking for.  You might try contacting one of the archaeologists at University College Dublin.  In 1911 Professor Macalister from the Archaeology Department conducted an excavation.  They might be able to direct you to a comprehensive work on the site.  Or you might try Professor Stefan Bergh, NUI Galway.  In 2004 he excavated some huts in the area.    

http://www.nuigalway..._PhD_Moore.html

There's an email link to Stefan Bergh on his page:

http://www.nuigalway...efan_bergh.html

[seanachai]

For those of you who’ve not read my research paper recently, I did come across two extremely important pieces of information, which I added a few months ago.  The first was a topo gradient image that an archaeologist with The Discovery Programme emailed me.   Based on that, An Forradh’s six ramparts don’t consist of those I initially identified in both my paper and the short film.  (see item 6)

http://www.knowth.co...a-orthostat.htm



Upon contacting the aforementioned archaeologist regarding the image, which I labeled and sent back to him, he stated that neither he nor anyone else in the organization was “competent enough” to interpret the image.  That begs the question, why did they spend the time and money to do the survey in the first place?

Another piece of the puzzle fell into place when Dr. Newman reminded me that the partial enclosure unearthed beneath The Mound of the Hostages, was part of a 13m timber palisaded structure, just as in the case of the 16m enclosure, which means the Mound of the Hostages had been incorrectly associated with its construction.  (see item 17)
  
http://www.knowth.co...a-orthostat.htm

The response I got from Conor Newman I already cited in an earlier post, but for those who haven't read it, "The truth, Sean, is that I have not really looked in earnest at the question of the association or otherwise of the earliest burials at MoH with the 13m enclosure. I am not saying that I agree, I just don’t disagree; but then I do not have all the information at my fingertips.  It is, however, an interesting hypothesis and one worthy of exploring. I would be more inclined to see general continuity anyhow between enclosure and tomb, except for the fact that they appear to be eccentric to one another which to the modern mind is counter-intuitive."  Unfortunately, it doesn’t appear that Dr. Newman or any of his colleagues that I’ve contacted have either over the past few months.

Most recently, in reply to an email I’d written to Prime Minister Cowen, Minister Gormley and Dr. Jukka Jokilehto regarding my paper, which I forwarded to Dr. Muiris O’Sullivan, rather than refute my research and remarks, or at least state that he could, Dr. O’Sullivan wrote "As one of those mentioned in this email, I wish to point out that Mr. Moriarty's circular uses my name without my permission."  To me, that speaks volumes. Lastly, Vincent Salafia at TaraWatch submitted my paper, along with their petition, to UNESCO WHC and WAC 6 in July.

[seanachai]

The following are several points I'm in the process of adding to my paper.

The first is that, according to archaeologists, the henge encircling Ráith na Senad was the first monument erected at Tara.  While I did explain that by stating in item 19 that “In looking at the geo-survey, one has to wonder why the henge wasn't built on top of the hill. Most likely the area it was built in, was open level space, whereas the hill, like Raith Maeve and Raith Lugh appear today, was covered with trees and other vegetation. Most likely the area it was built in, was open level space, whereas the hill, like Ráith Maeve and Ráith Lugh appear today, was covered with trees and other vegetation”,  I still didn’t feel comfortable with that.  So, given the evidence of the MOTH being constructed atop a timber enclosure, I started thinking about An Forradh and Tech Cormaic.  The problem here was that if they too were constructed atop timber enclosures, those enclosures would have been outside the henge surrounding Ráith na Senad. Possible, but not likely given An Forradh’s historical importance. Upon studying the geo-survey, topo grad map and model of Tara, it occurred to me that the enclosure labeled as the 7th enclosure, is likely another henge that encircles both An Forradh and Tech Cormaic, which predates that surrounding the area of Ráith na Senad. (see item 6) This necessitates a slight change in the chronology of Tara; item 19.

Based on the facts presented and the historical record, i.e. the carvings on the orthostat, the following is a brief chronology of Tara.

Phase 1)  A timber henge, labeled on the geo-survey as the 7th enclosure, (see item 6) is erected atop the Hill of Tara, along with three or four small enclosures, which were employed as burial sites.

Phase 2) A second timber henge is erected, that surrounding the area of Ráith na Senad, along with the 13m, 16m and 25m enclosures, which are also used as burial sites.

Phase 3) The henge atop Tara, along with its smaller enclosures, are removed and the oval or ring barrow An Forradh, along with Tech Cormáic and two other barrows are constructed, incorporating the burial sites within the small enclosures.

a]  In view of the causeway within its 2nd rampart, it’s likely that only ramparts 1 and 2 were initially added to An Forradh, either at the same time or the 2nd at a later date.

b] The four barrows forming the linear barrow cemetery are constructed.  These were satellite tombs, so they had to have been constructed after An Forradh, but added prior to its 6th rampart being erected.

c]  Over time, ramparts 3 - 6 are added to An Forradh, incorporating two unnamed barrows into ramparts 4 and 5, and Tech Cormáic, along with one of the barrows from the linear barrow cemetery, into its 6th rampart.

Phase 4)  The henge surrounding the area of Ráith na Senad, along with the 13m, 16m, and 25m enclosures are removed, and the burial sites within the latter two remodeled.

a]  The 25m barrow we see today is constructed in place of the 25m enclosure, incorporating one or more burials.

b]  The double court tomb is constructed in place of the 16m enclosure, the burial site within incorporated into the forecourt of the northwest facing tomb.

c]  The burials within the 13m enclosure are marked with stones.

d]  The oval barrow projecting from the southeast facing double court tomb is constructed.

Phase 5)  The last of the monuments depicted on the orthostat are constructed, which include Fothadh Gráine, Ráith Chailchon, Ráith Laogháire, The Hill of the Ox and King Cormáic’s Watchers.

Phase 6)  The causeway is added to An Forradh and Tech Cormáic’s five ramparts and causeway are constructed.

Phase 7)  Tara begins to evolve into the site we see today.

a] The now outdated orthostat is reused in constructing Duma na nGiall where the 13m enclosure once stood.

b] The four ramparts of Ráith na Senad are constructed, incorporating the double court tomb, 25m barrow and oval barrow.

Phase 8)  The fosses and causeways between the 4th rampart and barrow within An Forradh are infilled, as are the fosses and causeways between Tech Cormáic’s 3rd rampart and barrow, and their figure-eight palisaded structures erected.  Additionally, the two ramparts composing Ráith na Rig are constructed and its palisades erected.

Phase 9) Tech Midchúarta, along with Ráith Laogháire’s two additional ramparts are constructed, and the fosses between its 5th rampart and center infilled. (see item 15)

Carrying the evidence of the MOTH being constructed atop a timber enclosure on step further, with regards to Newgrange, Knowth and Dowth (see item 20) I’m adding the following:

“That said, in the case of Knowth, the one hundred and twenty-seven kerbstones, far outnumber the remains that have been excavated. So too do the ninety-seven kerbstones at Newgrange.  However, in light of the fact that Duma na nGiall was constructed atop the remains buried within the 13m enclosure, (see item 17) it’s possible there are timber enclosures beneath the clay mantles at Newgrange and Knowth, the identities of the remains within the remnants of those enclosures, corresponding to the kerbstones described above. “Ritual monuments constructed at Newgrange include a timber circle… to its south-east.  A similar Late Neolithic/Early Bronze Age revival can be seen at Knowth. Here a timber circle was placed near the entrance of the eastern tomb. These structures form a remarkable concentration of henge monuments.” Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government This raises three issues. First, whether the remains unearthed at Newgrange and Knowth have been, as in the case of Duma na nGiall, incorrectly associated with their dates of construction.  Secondly, whether the kerbstones formed, or were part of, monuments predating the mounds, which would explain why there are carvings on other faces of the stones. Lastly, whether the western passage at Knowth, or at least the inner section, was part of the aforementioned monument, which could explain its peculiar design. ”

With regards to the ring of 17 fire pits which coincide spatially with the 17 burials pits from a millennia earlier (see item 17) I’m adding

“It’s possible the fire pits were used during a ceremonial offering, either prior to the area being used for additional burials or the construction of Duma na nGiall."

Also, as to the MOTH being constructed atop the remains unearthed within the 13m enclosure, I’m adding the following:

“This supports the theory that the term “passage tomb” is a misnomer, rather the mound was a monument to the inhabitant’s ancestors, as well as being used for astronomical purposes.  As to the time gap between burials within the 13m enclosure, the inhabitants simply used the numerous other “monuments” on the hill for burials over that 700 year time span. (see engraving, page 20 and model of Tara, page 26)”

That first sentence may well apply to Newgrange, Knowth, Dowth and other "passage tombs".

[seanachai]

In one of my posts in another thread, I mentioned one reason for the delay in updating my paper is because I’m waiting to hear from the archaeologists who excavated Gardom’s Edge in Northumberland. This in regards to one of the stone carvings possibly matching the monuments on the site, one in particular.

Gardom's Edge, Derbyshire
 Rock_Carving.jpg   147.29K   3 downloads

Plan Drawing of Ring Cairn
 Bronze_Age_Ring_Cairn.jpg   98.31K   1 downloads

Another reason for the delay is with regards to the carvings on many of the kerbstones at Knowth and Newgrange possibly being an early form of heraldry. (see previous post) The other day I came across a book titled “Heraldry of the Dead” by Katina Lillios, which parallels my theory, only hers deals with Neolithic plaques found on human remains in Spain and Portugal. I only contacted her yesterday, so that’s another reason for my holding off on an update.

http://www.utexas.ed...oks/lilher.html

You can check out the entire catalog of plaque photos at:

http://research2.its...erian/index.php

The following are just two examples:

http://research2.its...php?cat_num=454

http://research2.its...php?cat_num=489

Compare them to two of the kerbstones at Newgrange:

http://www.carrowkee...newgrange5.html

http://www.carrowkee...newgrange6.html

[seanachai]

A clue for one item I’m in the process of adding, came from Paola and Diego, and yes I already thanked them personally.  In commenting on a carving found at Ormaig, Argyll "... they could be a kind of "family tree": the central cup being the first man of the family group and the rings around it his sons and nephews." The word that struck me was FAMILY, but not in terms of a tree, but rather a family burial plot. Check out the following photos, the first of which is from Boscombe Down in Wiltshire, during the excavation of a Roman cemetery. “One local trait is the way in which a few graves in all the cemeteries were set within small enclosures, similar to grave gardens or gardens of remembrance. There may have been a small bank next to the ditch on which a hedge may have grown.” Wessex Archaeology

Boscombe Down, Wiltshire
 Boscombe_Down.jpg   60.04K   3 downloads

Backstone Beck, Northumberland
 Backstone_Beck__Northumberland.jpg   195.5K   2 downloads

[seanachai]

“Surrounding the cairn, and sometimes located beneath the margins of the earthen mantle, the excavators recorded a ring of seventeen bone deposit[s], that, like the earliest dated burials in the tomb, have produced radiocarbon determinations focused on the period 3350–3100 (cal.) BC.” “A ring of fire-pits coinciding spatially with the ring of [seventeen] burials has been dated by radiocarbon to more than a millennium later.” UCD News (March 2006) Now compare that description to the photo. Unfortunately, the stone is not from Tara, but I think it illustrates my point regarding many carvings depicting maps of sites. This is also another example of a “family burial plot” that I mentioned in my previous post.

Townhead, Glasgow
 Townhead__Glasgow.jpg   266.61K   3 downloads

[seanachai]

Providing my theory is correct, there should be rock carvings that reflect the concentric ramparts and causeways seen on the Tara Mag Grad Topo. Unfortunately, there are no other carved stones at Tara, but then only two monuments have ever been excavated on the entire site. I have no doubt though there's at least one, either on the Hill of Tara, or within the complex along a path leading to the hill.  The following quote is about the carvings found at Gardom's Edge, which I discussed in an earlier post. “the landscape setting of many carvings does provide a few clues. Recent research suggests that many are associated with the fringes of uplands and with important paths of access between lower and higher ground. On occasion, they seem to line the route towards important monument complexes. This is by no means a black and white pattern, but the tendency for carvings to be located in this way suggests that some at least were in places that were visited from time to time by people on the move.”  GardWeb  

The above is just one more reason Tara needs to be protected from the construction of the M3 Motorway.  

That said, there a numerous examples found in Britain and elsewhere, Buttony being just one example.

Tara Mag Grad Topo
 Tara_Mag_Grad_Topo.jpg   92.02K   2 downloads

Buttony, Northumberland
 Buttony__Northumberland.jpg   293.81K   3 downloads

[seanachai]

The following two photos are of another "family plot" and an example of the concentric ramparts and causeways I mentioned in my previous posts. The one from Boeli is courtesy of Diego.

Dodd Law, Northumberland
 Dodd_Law__Northumberland_copy.jpg   270.16K   2 downloads

Boeli, Sardinia
 Boeli__Sardinia.jpg   38.29K   5 downloads

[tiompan]

[quote name='seanachai' date='26 October 2008, 2:14' post='7963']
“Surrounding the cairn, and sometimes located beneath the margins of the earthen mantle, the excavators recorded a ring of seventeen bone deposit[s], that, like the earliest dated burials in the tomb, have produced radiocarbon determinations focused on the period 3350–3100 (cal.) BC.” “A ring of fire-pits coinciding spatially with the ring of [seventeen] burials has been dated by radiocarbon to more than a millennium later.” UCD News (March 2006) Now compare that description to the photo. Unfortunately, the stone is not from Tara, but I think it illustrates my point regarding many carvings depicting maps of sites. This is also another example of a “family burial plot” that I mentioned in my previous post.

Townhead, Glasgow
 Townhead__Glasgow.jpg   266.61K   3 downloads
[/quote
The obvious parallel here is a banjo enclosure , although they are much later than the RA which is in Dumfries & Galloway not Glasgow .Half a metre away is another very similar motif and yet another is to be found in the same field .If all the motifs at Townhead were maps of burials it would make Kensal Green appear like a village churchyard .

[seanachai]

Tiompan,

Let me see if I got this right, half a meter away from the stone in the photo at Townhead, is one with a similar motif and another in the same field? Do you have any photos you can share?  With regards to your last sentence, you're saying that if the carvings at Townhead depict burial plots, that the site would dwarf the Kensal Green Cemetery.  No, for one simple reason, the size of the monuments which cups, rings and other symbols depict, do not have to be on par with a Raith na Ríg or Knowth, but depending on their context, i.e. the size of the site, may only have been a meter in height and width. So those three plots at Townhead may have only been ten meters across.

Look at it in these terms. I have a map of Arlington National Cemetery in Arlington, Virginia, USA.  The site covers 624 acres (2.53 km2).  The map is drawn on one legal size page, 8.5 × 14 inches (216mm × 356mm)  I also have a map of a small cemetery not far from Arlington.  It's about 1/100 the size of Arlington, but it also fills an entire page.  The reason is, they are drawn to scale for that site, not in relationship to each other.  If they had been, the drawing of the small cemetery would be about the size of a postage stamp, which would make it useless as a map.