HILL OF TARA – TaraWatch UNESCO Tentative List Site Proposal

HILL OF TARA

TaraWatch UNESCO Tentative List Site Proposal

Nomination for inclusion on Ireland’s revised Tentative List of Potential Sites for World Heritage Nomination

(i) Name of Property/Site

Tara / Teamhair

Professor Dáithí Ó hÓgáin has described the name Tara or Teamhair as follows:

“The toponymic Teamhair (from a Celtic *Temoria) is interpreted to mean ‘spectacle’. A fine view of the centre of Ireland is available Irom this vantage point, and it was of importance long before it was given such an appropriate Celtic designation. The anglicised form ‘Tara’ is based on the genitive form of the toponymic, Teamhrach.

Dr. Edel Bhreatnach has also stated:

“The etymology of the placename Temair has its origins in the verbal root *tem- ‘to cut’ and it is, therefore, cognate with Latin templum and Greek temenos. All these terms within their own cultural contexts signify some form of sacred space or sanctuary set aside for special ceremonies.

(ii) Geographical Location

-The Tara landscape and archaeological complex lies about 30 miles north of Dublin, in the heart of County Meath. The Tara archaeological complex and cultural landscape has the Hill of Tara at the centre, and extends into the surrounding countryside, for miles around, including Edoxtown, Rathfeigh, Tara, approximately 7 km to the east of the Hill of Tara.

- Maps enclosed:

(iii) Description of the Property/Site

Article 1 of the UNESCO World Heritage Convention defines sites and monuments, “for the purposes of this Convention, the following shall be considered as ‘cultural heritage’ :

Tara can be described as a collection of both sites and monuments, but it is also a single unified cultural landscape.

Article 2 of the World Heritage Convention includes the following in the definition of “natural heritage” as:

Tara contains natural features and sites, which are of outstanding universal value from the aesthetic point of view, and from the point of view of science, conservation and natural beauty.

Mixed Cultural and Natural Heritage Properties

Paragraph 46 of the Operational Guidelines states that “Properties shall be considered as “mixed cultural and natural heritage” if they satisfy a part or the whole of the definitions of both cultural and natural heritage laid out in Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention.” As such, Tara could be considered a mixed site.

Cultural landscapes

Cultural landscapes are defined in Annex 1 of the Convention and Section 47 defines cultural landscapes: “cultural properties … represent the ‘combined works of nature and of man’ designated in Article 1 of the Convention. They are illustrative of the evolution of human society and settlement over time, under the influence of the physical constraints and/or opportunities presented by their natural environment and of successive social, economic and cultural forces, both external and internal.”

Paragraph 10 of Annex III of the Operational Guidelines states:

“Cultural landscapes fall into three main categories, namely:

(i)       The most easily identifiable is the clearly defined landscape designed and created intentionally by man. This embraces garden and parkland landscapes constructed for aesthetic reasons which are often (but not always) associated with religious or other monumental buildings and ensembles.

(ii)     The second category is the organically evolved landscape. This results from an initial social, economic, administrative, and/or religious imperative and has developed its present form by association with and in response to its natural environment. Such landscapes reflect that process of evolution in their form and component features. They fall into two sub-categories:

(iii) The final category is the associative cultural landscape. The inscription of such landscapes on the World Heritage List is justifiable by virtue of the powerful religious, artistic or cultural associations of the natural element rather than material cultural evidence, which may be insignificant or even absent.

Tara qualifies as a under (ii)  organically evolved landscape, and a continuing landscape, in particular. The key issue now is whether the M3 represents a natural evolution of the landscape, or is an unwarranted imposition on it. The public, and the vast majority of experts, agree that the M3 is an unacceptable intrusion on the site. Tara also qualifies under (iii) as an associative cultural landscape.

Joe Fenwick, of the Department of Archaeology, NUI Galway, and member of the Discovery Programme, a State-funded body, wrote:

This area is not arbitrarily defined by archaeologists and historians, but can be ‘read’ and understood though dedicated research of the landscape, its monuments and the historical sources. This area is a legacy of those very people, countless generations ago, who created Tara. Its boundaries (perceived, natural and artificial), its corridors of communication, its settlement patterns and sacred focus have evolved and developed as a recognised entity over the millennia. The State-sponsored research of Tara by the Discovery Programme over the past decade and more, most notably through the work of Mr Conor Newman (Director of the Tara Survey) and Dr Edel Bhreathnach (Historian and Tara Research Fellow), has demonstrated conclusively that Tara is not confined to the focus of ritual monuments on the hilltop but extends to a wider surrounding hinterland. [Affidavit of Joe Fenwick, paragraph 6.]

The internationally recognised experts on Tara are Conor Newman, Joe Fenwick and Dr. Edel Bhreatnach, who comprised a team that has worked on the archaeology, history and literature of Tara since 1992 under the aegis of the Discovery Programme.  They wrote a paper entitled  The Impact of the Proposed M3 Motorway on Tara and its Cultural Landscape (up-dated 20th March 2004):

The Hill of Tara itself is more closely encircled by a group of strategically-positioned hillforts and an enormous linear earthwork, the configuration of which creates an inner zone of demarcation and defence, leaving no doubt about the traditional and continued importance of this area around the Birth of Christ and into the first few centuries AD.  [See Fig. 1]

To the immediate east of Tara this territorial line is defined by the promontory forts of Rath Lugh and Edoxtown, near Skryne and Rathfeigh respectively. [See Fig. 2 (Tara is number “1” and Edoxtown is number “60”)]

The ceremonial complex of Tara dates back to about 4000BC. It was used in prehistory as a burial ground, a sanctuary and as the site where the highest level of king in society was publicly proclaimed. The king of Tara was the most important sacred king in prehistoric Ireland and was probably regarded by society as ‘the king of the world’. This status explains the extraordinary diversity and density of monuments comprising the cultural landscape of Tara.

A common misunderstanding exists that Tara simply consists of the ridge known as the Hill of Tara. Recent research, following the most modern theories of archaeological landscape and surveying techniques, shows that the central ceremonial complex on the hill was surrounded by settlements, religious monuments, ceremonial entrances and route-ways and strategically-placed fortifications. Extended ritual and settlement complexes, or landscapes, are a recognised archaeological phenomenon known elsewhere in Ireland. Other examples include Navan Fort (Emain Macha), Co. Armagh and Rathcroghan (Ráith Crúachain), Co. Roscommon. In the medieval period (7th to 12th century), the prehistoric landscape of Tara translated into a royal demesne defended by the local kings. It was approximately the same extent as the modern Barony of Skreen.

Conor Newman wrote:

Later prehistory saw an enlargement and formalisation of the political and cultural landscape of Tara, a phenomenon that in many ways prefaced the genesis of the later kingdom of Brega and the creation of the ferann ríg, or royal demesne of Tara. Defensive earthworks were built all around Tara and they literally map out for us the catchment of Tara. These can be traced extending eastwards towards Duleek and northwards as far as the Boyne. Rosnaree, across-river from Knowth, is a royal settlement of the kings of Tara while to the south-east of it is the famous Painestown ogam stone, a landmark monument commemorating one of the Leinster kings of Tara and staking his ownership of these lands.

Dr. Ron Hicks, of Ball State University wrote in an affidavit for TaraWatch:

First it is necessary to put the Tara complex, of which the site of Lismullin is a part, in context through a brief statement regarding the nature and extent of sacred/ceremonial/ritual complexes in Ireland, and in particular the sites identified in medieval manuscripts as “royal sites,” of which Tara is the most important example.  It is quite clear that these sites are not royal residences but rather ceremonial/ritual complexes closely associated with the kingship.

The extent of the complex would seem to a key issue in the case of Tara and Lismullin.  That being so, a consideration of the extent of the other royal complexes should prove illuminating.  As at Tara, the earthwork complexes at Emain Macha, Rath Cruachan, and Dún Ailinne are mentioned in the early literature as having served as the foci for seasonal assemblies, either at Lughnasa or Samhain.  The assemblies at Lughnasa, as at Emain Macha, seem to have occurred on plains nearby rather than within any of the enclosures.  Thus each of these neighboring open areas must be considered an integral part of the ritual complex with which it was associated.  Thus, although much has undoubtedly been destroyed in the vicinity during recent centuries, the Emain Macha complex must at the least have included the enclosure itself, this plain to the south (perhaps extending as far as Drumconwell, some 6 km to the southeast), and several nearby sites, including Ard Macha (the hill upon which the Armagh cathedral stands where excavation revealed traces of a surrounding ditch of uncertain date), Haughey’s Fort, and the “ritual pond” known as the King’s Stables.  That would encompass an area extending perhaps 4 km east-west and at least 6 km north-south.

At Ráth Cruachan, there exists a wide variety of monuments spread across an area measuring at least 3 km east-west by 3 1/2 north-south.  The Dún Ailinne complex covers a similar extent.  Knockaulin Hill, at whose summit lies the major monument of the group, is a much more prominent feature of the landscape than the relatively small elevations at Emain Macha and Rath Cruachan, overlooking a considerable territory.  The early literature provides us with seven names for assemblies in this vicinity (Alend, Colmáin, Carman, Ailbi, Sengormain, Clochair, and Lethchraich).  While some are probably alternative names for single areas, they do not all seem to refer to the same location.  The dindshenchas for the assembly site of Carman mentions twenty-one enclosures as well as several distinct activity areas within the overall site.  The complex as a whole thus seems likely to have extended from the parish of Carnalway (Carn Ailbe) about 3 km to the north of Dún Ailinne, near Kilcullen, and across much of  the Curragh to the northwest of Knockaulin, where one finds ten henge-like earthworks, constituting a complex covering an area some 4 km by 8 km long.

While there is clearly some variation in the size of the ritual complexes that I have described, even using conservative estimates for their boundaries we see that the shortest dimension tends to be 3 to 4 km.  What, then, is the apparent and likely extent of the Tara complex?  Given that it was associated with the high kingship, it is unlikely to have been smaller than those associated with the royal centers of Ulster, Connacht, and Leinster and was most probably somewhat larger.  That it extends beyond the Hill of Tara itself can be easily seen.  It certainly must extend to include Rath Maeve, whose far edge lies 1.6 km to the south, and the Riverstown enclosure and linear banks lying nearly 2 km to the west and northwest and Ringlestown Rath to their south.  To the east the nearest prominent feature that might have marked a boundary to the district is the Hill of Skreen, some 3.4 km away, well within likely limits for such complexes.  The presence on the height of an early monastic site is another indication that it is likely to have been a pre-Christian sacred site.  It is undoubtedly significant that the Gabhra River flows between the two hills down the middle of this complex, given its name, which can be interpreted as the River of the White Mare, a symbol intimately associated with kingship in ancient Ireland.  To the north of Skreen lies Rath Lugh and west from there Rath Miles, each of which seems likely to lie within the boundaries of the complex, with the Lismullin enclosure between them.  In his survey of the Tara vicinity, Newman also describes a number of mounds nearby that likewise most probably lay within the limits of the complex.  This includes a line of four lying to the east and northeast.  The most northerly of these, in Clonardran Townland, lies on high ground somewhat more than 3.5 km from the Tara hilltop while the fourth lies in the valley just east of the Hill of Tara itself.  Newman points out that some of these mounds are comparable in size to the Mound of the Hostages and may, like it, be passage tumuli.  This would give the Tara complex overall dimensions of roughly 5 km both north-south and east-west. [See Appendix for full text]

Professor George Eogan, Professor Emeritus of Archaeology at University College Dublin, who is a member of the independent Expert Advisory Panel, appointed by the Minister for the Environment, to review Ireland’s Tentative List, made the following statement in an affidavit in the case of Salafia v. Minister for the Environment, 2005:

“I have continuously researched in the Boyne area of Co. Meath since 1950 and it is not an exaggeration to say, therefore, that I know Tara, its environment and cultural context intimately. In view of my long association with Tara and its archaeology I can state that Tara consists of an archaeological area, about the same extent in size as the Brugh na Boinne World Heritage Site. The summit of the Hill of Tara is only a part of the Tara complex in just the same way as Newgrange is only part of the Brugh na Boinne complex. Accordingly, I have no hesitation in saying that the archaeology of Tara is more than the summit of the hill, but is a complex of inter-related monuments that embrace a wider area, which collectively form part of what is understood to be Tara and therefore that everything found in test trenching is/are national monuments. [See Appendix]

Dr Ron Hicks, of Ball State University, stated in an assessment of a national monument discovered in 2007, during the course of building the M3 motorway, entited ‘On the Significance of Lismullin’ that:

“The Tara ceremonial/ritual complex is not confined to the Hill of Tara but extends to several square kilometers of the surrounding landscape.  This is perfectly typical of the places referred to in early Irish manuscripts as royal sites–Emain Macha, Cruachan, Dún Ailinne, and Tara.  Each includes a hilltop surrounded by a much wider area–as much as 24 square kilometers–within which one finds a variety of monuments of a ceremonial or ritual nature.  There are good reasons for assuming that the Tara ceremonial complex is roughly bounded by the Riverstown enclosure and a linear earthwork on the west, the Clonardran tumulus on the north, Rath Lugh and the Hill of Skreen on the east, and Rath Maeve on the south.  It seems obvious that if some portions of such complexes qualify as National Monuments, then the complex as a whole should qualify since all components are integral parts.

The Lismullin henge sites was declared one the Top Ten archaeological Discoveries in the World for  2007, by Archaeology Magazine, before it was demolished, in order to make way for the M3 motorway. It lies just over 2 km away from the Hill of Tara. Dr Hicks concluded,

“Thus we see at Lismullin a site that is part of a larger ritual complex that shares its National Monument status and that is, moreover, unique in several important characteristics—the size of the enclosure, its lack of a surrounding earthen bank and ditch, and its siting within a natural amphitheater not found at the other major royal sites.  All of these would seem to qualify it for preservation in situ.”

(iv) Justification for its Outstanding Universal Value

Outstanding universal value is defined as follows, in the World Heritage Convention:

Outstanding universal value means cultural and/or natural significance which is so exceptional as to transcend national boundaries and to be of common importance for present and future generations of all humanity. As such, the permanent protection of this heritage is of the highest importance to the international community as a whole. The Committee defines the criteria for the inscription of properties on the World Heritage List.

There is unanimity in the international community that Tara is a site of outstanding universal value, within the meaning of the World Heritage Convention. Most recently, this has been clearly expressed  by the World Archaeological Congress, in 2007:

World Archaeological Congress

Following the largest ever international gathering of archaeologists in Ireland, at the sixth World Archaeological Congress (WAC) in University College Dublin, WAC has released a statement on 15 July 2008, expressing its opposition to any further development alongside the new stretch of motorway in the wider landscape zone surrounding the historical site of Tara in Co Meath, Ireland.

“Tara has significance far beyond Ireland itself,” said Professor Claire Smith, President of the World Archaeological Congress. “Its iconic significance derives from its unique cultural character, as situated in a broader landscape. The World Archaeological Congress strongly encourages the Irish Government to instigate formal protection measures for this area, and to consider nominating Tara for inscription as a World Heritage site.”

International experts letter to The Irish Times:

In 2004, Vincent Salafia of TaraWatch drafted a letter to the editor of The Irish Times, which was signed by 29 academics, many of whom are internationally renowned experts on Tara.  The letter was hand-delivered to members of a joint ICOMOS/UNESCO mission to the Brugh na Boinne World Heritage Site, at a meeting with local stakeholders groups. The letter included the following statement.

“The Convention Concerning the Protection of World Cultural and Natural Heritage, signed by Ireland in Paris, in 1972, resolved to protect parts of the cultural or natural heritage that are of outstanding universal value and therefore need to be preserved as part of the world heritage of mankind as a whole. Tara warrants UNESCO protection, if ever an Irish site did.”

“We call on the Government, particularly the Taoiseach, the Minister for Transport and the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to review this decision and choose one of the many intelligent options that are still available. These include: improving the existing N3, as per the original advertised scheme; re-opening the Navan-Dublin railway line, which is widely supported in the locality; or simply moving the M3 away from this delicate archaeological landscape.”

Signed:

Dr EDEL BHREATHNACH, Mícheál Ó Cléirigh Institute, University College, Dublin;

FRANCIS JOHN BYRNE, Early Irish Historian;

NICHOLAS CANNY, Department of History, University College, Galway;

MÁIREAD CAREW, Archaeologist and writer;

PROF THOMAS CHARLES-EDWARDS, Faculty of Modern History, Oxford University;

JULITTA CLANCY MBE, Meath Archaeological and Historical Society;

Prof THOMAS OWEN CLANCY, Department of Celtic, University of Glasgow;

Dr HOWARD CLARKE, School of History, University College, Dublin;

Dr MARK CLINTON, Archaeologist and writer;

Prof CHARLIE DOHERTY, Department of History, University College, Dublin;

Dr SEÁN DUFFY, FTCD, Department of History, Trinity College, Dublin;

MÁIRE HERBERT, Department of Old Irish, University College, Cork;

Prof BART JASKI, Celtic Department, University of Utrecht;

Dr RAIMUND KARL, Department of History and Welsh History, University of Wales, Bangor;

Prof MÍCHEÁL MAC CRAITH, Department of Modern Irish, NUI, Galway;

Prof KIM McCONE, Department of Medieval Irish Studies, NUI Maynooth;

Prof NEIL MCLEOD, Murdoch University, Australia;

Prof JOSEPH NAGY, Department of English, University of California, Los Angeles;

Dr MUIREANN NÍ BHROLCHÁIN, Department of Medieval Irish Studies, NUI Maynooth;

Dr MÁIRE NÍ NEACHTAIN, Department of Irish, University of Limerick;

KENNETH NICHOLS, Retired statutory lecturer, University College, Cork;

Prof TOMÁS Ó CATHASAIGH, Irish Studies, Harvard University;

DONNCHADH Ó CORRÁIN, Department of History, University College, Cork;

DÁIBHÍ Ó CRÓINÍN, Department of History, NUI Galway;

VINCENT SALAFIA, Brehon Law Project, Dublin;

Prof RUAIRI Ó hUIGINN, Department of Modern Irish, NUI Maynooth;

Prof ALFRED SMYTH, Chair of Medieval History, Canterbury University;

PÁDRAIGÍN RIGGS, Department of Modern Irish, University College, Cork;

Dr NANCY STENSON, Department of Linguistics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis;

Rev Dr R. STIEFEL, University of New Hampshire.

- Letter to the Editor, The Irish Times. February 23rd, 2004

1001 Historic Sites You Must See Before You Die

In 2008, Tara was one of 16 Irish historic sites included in a book entitled, 1001 Historic Sites You Must See Before You Die, produced in collaboration with the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (Unesco). The sites were selected by hundreds of travel journalists from across the globe and the book features many locations that have been designated as Unesco world heritage sites. Rosita Boland wrote a review in  The Irish Times, ‘Sites to see before you die’, Saturday, June 21, 2008

“The 1,001 sites in this book have been chosen in collaboration with Unesco; 400 of them are World Heritage sites. Ireland features 16 times, including for one site in Northern Ireland. The editors’ criterion was that no scenery or landscapes were to be included – so no summit of Mount Everest, even though you could argue that it is a culturally historic site. Nor are there conventional museums or art galleries. Everything on the list is accessible, in theory, to all, which is why any religious sites listed are open to non- practising members.

“Hill of Tara, Co Meath. This is the most newsworthy of all the sites listed here, but there is no mention of the controversy about the motorway planned for the area. The book’s opening sentence about the Hill of Tara declares: “Nowhere in Ireland had richer associations than Temair, the ancient site of Tara.” Certainly, no other historic site in Ireland has generated so much domestic and international media coverage in recent years.

This is the full entry in the book, which gives the following description for Tara:

Nowhere in Ireland has richer associations than Temair, the ancient site of Tara. In prehistoric times it was already a major center for ritual, but it assumed even greater importance after the arrival of the Celts. The place featured prominently in early Irish legends and came to be regarded as the seat of the high kings of Ireland. As such, it became a potent symbol and rallying point of Irish unity and patriotism.

Tara is a complex site consisting of at least twenty-four separate monuments. The oldest of these is a passage grave from the Neolithic era (carbon-dated as 3000-2400 B.C.E.), although many of the structures were erected in the Bronze Age or the Iron Age, and not all were tombs. The site also includes a number of Raths (ring forts), earthworks, and ritual enclosures. Most of these were later given colourful names, linking them with ancient gods or kings. These include the Mound of the Hostages – a megalithic passage tomb and probably the oldest monument at the site – the Rath of the Synods. And the Banqueting Hall.

From early times, Tara was regarded as a sacred site because of its links with the high king. The office of high king was usually held by the local ruler and did not signify any great military or territorial power, but it was hugely prestigious. The High King did not reside at Tara, but did participate in its ceremonies. The most important of these was the feis temrach (feast of Tara), which symbolized the ritual union between the king and the goddess of sovereignty. Prospective rulers also had to place a hand on the Lia Fail (Stone of Destiny), a mystic pillar stone reputed to shriek whenever it was touched by the rightful king. In later years, the Christian missionaries sought to exploit the reputation of the site by claiming that St. Patrick’s decisive confrontation with the pagan high king took place on the Hill of Tara.

500 Places to See Before They Disappear

The Hill of Tara features in a 2008 book entitled ‘500 Places to See Before They Disappear‘, published October 20 by Frommers, and written by Holly Hughes. This is further evidence of how important the sites is and how negatively the international community still views the M3 motorway works. The entry in the Hughes book for Tara reads, in part: “Hill of Tara, Co Meath, Ireland: The ancient seat of Ireland’s high kings is threatened by the proposed M3 highway which runs close by and is due to open in 2010″ The Frommers web site catalogue reads as follows:

“500 Places to See Before They Disappear enables passionate travelers and the eco-conscious to learn about and plan a visit to see rare cultural, historic, and natural places before they are irrevocably altered or even gone forever. Here are one-of-a-kind landscapes, fragile ecosystems, rare bird habitats, places to see the last remaining species of big game in the wild, cityscapes in peril, vanishing cultural kitsch, petroglyphs, and more—500 thoughtfully- chosen treasures that will inspire and enlighten travellers of all ages. Each entry explains why it’s been included, gives its history, the nature of the threat against it, brief practical information on how to visit, and what visitors can to do protect it. A Geographical Index allows travellers to locate attractions across the world.”

The full entry for The Hill of Tara is entitled, ‘Going to ruins’:

Ireland is a nation of story tellers where seemingly every mossy stone and country crossroad has a tale spun about it. But even so, there’s no disputing the legendary significance of the Hill of Tara, traditional seat of the high kings of Ireland. No wonder plans to run a new superhighway past it has generated storms of outrage.

On first glance, Tara today doesn’t look like much – a 90m (300 ft) hill dotted with grassy mounds, some ancient pillar stones, and depressions that show where the Iron Age ringfort, Raith na Riogh, encircled the brow of the hill. But audiovisuals at the visitor center deconstruct just what these mounds represent, as if peeling away the centuries from this time-harrowed ridge. Prominent on the hilltop are the ring-barrow called Teach Cormaic (Cormac’s House) and the Forradh, or Royal Seat, with a granite coronation stone  known as the Lia Fail (Stone of Destiny), standing erect at its center. The trenches of three other smaller ringforts are nearby, as well as an excavated passage tomb just to the north, the astronomically aligned Mound of the Hostages, which dates to 2000 BC.

The wood timbers of the old royal halls rotted a long time ago; the last great feis – triennial banquet of princes, poets, priests, and politicians – was held in A.D. 560, after which the rise of Christianity forced ancient Celtic traditions into hiding. But Tara was always more than just one hill – it was the epicentre of Ireland’s foremost kingdom and several other important pre-historic sites are in the same valley. From the Hill of Tara, in the distance you can spot the great burial mound of Newgrange and the Hill of Slane, where Saint Patrick readies himself to take on the Irish pagans – which, of course, he needed to do at Tara, Ireland’s symbolic heart.

The N3 highway, heading northeast out of Dublin towards the town of Kells, already ran close enough to Tara to shake its foundations; now a larger limited-access motorway, the M3, is being built even closer, with a major interchange right near the sacred hill. During construction, a number of megalithic souterrains – underground buildings – some dating from the 7th century, have been bulldozed, probably the homes of important nobles and courtiers living near the kings fort. When a 2000 year old henge named Lismullin, with Megalithic decorations on its stone, was unearthed in March 2007, construction was temporarily halted – but work proceeds on other sections of the road, despite vociferous citizen protests. Alternative routes have been proposed, but to no avail. The ghosts of the high kings must be weeping.

In an effort to stop or at least slow the destruction of the Hill of Tara, conservationists and Government supporters are working to make the Hill of Tara a World Heritage Site. This would help preserve the Gabhra Valley between the Hill of Tara and the Hill of Skryne, and protect the surrounding landscape by preventing commercial development along the path of the new motorway.

- 500 Places to See Before They Disappear, by Holly Hughes. Frommers (2008) p.247.

For the record, TaraWatch is willing to support UNESCO designation, only if the M3 is re-routed first.

World Monuments Fund – 100 Most Endangered Sites 2008-2010

The World Monuments Fund (WMF) is described by UNESCO as the “foremost private, non-profit organization dedicated to the preservation of historic art and architecture worldwide through fieldwork, advocacy, grantmaking, education, and training.” Every two years it published a List of 100 Most Endangered Sites, described by UNESCO Venice as follows:

“Since its founding in 1965, the New York-based WMF has worked with local communities and partners to stem the loss of more than 300 important and irreplaceable monuments in 70 countries including the Temple of Preah Khan at Angkor, Hagia Sophia, and Brancusi’s monumental Endless Column. The World Monuments Watch, a program of World Monuments Fund, issues the List of 100 Most Endangered Sites every other year.

WMF placed Tara on its 2008 List of 100 Most Endangered Sites after after TaraWatch drafted the nomination papers and Dr Ronald Hicks of Ball State University agreed to to endorse the nomination.  The full entry for the site reads as follows:

Tara Hill

Meath, Ireland

3rd Millenium B.C.-12th Century A.D.

Located about 50 kilometers from Dublin, Tara Hill is considered the ceremonial and mythical capital of Ireland, and is the centerpiece of a large archaeological landscape with hundreds of significant sites. Celtic in origin, Tara is said to be the location of St. Patrick’s conversion of the Irish to Christianity in the early fifth century, and was the coronation site of Irish kings between the sixth and twelfth centuries. In 1641, it was at Tara that the Catholic English allied themselves with the native Irish against the Protestant English. Due to this and subsequent events, Tara has developed into a focal point of the modern national landscape.

Over the past decade, the Irish economy has undergone an extraordinary period of growth, which has led to increasing development and investment in infrastructure, particularly transportation. One new project is the proposed construction of a new M3 motorway that would serve Dublin commuters. The motorway, which is to run within 1.5 kilometers of Tara Hill and bisect the Tara-Skryne valley, threatens not only the Tara cultural landscape, but also the yet-to-be-uncovered archaeological sites that are thought to surround it. In addition to the destruction of historic material, the combination of tree-felling, major earthworks, and road construction—as well as ongoing noise and visual pollution that accompany them—will forever change this iconic landscape. The motorway development will also likely result in changes of local land use from agrarian to suburban, which may encourage further rapid and inappropriate development. At the moment, only the “Hill of Tara” itself is protected, while the surrounding natural and archaeological landscape, about which we still have much to learn, is vulnerable. It is hoped that Watch listing will compel authorities to rethink the radical alteration of this important site.

International Congress of Celtic Studies

The XIII Celtic Congress, hosted by Permanent Bureau for the International Congress of Celtic Studies, held in Bonn, 2007, sent the following letter to TD Gormley regarding the Tara environs situation:

16 August 2007

Mr John Gormley, TD

Minister for the Environment

Custom House, Dublin 1

A Aire Uasail, a chara,

At its closing session on Friday 27 July, the assembled delegates to the XIII International Celtic Congress, Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-University, instructed us to send you this letter, to protest most vigorously against the destruction of the environs of Tara and of other historic and prehistoric sites in Ireland, such as Lismullin.

These are essential parts of the Celtic and pre-Celtic inheritance not only of Ireland but of the whole of European civilisation. We urge you, Minister, to reverse these official decisions and to act decisively as the protector of Europe’s cultural heritage.

Yours sincerely,

WILLIAM GILLES

Professor of Celtic, Edinburgh University

President of the Permanent Bureau for the International Congress of Celtic Studies

ANDERS AHLQVIST

Professor Emeritus of Old and Middle Irish and Celtic Philology, NUI, Galway

Secretary of the of the Permanent Bureau for the International Congress of Celtic Studies

Sacred Sites International – Endangered List 2005

Another international organisation to place Tara on their Endangered List, is Sacred Sites International. Sacred Sites International was invited to an international symposium jointly sponsored by UNESCO, the French National Center for Scientific Research, and the French National Museum of Natural History, 1998. The topic was Natural Sacred Sites, Biological Diversity and Cultural Integrity. Their mission, on their web site, reads as follows:

Sacred Sites International Foundation, established in September of 1990, advocates the preservation of natural and built sacred places. We believe that protecting sacred sites is key to preserving traditional cultures and time-honored values of respecting the earth. Sacred Sites International Foundation, an all-volunteer organization, is governed by a Board of Directors guided by an Advisory Board of Native People and other experts in the field of site protection.

We recognize natural sites such as sacred mountains, rivers, springs and rocks and built sites like shrines, temples, and other houses of worship. Some examples of sacred sites recognized by Sacred Sites International are: pilgrimage routes, petroglyphs and pictographs, burial sites, archaeological sites having sacred significance, ceremonial and calendric sites, memorials, and labyrinths.

The 2005 Endangered List entry reads as follows:

Tara Hill, dating from the Neolithic period, was a henge monument, such as Stonehenge and Woodhenge, used for ritual and/or astronomical observations. Recent excavations on the hill have uncovered post holes suggesting the hill was surrounded by a wooden palisade.

The site is featured in numerous stories as the abode of the most powerful Celtic god, Lub and goddess, Medb and the seat of the high-kings of Ireland. It is part of a vast sacred landscape associated with other well-known Neolithic monuments including Loughcrew, Four Knocks, Uisneach, and the UNESCO World Heritage sites in the Boyne Valley: Newgrange, Knowth and Dowth. It is estimated that there are 140 – 1,000 uninvestigated related sites in Skyne Valley. Tara Hill continues to be used ceremonially in present times.

The Threat: The Irish government has embarked on a massive highway building plan, the largest in Europe. These roadways are threatening many ancient sites, including Tara Hill and Skryne Valley.   The M3 Motorway Scheme, as part of the larger development plan, proposes a 4-lane freeway through the Tara-Skryne Valley with an interchange just north of the Hill of Tara. Construction is scheduled to begin in early 2006.

Aosdána

Aosdána, the national Irish arts organisation, unanimously passed a motion at it’s annual General Assembly, on Thursday, 8th May, agreeing with statements made by Seamus Heaney about the negative impact of running the M3 motorway through Tara. The Irish Arts Council established Aosdána in 1981 to honour those artists whose work has made an outstanding contribution to the arts in Ireland, and to encourage and assist members in devoting their energies fully to their art. Aosdána members meet annually in a General Assembly, to elect new members, to review the affairs of the organisation and to discuss the position of the artist, and the arts in society. The following motion, proposed by Michael Holohan and seconded by Dermot Healy, was passed by the Assembly:

“That Aosdána supports the recent statement (in The Irish Times 1st/2nd March 2008) by our fellow member Seamus Heaney that the surrounding archaeological landscape beside the ancient hill of Tara has been “desacralised” by the construction of the M3 motorway and consequently Aosdána calls upon the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to strengthen the present legislation (National Monuments Act 2004) immediately in order to prevent the further destruction of our other national archaeological sites”

Seamus Heaney

Seamus Heaney in his first broadcast interview on the subject, told BBC Radio Ulster that the plan was a “ruthless desecration”.

“I think it literally desecrates an area – I mean the word means to de-sacralise and for centuries the Tara landscape and the Tara sites have been regarded as part of the sacred ground,” he said.

“I was just thinking actually the Proclamation of the Irish Republic in 1916 summoned people in the name of the dead generations and called the nation, called the people in the name of the dead generations.

“If ever there was a place that deserved to be preserved in the name of the dead generations from pre-historic times up to historic times up to completely recently, it was Tara.”

The Nobel Laureate also said that under British rule in Ireland, Tara appeared to have more protection than in today’s Irish Republic.

He said: “I was reading around recently and I discovered that WB Yeats and George Moore, two writers at the turn of the century and Arthur Griffith, wrote a letter to the Irish Times sometime at the beginning of the last century because a society called the British Israelites had thought that the Arc of the Covenant was buried in Tara, and they had started to dig on Tara Hill.

“And they wrote this letter and they talked about the desecration of a consecrated landscape. So I thought to myself if a few holes in the ground made by amateur archaeologists was a desecration, what is happening to that whole countryside being ripped up is certainly a much more ruthless piece of work.”

Mr Heaney said that the Celtic Tiger was attacking the ancient symbol of Ireland, the harp.

“It will be a sort of signal that the priorities on these islands have changed, I mean the Tiger is now lashing its tail and smashing its way through the harp – the strings of the harp are being lashed by the tail of the tiger,” he said.

Heaney said that Tara was unique to him as an Irishman.

“Tara means something equivalent to me to what Delphi means to the Greeks or maybe Stonehenge to an English person or Nara in Japan, which is one of the most famous sites in the world,” he said.

“It’s a word that conjures an aura – it conjures up what they call in Irish dúchas, a sense of belonging , a sense of patrimony, a sense of an ideal, an ideal of the spirit if you like, that belongs in the place and if anywhere in Ireland conjures that up – it’s Tara – it’s a mythical site of course.

“I mean the traces on Tara are in the grass, are in the earth – they aren’t spectacular like temple ruins would be in the Parthenon in Greece but they are about origin, they’re about beginning, they’re about the mythological, spiritual source – a source and a guarantee of something old in the country and something that gives the country its distinctive spirit.”

Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland (RSAI)

The RSAI was founded in the nineteenth century to preserve and investigate ‘the antiquities, language, literature and history of Ireland.’  Aideen Ireland, President of RSAI, wrote a Letter to the Editor of The Irish Times, 5 May 2006., in which she ‘urged the Minister to declare the greater Tara-Skryne valley an area of outstanding national and international significance and to grant it the same degree of protection as is afforded to the Boyne Valley.’ The letter reads, in relevant part, as follows:

It is not yet too late for the Minister for the Environment to be courageous in the matter of the proposed road through the greater Tara-Skryne valley. More than 100 years ago this society campaigned vigorously to have ill-considered excavations by the British Israelites on the Hill of Tara stopped. On that occasion the digging ceased and the site was preserved. It would be a scandal if Tara were now to be sacrificed in the interests of short-term progress.

The society further urges the Minister to declare the greater Tara-Skryne valley an area of outstanding national and international significance and to grant it the same degree of protection as is afforded to the Boyne Valley.

The cases of Woodstown and Tara highlight the potential for conflict between the perceived development needs of the country and the need to preserve, document and research our physical heritage as represented by the many thousand archaeological sites in the country. This society calls on the Minister to ensure that planning, development and cultural policies preserve our rich archaeological heritage for present and future generations of researchers and for the enjoyment and education of the public. If this is not done, future generations will castigate us as cultural vandals in the same way as we look back in amazement at some of the “improvement” actions of previous generations.

Yours, etc,

AIDEEN IRELAND,

President, Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland,

Merrion Square,

Dublin 2.

What are the values that may justify World Heritage Listing?

- Historical significance

Tara is a site of supreme national and european historical importance. This is exhibited best by

Dr. Edel Bhreatnach of the Mícheál Ó Cléirigh Institute for Irish History and Civilisation,

University College Dublin, who was part of the State archaeological research unit, the Discovery Programme’s, Tara Project. She is the editor of the The Kingship and Landscape of Tara, published by Four Courts Press in 2006. She wrote an article entitled, ‘Defining the historical landscape of Tara’, in 2004, for Ríocht na Midhe, the Journal of the Meath Archaeologial and Historical Society . The article begins as follows:

The undisputed evidence of medieval Irish sources, dating from circa AD 600 onwards, ranks Tara as the ceremonial and mythical capital of Ireland. The placename Temair suggests that this was a significant prehistoric sanctuary or cult centre, a status manifest from the large-scale monuments on the hill (Mac Giolla Easpaig, forthcoming). It is possible even that the name Temair was coined to describe the large hengiform enclosure (known today as Ráith na Ríg) of Iron Age date which encircles the brow of the hill. Excavations conducted in the 1950s and again in 1997 revealed an extensive rock-cut ditch (Roche 2002) which was likely to have delineated the Iron Age temenos ‘temple, sanctuary’ constructed for ritual purposes and which also enclosed earlier Neolithic and Bronze Age burials. Tara was the ceremonial seat of a distinctive kingship, which was accorded a pre-eminent position among the provincial and local kingships of Ireland. Contrary to popular belief, Tara was not the residence of the high-king of Ireland. The kingship of Tara was a prehistoric sacral kingship, not a territorial kingship, the focus of which at Tara was perceived to be the equivalent of axis mundi ‘the centre of the world’. In prehistoric and early historic Ireland, the king of Tara was regarded as the king of the world and, therefore, a link between humankind and the otherworld. The ceremony known as Feis Temro ‘The Feast of Tara’, probably last held in the mid-sixth century AD, was a sacral feast celebrated by the king of Tara. Similar sacral kingships have been identified in many cultures and their capitals recognised as locations of special significance (Doherty, forthcoming).

Dr. Bhreatnach also shows how Tara’s role in Irish history has been continuous and significant, from ancient into modern times:

The vital role of the kingship of Tara in the prehistoric and early medieval polity of Ireland is reflected in its central position in the construction of a national history by the medieval learned class. Even though the prehistoric sacral kingship declined with the advent of Christianity particularly from the seventh century onwards, lists of the kings of Tara were compiled and used as the core constituent of the history of major dynasties and of the island itself. Medieval Irish kings continued to use the title rí Temro ‘king of Tara’ until the eleventh century and the learned class successfully promoted the concept of Tara as a royal capital inhabited by a supreme king. Throughout the medieval and early modern period, Tara was considered as an inspiring location from which to launch military campaigns: incidents occurred there during the reign of Brian Bóruma, the O’Neill campaigns in the sixteenth century and the 1641 rebellion. Its perceived position as the spiritual capital of nationalist Ireland led to events there such as the skirmish in 1798 and Daniel O’Connell’s monster meeting there in 1843.

According to Dr. Bhreatnach, the historical landscape that has Tara at the centre, extends well beyond the Hill itself, into the surrounding countryside:

Tara is not a hill that stands alone in County Meath without connection to its surrounding countryside. A common and universal mistake in the presentation of Tara in official and popular literature is to regard Tara as consisting simply of the monuments on the ridge in the townlands of Castleboy and Castletown Tara. In a manner similar to the Boyne Valley complex, Rathcroghan, Co. Roscommon and Navan Fort, Co. Armagh, in archaeological terms Tara was the focal point of an extended landscape. The intimate association between the hill and a wider area is clearly expressed in medieval sources. On a regional level, Tara was in the medieval kingdom of Brega, a region that extended from the River Dee to the River Liffey and eastwards to the coast. It was the foremost kingdom in medieval Ireland, and indeed, it seems imperative to register clearly in the context of the construction of a road corridor from Dunshaughlin to Kells, that this motorway is about to plough through the heartland of Brega and to encounter the immediate hinterland of all significant sites of the kingdom: Dunshaughlin, Lagore, Trevet, Tara, Skreen, Navan, Teltown, Phoenixtown, Oristown, Emlagh and Kells. At a more local level Tara was the centre of a ferann ríg ‘royal demesne’, generally approximating in modern terms to the Barony of Skreen.

Dr Bhreatnach describes the Tara historical landscape, citing various historical events as evidence.

The M3 motorway passes through the Gabhra Valley, between the Hills of Skryne and Tara, which are part of a single unified historical and cultural landscape, as displayed by Dr Brheatnach:

If one examines the concept of the ferann ríg of the kings of Tara in the medieval sources, it is clear that the hills of Tara and Skreen were part of one landscape. The theme of the text Do Suidigiud Thellaich Themra ‘The settlement of the demesne of Tara’ (Best 1910) relates how during the reign of the sixth-century king Diarmait mac Cerbaill the nobles of Ireland were dissatisfied with the extent of the royal demesne of Tara. ‘They regarded as too great the land of the demesne of Tara, namely, there were seven views on every side’. Since this extensive area was subject to royal tribute, the nobles were overburdened with obligations to the king of Tara and sought to remedy this difficulty by reducing the size of the demesne. It is likely that the text was composed around AD 1000 and that it contains a contemporary message directed at the Clann Cholmáin kings of Tara.

The royal demesne of Tara was fiercely defended in the tenth and eleventh centuries by Clann Cholmán (the descendants of Colmán), later known as the Uí Máel Sechnaill (O’Melaghlins), from incursion by Norse kings of Dublin and their local allies (Bhreathnach 1996, 1999). Máel Sechnaill mac Domnaill, king of Tara (d. 1022), was so closely associated with Tara that poets who practised their craft during his reign constantly evoked the bond between the king and Tara as a theme is their poetry. Máel Sechnaill fought the battle of Tara in 980 against Amlaíb Cúarán, Norse king of Dublin, for dominance of Brega and especially of his ferann ríg around Tara. Amlaíb had encroached on Máel Sechnaill’s territory and seems to have deliberately endowed a church dedicated to St Columba at Skreen as a defiant act in the heart of royal mensal lands. The dedication to Columba was also provocative for other reasons: Clann Cholmáin were linked to that saint’s monastery at Kells (Herbert 1988, 87) and, more significantly in the context of Tara, it was in direct opposition – metaphorically and physically – to the dedication of a church to St Patrick at Tara.

This perceived conflict between the two hills is expressed in a poem on Skreen composed for Amlaíb by Cináed úa hArtacáin, a poet from among his local allies. The poem opens with the line Achall ar aicce Temair ‘Achall (an alternative name for Skreen) opposite Temair’. This is the best expression, through medieval eyes, of the relationship between the two hills: they were part of the same royal landscape. Although not as prominent nationally as Tara, nonetheless Skreen was an important prehistoric and medieval site. The medieval poem lists prehistoric burials (likely to be Bronze Age barrows) dotted on the hill. It became the caput of the manor of the Anglo-Norman de Feipo family from the twelfth century onwards, the evidence for which lies in and around Skryne Castle and which was so carefully documented by the late Elizabeth Hickey in her book Skryne and the early Normans.

- Archaeological significance of Tara:

Conor Newman, Department of Archaeology, National University of Ireland, Galway (former Director of the Discovery Programme’s “Tara Survey”, in his submission to the An Bord Pleanála oral hearing (17 October 2002) stated that:-

“The Hill of Tara represents the ritual and political core of a far larger territory of landscape. It cannot be regarded, or treated, in isolation from its broader landscape because this would be to divorce it from its cultural and geographical context. For the most part, people did not live on Tara: they buried their dead there and built Temples. They lived instead in the shadow of their sacred mountain. This is why archaeologists and historians are concerned about any developments within the vicinity of Tara and Skreen as an area of paramount importance throughout the history of Tara and this is spectacularly corroborated in the geophysical survey carried out as part of the EIA.”

A joint-letter, signed by 13 eminent international scholars, (The Irish Independent, 20 November 2003), stated:

“The plan approved recently by An Bord Pleanála for the M3 motorway to dissect the Tara-Skryne valley, Ireland’s premier national monument, spells out a massive national and international tragedy that must be averted.”

Dr Niamh Whitfield, Fellow of the Society of Antiquaries (FSA), London, England, wrote in a letter to The Irish Times, 25 February 2004:

“The Irish plan is to build a motorway at [Tara] over one of the richest archaeological landscapes of Europe.  In England it is proposed to remove roads passing close to Stonehenge by grassing over one and by burying the other in a tunnel.”

A joint-letter by 30 academics to The Irish Independent, 25 February, 2004, stated:

“This narrow valley is one of the most culturally and archaeologically significant places in the world. Every effort should be made to preserve national monuments in situ, according to stated Government policy, as well as the Council of Europe’s Valetta Convention (The European Convention on the Protection of the Archaeological Heritage), to which Ireland is a signatory.”

Dr. W. Groenmann-van Waateringe, Professor of Environmental Archaeology, University of Amsterdam and former president (now vice-president) fo the Vereniging Nederland-Ierland) in a letter to Mr Martin Cullen, Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (22 March 2004), wrote:

“Not only is Tara and surrounding of interest to Irish archaeologists, but the site is of much more wider importance, in the first place to Ireland as a nation, because of it representing Ireland’s early history, secondly to the European community as a whole, representing a hitherto particularly well preserved prehistoric and historic complex, the scale of which if practically unknown elsewhere in Europe. In prehistoric times Ireland was as much a part of Europe as any other country and in certain times it had a strong influence on developments on the Continent. I may refer here to the Bronze Age, also well represented in the site of Tara.”

- Traditional significance of Tara

Professor Dáithí Ó hÓgáin is Ireland’s leading folklore expert. Dr. Ó hÓgáin is the Associate Professor of Folklore at Univercity College Dublin, Ireland. An author in his own right he has been published extensively with many publications on the subject of Irish Myth and Folklore. He wrote a an affidavit for TaraWatch [See Appendix]

Archaeology has shown that Tara was an important burial site from the second millenium BC, and it continued so after the Celtic culture became general throughout the area. In the usual manner of such sites, it became the centre of a cult of sacred kingship. This is evidenced by the ancient tradition concerning a mythical king of the Érainn people at Tara. That king was called Conaire, and the early mediaeval lore represents his reign as propitious and hedged about by many magical conditions. Such memories of ritual can hardly be taken to contain historical information, but the account of Conaire’s death may reflect something of the seizing of control of Tara by the Laighin (Leinstermen) in or around the 3rd century AD.

The accumulated heritage of Tara made it the scene par excellence of adventure. Central to this were the rites of inauguration of kings. Such ancient rituals, and rhetorics associated with them, welcomed the new king to the place as a protector and guardian. This imagery survived in narratives of a great champion coming to Tara as a stranger – such as in the legends concerning Conaire, Cormac, and later in a Christian context of St Patrick. The same format was applied to the coming to Tara of Lugh, a pan-Celtic deity who has left his name on several places which were once Celtic in western Europe. These places include Lyon, Laon, Laudun, Lauzun, Loudon, Leiden (all from Lugudunon), and Carlisle (Caer Lleuil, from Luguvalium). Lugh arrives at Tara as a polytechnic stranger to help the divine community, Tuatha Dé Danann, in a mythic framework which is of Indo-European inheritance and is a narrative of great importance to  research into international literature and mythology.

Added to this wealth of story was a wide variety of lore and fiction concerning the actual courts of kings at Tara, making it the locale of much of the high drama of early Irish literature, and presenting it as a symbol of Irish identity and pride to generations of poets and scholars. By these writers, the hill of Tara was regarded as a site of ancient glory. The Uí Neill dynasty continued to refer to themselves as ‘kings of Tara’ and the ‘feast of Tara’ was apparently still celebrated by high-kings down to the 9th century, but the prestige of the place in mediaeval culture was rather abstract. The actual site was overgrown and reclaimed by nature, and was the subject of speculation by antiquarians. Thus the fiction grew up that Tara had been abandoned due to a curse placed on it by the 6th-century saint Ruadhán, and the ultimate alienation from the ancient cult was reached when an 11th-century scholar invented a new interpretation of its name. According to this, a lady called Tea was the wife of the pseudo-historical Gaelic leader Éireamhóin, and had come from Spain with him. She had seen in Spain a rampart around the grave of a lady of that country called Teiphe. On reaching Tara, Tea begged her husband to bestow the hill on her and, when he complied, she built a wall (mur) around it in imitation of Teiphe’s rampart. When she died, she was buried within that enclosure, hence – the writer fancifully argues – the placename Teamhair.

No other place in Ireland is so venerable and occupies so basic a role in the cultural history of the country. In political terms, too, it has figured prominently. At the height of the Nine Years War, in 1598, the celebrated Aodh Ó Néill, Earl of Dungannon and chieftain of his sept, made a push against the Elizabethan forces and caused such alarm that an English agent reported to Dublin: ‘Presently he [O’Neill] gathers all his forces and friends of Ulster, besides some out of Connacht, and with these makes incursions into the English Pale, even to the county of Meath – coming to the hill of Tara, where the old doating prophecy was that if O’Neill could come and shoe his horse, he should be king of all Ireland.’ This was a reference to the age-old O’Neill prophecy that one of their leaders, called Aodh Eangach, would re-establish the old Gaelic order throughout the land.

The hill of Tara should be preserved and protected for the gem that it is, lying at the centre of Irish tradition. There are many reasons for this, each one of them in itself a justification for such preservation and protection – the multifacted heritage of the site, the evidence it holds for continuing research into Ireland’s past, its educational value and potential for cultural tourism, its central role in the hearts of the Irish people and its splendid reputation internationally.

- Cultural significance of Tara

Conor Newman said, in his affidavit, at paragrapgh 4:

I say that the Hill of Tara emerges into the light of history, around the beginning of the 7th century AD, as having been the pre-eminent pagan sanctuary on this island, its religious leaders commanding national authority. This elevated status was founded on an unprecedented four thousand years of continuity of ritual traditions which saw the hill develop as a necropolis, a sanctuary and a temple complex chartered, first and foremost, in the archaeological record. This tradition merged seamlessly into its development as a royal site and symbol of sovereignty in the Early Medieval Period when still further monuments were added. It is, by tradition, central to the story of St. Patrick’s conversion of the Irish to Christianity and, again by tradition is indelibly marked with the institution of Irish high-kingship. Tara became the touchstone of the Irish nationalist movement of late-19th and early-20th century, its integrity acclaimed and defended by leading figures in the formation of the Irish nation. Tara’s uniquely important position and its potential to yield information about Irish culture and history, was acknowledged by an Taoiseach Eamon de Valera who turned the first sod of Séan P. Ó Ríordáin’s 1953 excavation campaign. Following Ó Ríordáin’s untimely death, his campaign was brought to a successful conclusion by the taoiseach’s son, Professor Ruairdhrí de Valera. This historical association was transferred to a third generation of this modern political dynasty when Minister Síle de Valera turned the first sod on the Discovery Programme’s excavations in 1997.

Today Tara is one of the most frequently-visited archaeological sites in Ireland. As research into this extraordinary complex reveals more about the sacral dimension of Tara, its role as a temenos and burial ground, the public perception of it has also evolved and increasingly people are drawn to Tara as a place of contemplation and meditation. Put simply, Tara continues to be part of who we are as a nation: slight it and we belittle ourselves.

I say that Tara is not just of national significance. On the contrary, it is one of the most important and highly-regarded archaeological and historical sites in the world. This is testified to in the attention it commands in international scholarship and in the profiles of people who travel from all over the world to visit and to study Tara. We should consider ourselves, therefore, as custodians of a world heritage site in everything but name (indeed, there is no doubt but that it should have this status in law).

Tara is a sanctuary and burial ground. It deserves our respect. In it are invested the hopes and aspirations of countless Irish people, right down to the present day. It is a place of tranquillity and meditation. It is simply wrong to build a motorway near it, particularly when it has been admitted that it will be impossible to mitigate against the visual and noise pollution created by the motorway and the vehicles that use it. There is no sell-by date on ancient burial grounds and sanctuaries. In fact their importance matures with age. In considering the archaeological landscape of Tara we have arrived at that point of convergence ethical and cultural imperatives that require us to preserve and understand Tara in recognition of the central role it has played, and continues to play, in forging this nation’s identity. It appears that fourteen years later we must still ask the same question posed by Judge Niall McCarthy in his condemnation of a proposed refuse dump in the megalithic cemetery at Carrowmore, Co. Sligo, ‘‘Do the Irish have no pride?’’.

(v) World Heritage Outstanding Universal Value Criterion for the Property/Site met- (See paragraph 77 of Operational Guidelines (Tick as appropriate)

A property is deemed to be of Outstanding Universal Value if it satisfies one of more of the ten criteria, as per Section 77 of the ‘Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention’. Tara satisfies a number of criteria, and can be considered a mixed natural and cultural site. It can also be categorised as a cultural landscape.

The following criteria apply to Tara:

1) Tara bears “a unique testimony to a cultural tradition/civilization which is living or has disappeared”

The XIII Celtic Congress, hosted by Permanent Bureau for the International Congress of Celtic Studies, held in Bonn, 2007, wrote a letter dated 16 August 2007, to the Minister for the Environment, “to protest most vigorously against the destruction of the environs of Tara and of other historic and prehistoric sites in Ireland, such as Lismullin.”  The letter describes these sites as “essential parts of the Celtic and pre-Celtic inheritance not only of Ireland but of the whole of European civilisation.” The Congress urged the Minister to “reverse these official decisions and to act decisively as the protector of Europe’s cultural heritage.”

The Massachusetts Archaeological Society wrote a letter to TaraWatch, dated, October 17, 2007, stating:

“We wish to express to you our concerns over this development proposal, since it will adversely affect the archaeological integrity of an entire significant landscape. Many of our members are Irish-Americans, and they have particular concerns about this. We strongly support your efforts to raise public consciousness in Ireland to preserve the Tara Archaeological complex, and we encourage you to share this letter with the appropriate parties. [See Appendix]

Professor Dáithí Ó hÓgáin stated in his affidavit:

Archaeology has shown that Tara was an important burial site from the second millenium BC, and it continued so after the Celtic culture became general throughout the area. In the usual manner of such sites, it became the centre of a cult of sacred kingship. This is evidenced by the ancient tradition concerning a mythical king of the Érainn people at Tara.

A Tara Statement, signed by 300 academics, stated:

‘Over the past number of years the debate regarding the routing of part of the M3 motorway through the Tara/Skryne Valley has concentrated on archaeological, economic and traffic considerations. As teachers and researchers of various disciplines including Celtic Studies, Irish History, Irish Literature, Historical Geography, Theology, Linguistics and Anthropology we feel compelled at this stage to widen the discussion beyond archaeology. The weight of anthropological, historical and literary evidence proves that Tara is a site of special significance and of international importance from early history to the present.’

Joe Fenwick said:

Tara has a unique historical resonance for Ireland and for Irish people worldwide. This national monument remains, like our national flag or patron saint, a potent cultural icon. It is a symbol of our nationhood. In the An Bord Pleanala planning hearing for the M3, the evidence of Ger Clarke, Development Officer, Mission Awareness Centre, Dalgan Park, as described in the Inspector’s Report, as follows:

Mr. Clarke said he had studied for a Science degree in UCG and had worked in the mining industry in Canada and with Tara Mines in Navan before joining the OPW as a Guide at Newgrange and had later worked as Headguide at the Hill of Tara. In the mid 1990s the Columbans asked him to run their Visitor Centre when it opened and he was now the Development Officer with the Mission Awareness Centre.

Mr.Clarke said that a few years ago the people of Mayo raised objections to proposed mining operations on Croagh Patrick as it was a sacred monument and it was too important to desecrate and destroy in the name of development and that reason and popular will won the day. He said that interference in the ability of a community, either local or national, in identifying with its symbols of origin and being could not be taken lightly and said that while the area surrounding Tara could not approach Croagh Patrick in its physical stature, Tara far surpassed it in terms of history, heritage, archaeology and native Celtic spirituality. He said that over 100000 people visited Tara, Skryne and Dalgan annually and about 35000 of these availed of the visitor centres provided by Duchas at Tara and the Columbans at Dalgan, with rest visiting privately, and said the attraction of the region was Tara itself.

In the Supreme Court case of Tormey v. The Commissioners of Public Works, which concerned the compulsory purchase of 50 acres of what is now the roughly 100 acres of what is now the State-owned land on the crest of the Hill of Tara, from the Tormey family.  In the unanimous Supreme Court judgment delivered by Ó Dálaigh C.J. on 21st December, 1972 (unreported), the Chief Justice described the evidence given by leading archaeologist, Professor Ruaidhri de Valera of University College, Dublin:

“Professor de Valera completed the excavations at Tara which Professor Sean PO Riordan had in hand at his death in 1956.  Professor de Valera described the Hill of Tara as ‘the focus of Celtic times’ (q 23, 2nd day).  He added that one would expect important findings on almost any part of the Hill of Tara, and from the historical accounts of it, it seemed very likely that traces of previous occupational use would be found in most if not all parts of the hill (q 24).

3) Tara exhibits “an important interchange of human values, over a span of time or within a cultural area of the world, on developments in architecture or technology, monumental arts, town-planning or landscape design;

Conor Newman, makes the following observations in his book, Tara: An Archaeological Survey (Discovery Programme Monographs, p. 237):

The genesis of Tara

The propagation of Tara as a symbol of Irish national unity and cultural identity was touched upon in the opening chapter, where the point was made that the symbolism is grounded in a currency of almost 4000 years during which Tara was a pagan ritual complex.  Because they are the material reality upon which the reputation of Tara is founded, the monuments have, to some extent, become hidden beneath a deep stratigraphy of oral and literary accretions. Peeling this away, we see that the monuments themselves comprise a palimpsest of prehistoric ritual activity.

Rather than suggesting, however, that this palimpsest is the product of a random or disjointed progression, we should consider that for most of the time the layout, design and function of the monuments and buildings were directed by sophisticated and dynamic ideologies, which, although evolving and changing, were also capable of accommodating earlier, inherited beliefs, intellectually and architecturally. And, in so far as ideological precepts are reflected in the architecture and sometimes in the material composition and positioning of ritual structures and monuments, it is also probable that aspects of prehistoric ideologies are preserved, encoded in the monuments at Tara.

4) Tara is “an outstanding example of a type of building, architectural or technological ensemble or landscape which illustrates (a) significant stage(s) in human history;

Conor Newman in his book, Tara: An Archaeological Survey (Discovery Programme Monographs, p. 225):

It is evident…from the foregoing analysis that the construction of monuments on the Hill of Tara probably took place over a period of 4000 years, from around the middle Neolithic to the Early Christian period, while aspects of its sacred and quasi-political significance have been sustained orally and in literature up to the present day. In spite of the many outstanding questions about the date and function of the monuments at Tara, by combining information revealed in this and earlier surveys with what is known from excavation it is possible to construct a model of the general developmental sequence at Tara based on the relative dates of the principal monuments. The model refers only to the construction of monuments on the Hill of Tara and does not, in itself, adequately reflect the period of their use.  So, while monument-building may have been episodic and in each instance of relatively short duration, related activities probably continued for considerably longer periods of time.

However faulty and incomplete, the fact that a reasonably coherent sequence can be postulated for Tara is a significant advance in our understanding of the complex and provides a hypothetical model for future consideration.  It has demonstrated the longevity of ritual activity in this one place and allows comparison with other ritual complexes both here and in Britain.

Phase 1

The earliest identifiable monument is a postulated palisaded (?) enclosure of Neolithic date, part of which was uncovered in pre-tomb levels during excavation of Duma na nGiall and radio-carbon dated to 3030-2190 BC.  Traces of what might be a continuation of the same feature may be evident as faint delineations in the geophysical data from adjacent areas.

Phase 2

The construction of Duma na nGiall, probably during the second half of the third millennium BC, marks the onset of the second phase of development, which occurred sometime after the enclosure had fallen into disuse or was burned down.  It is a tomb (i.e. orthostatic passage cairn and mantle of soil).

Phase 3

Conventional dating suggests that Tech Midchuarta may post-date the construction of Duma na nGiall and thus may represent the third major building episode, possibly sometime between the middle of the fourth and middle of the third millennium BC.  The location and orientation of Tech Midchuarta suggest a formal approach or avenue to the summit. 226-7

It is probably not coincidental that the first monument one sees as one ascends Tech Midchuarta southwards is Duma na nGiall, suggesting the possibility of deliberate alignment.  In fact, the alignment of a number of sites both on its long (e.g. Duma na nGiall; the barrow (31:33:17) and ring-ditch (31:33:60) incorporated into Raith na Senad; possible barrows 31:33:51 and 31:33:52 in the adjacent field to the north) and short (e.g. barrows 31:33:21 and 31:33:22, i.e. Dorcha and Duma na Mban-Amhus) axes indicates that it may have played an important role in the spatial layout of the complex, being aligned on some monuments and having others aligned on it.  227

Phase 4

The fourth phase of activity, dating generally from the earlier Bronze Age, is represented by the construction of the embanked enclosure of Rath Maeve to the south of the crown of the ridge and by the commandeering, a little later, of Duma na nGiall as a cemetery mound. Apart from being a measure of the substantial size , wealth and permanency of the earlier Bronze Age community in the area around Tara, these burials are significant because they provide direct evidence of the reuse of monuments at Tara for ritual purposes at a relatively early stage in the history of the complex, and are a concrete reminder of the fact that the ritual importance of Tara grew cumulatively and that not all activity there was related to the construction of new monuments.  227

Phase 5

Analysis of the dating evidence suggests that although the ring-ditches and bowl-barrows appear to have had lengthy periods of currency there is a significant clustering of these types in the Bronze Age, and consequently they are provisionally assigned to this phase.  As we have seen however, Cooney and Grogan  argue that…may be indicative of a middle Bronze Age so it is possible that at least some of the ring-ditches (and embanked ring-ditches) at Tara date from this period.  That he middle Bronze Age may have been an important chapter in the history of Tara is attested by the occurrence of prestige artifacts such as the gold torcs, and of course artifacts of comparable date from the broader hinterland.

Phase 6

It has been argued on the basis of the cross-sectional information that Raith na Rig was constructed sometime after the introduction of iron. Comparative analysis of ring-barrows suggests the possibility that the five specimens identified at Tara may date from the Iron Age also. 230

Phase 7

It is evident from examination of its ground-plan and the sections excavated across its ramparts that Raith na was built sometime after the construction of Raith na Rig. Its location, size and shape may have been determined by a desire to harmonise the central area with the pre-earthwork ring-ditch, to incorporate the small barrow into the north-western quadrant and to avoid the ramparts of Raith na Righ whilst at the same time creating a quadrivallate enclosure.  Therefore it is possible that considerable thought was put into the planning and execution of this monument.  It has also been argued that the closely set multivallations at Raith na Seanad link it with sites such as Raith Loegaire, Ringlestown Rath, Rathmiles and Rath Lugh and that during this phase there is evidence that considerable effort was expended in an effort to formalise the relationship between Tara and its immediate hinterland.  230

Phase 8

The final structural phase it has been speculated saw the conversion of Raith na Rig from a ritual into a defensive enclosure with the erection of a palisade around the internal perimeter of the fosse.  Three new entrances may have been constructed at this stage, possibly the most important one facing east.  I have argued that this change of role is something of a revolution, heralding the arrival of a new order, equitable, perhaps, with the arrival of Christianity and the decline of paganism.  It can further be suggested that Tech Cormaic, the only ringfort at Tara might have been built at around this time and that in its building a deliberate effort was made to incorporate the Forrad and to align its entrance with the eastern entrance to Raith na Rig.

Hinterland

Neolithic

The question of whether Neolithic communities at Tara constituted a discrete and autonomous group is raised by Cooney’s suggestion that the catchment area for the Boyne Valley passage tomb cemetery may have had a radius in the order of 20m, which comfortably takes in Tara (and Fourknocks for that matter).  This raises a number of possibilities concerning the nature of the relationship that may have existed between the community around Tara who, buried their dead at Duma na nGiall, and that in the area of the Boyne Valley who buried their dead in the area of the Boyne Valley, who buried their dead in the cemeteries of Knowth, Dowth and Newgrange. 232

The relatively small size of Duma na nGiall suggests that it serviced a smaller catchment area than that influenced by the Boyne Valley cemetery.  At one level, therefore, Duma na nGiall fulfilled the ritual requirements (at least those associated with death) of those living near Tara. 232

The ‘mega-passage tombs’ (Cooney 1991) in the Boyne Valley, on the other hand, may have been built to fulfil those requirements regionally and possibly on a more ideologically elevated plane, and it is possible that under such circumstances like-minded communities at Tara (and around Fourknocks and Slieve Breagh) would have been drawn into their orbit.  234

Applying the theory that ritual practices can give an insight into contemporary social structures to the case of Tara, it might be argued that between them Duma na nGiall, the Neolithic hilltop enclosure and Tech Midchuarta demonstrate that, rather than being on the periphery of a larger community zone during the Neolithic, Tara was the ritual centre of such a zone.  Developing the model slightly further, it might be suggested that the Tara zone was bounded on the north-west, north-east and south-east by the catchment zones of Slieve Calliagh, the Boyne Valley and Fourknocks respectively. 234

Late Neolithic – Early Bronze Age

The picture may change slightly during the later Neolithic and earlier part of the Bronze Age, but again only the ritual monuments survive.  On a regional level, the evidence suggests that passage tombs continued to play a determining role in the location of ritual activity.  At Tara, the mound and the passage of Duma na nGiall were used for burial in the earlier Bronze Age and, as suggested already, the radio-carbon date from a fire-pit in front of the entrance suggests that there may have been ancillary activity at this time.  234

It is also clear that these ancient burial places did not fulfil all of the community’s ceremonial requirements and so, in addition embanked enclosures and some at least of the eight mounds and two or three barrows in the surrounding areas.  234

Iron Age

Rather than indicating a lull in activity, the fact that no large, communal ritual monuments can be ascribed with certainty to the late second and early first millennium BC may be due to a change in the types of ritual activity undertaken, both private and collective, when perhaps less store was set on the construction of new monuments than on overt, portable material wealth.  As we have seen, activity relating to this period is attested in the artefact assemblage from the study area, and it is also possible that some of the barrow types in the study area are of this date. 234-5

It has been argued that Raith na Rig was constructed sometime after the introduction of iron, so, in contrast to the preceding period, there may have been renewed interest in the creation of communal monuments. 235

* The defended earthworks of Raith Loegaire, Ringlestown Rath, Rathmiles, Rath Lugh and the Riverstown liner earthwork, it has been suggested, may be of Iron Age date.  Between them they may have defended the northern and western peripheries of the territory during the last few centuries BC and first few centuries AD, at a time when there may have been increasing pressure from the north and west, causing a contraction of the catchment area and prompting the formal definition and defence of its frontiers. This may be the first indication of political regionalisation and may coincide with events recorded in the pollen record for Weir reports a steady increase in clearance into the Iron Age but with a generally low incidence of arable agriculture – though this may in part be explained by the dearth of excavated sites of this period.

As Weir states, ‘the general picture that seems to be emerging is of a predominantly pastoralist Iron Age economy, with a smaller arable component than during the Late Bronze Age’… This phase is brought to an end with a substantial clearance episode during the first centuries of the first millenium AD and is accompanied by a marked increase in cereal pollen values, with rye appearing for the first time.

Later still, possibly as late as the middle of the first millennium AD, we witness the most dramatic infringement of Tara’s ritual authority, when the royal enclosure was converted into a defended site with the erection of a palisade around the internal perimeter and the construction of Tech Cormaic, possibly the only residence at Tara.  From this point on the, ritual potency of Tara was fossilized as a symbol.

Newman also stated in his affidavit:

I say and believe that it is precisely the same understanding and appreciation of the archaeological landscape of Tara that informs the advice given by Dr Patrick Wallace, Director of the National Museum of Ireland to Mr Dick Roche, Minister at the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, in his letter (dated 16th of March 2005) where he states:

“I believe Tara and the complex or association of monuments and sacred spaces in its surroundings to be the most important of their type in Ireland, if not in Europe. Taken together, this group of monuments constitute an archaeological and cultural landscape which deserves the fullest and most generous archaeological protection. The process of evaluation by which the planning authority agreed to the proposed works in such a culturally sensitive area seems narrow. This is because it chose to confine its deliberation to Tara on the basis of the requirements of individual sites and ignored the importance of the place as a complex in the first millennium and later when it was as important as it was in the Iron Age and before.”

I believe Tara and the complex or association of monuments and sacred spaces in its surroundings to be the most important of their type in Ireland, if not in Europe. Taken together, this group of monuments constitute an archaeological and cultural landscape which deserves the fullest and most generous archaeological protection.

Tara is a unique cultural landscape, which has significance for our national heritage that extends beyond the sum of its individual archaeological components. It is one of a small number of monumental complexes that are of more than usual cultural importance from the standpoint not only of archaeology but also of history, mythology, folklore, language, place-names study and, in the case of Tara, even national identity. The spiritual and symbolic aspects of such sites are real and must be regarded as crucially important elements of their cultural significance.

I say that the same interpretation and understanding of the archaeological landscape of Tara informs the opinion of the Heritage Council on the matter as outlined in its submission to Joint Oireachtas Committee on Environment and Local Government (2nd of Feb. 2005) where it is stated: The Co. Meath Record of Monuments and Places, which is a series of maps showing known archaeological sites, identifies two foci, the Hill of Tara and the Hill of Skreen. Such an approach could be considered as a traditional approach based on individual sites. A second definition is one based on the archaeological and historical work carried out by the Discovery Programme in the 1990s. This approach has formed the basis for defining Tara as part of a wider landscape, with the area to the east of the Hill forming part of the Royal Demesne in the early medieval period. The Heritage Council concurs with the need to view archaeological sites in their wider landscape setting and has actively engaged with the practical issues of defining and managing archaeological landscapes. (p. 3)

There is no doubting that this is an important archaeological and historical landscape, notwithstanding the significance of individual sites (p. 4)

If Council were the body with decision making powers on this issue it is most unlikely that it would have chosen this new route. This is based on a wide appreciation of the historic landscape in the Tara-Skreen Valley and the important place of Tara in the construction of Irish identity. (p. 4)

I say and believe that the same recognition, appreciation and understanding of the archaeological landscape of Tara informed the comments of Dr Michael Ryan in his Presidential Address to the Royal Irish Academy on Monday 31st of January 2005 when he stated: “I consider that the decision to route the road through the valley is a major error of judgement and that the decision should be reversed, not because of a threat of protest or litigation, but simply because it is wrong and there are better options.”

The importance of Tara and the Skryne Valley is not merely archaeological, although the area is archaeologically rich-it is a landscape of complex, layered meanings that have grown up and intertwined in the six millennia from its earliest prehistoric settlement to modern times. It has been recognised in literature as a kind of spiritual centre of Ireland for 1500 years. It is not a first sight an ancient landscape but it is in truth a rich palimpsest-written and overwritten for at least six thousand years and the ancient sites are there to be seen or to be rediscovered.

6) be directly or tangibly associated with events or living traditions, with ideas, or with beliefs, with artistic and literary works of outstanding universal significance. (The Committee considers that this criterion should preferably be used in conjunction with other criteria)

The requirements of this criterion are addressed in paragraphs relating to the other relevant critera.

7) contain superlative natural phenomena or areas of exceptional natural beauty and aesthetic importance;

The very name Tara or Teamhair, has been traced to be an expression of the view from the top of the Hill of Tara. (see above). Tara’s outstanding natural features of natural beauty and aesthetic importance are best attested to by Meath County Council’s own County Development Plan, which has protected many of the views. See below for quotes, in the legal protections section.

Please state why the Property/Site meets these criteria?

Tara meets the above criteria, because of the testimony and statrments made by the recognised experts in their respective fields, contained in this document, including many statements made by the developers of the M3 and their employees.

(vi) Authenticity in a World Heritage Context – Please state the level of authenticity of the Property/Site

Paragraph 80 of the Operational Guidelines describes authenticity:

The ability to understand the value attributed to the heritage depends on the degree to which information sources about this value may be understood as credible or truthful. Knowledge and understanding of these sources of information, in relation to original and subsequent

characteristics of the cultural heritage, and their meaning, are the requisite bases for assessing all aspects of authenticity.

The expert statements contained in this submission are by the leading historical and archaeological authorities on Tara, as well as we leading Irish authories on archaeological and cultural sites and should serve as the most credible and truthful authoritative guidance on the authenticity, characteristics and value of the Tara complex and landscape.

Paragraph 81. of the guidelines states:

Judgments about value attributed to cultural heritage, as well as the credibility of related information sources, may differ from culture to culture, and even within the same culture.

The respect due to all cultures requires that cultural heritage must be considered and judged primarily within the cultural contexts to which it belongs.

The cultural heritage at Tara should be judged within a local, national and international context. Locally, the historical and ritual landscape of Tara extends beyon the Hill, into an area soughly the size of Bru na Boinne World Heritage Site. Nationally, it is unique, but somewhat comparable to other national sites (see below). Internationally, it should be judged within a European context as well as a global context.

It is the duty of the State to fully define the authenticiy of Tara, in a more comprehensive manner than previously attempted. The State duty is elaborated on in Paragraph 85:

When the conditions of authenticity are considered in preparing a nomination for a property, the State Party should first identify all of the applicable significant attributes of authenticity. The statement of authenticity should assess the degree to which authenticity is present in, or expressed by, each of these significant attributes.

(vii) Integrity in a World Heritage Context – Please state how the Property/Site meets the condition of Integrity

Paragraph 87 of the Operational Guidelines states that: “All properties nominated for inscription on the World Heritage List shall satisfy the conditions of integrity. (Decision 20 COM IX.13. Integrity is defined as follows, in Paragraph 88 of the Operational guidelines:

Integrity is a measure of the wholeness and intactness of the natural and/or cultural heritage and its attributes. Examining the conditions of integrity, therefore requires assessing the extent to which the property:

Paragraph 87 states that the above three step assessment “should be presented in a statement of integrity.”  It is the duty of the State to generate a Statement of Integrity for Tara that properly assesses the site, in light of the M3 motorway development. Our recommendations are as follows:

a) The Tara property includes all the elements necessary to express its outstanding universal value.

b)  The size of the property is the key to proper definition. Archaeologists and historians have divided the Tara landscape into ‘inner’ or ‘core’ landscape, and ‘broader’ or ‘wider’ landscape. At a minimum, the core landscape of Tara is defined by the Hill of Skryne, Ringlestown Rath, Rath Lugh and so forth. The outer landscape, which would correspond to the proposed buffer zone, would extend as far eastwards as Edoxtown,  Rathfeigh. Even today, the postal address of Rathfeigh is ‘Tara’.

c)  The core landscape and area that should be protected by the World Heritage Convention, defining the Tara ‘cultural landscape’, is being bissescted by the M3 motorway, which passes in between the Hill itself and the defensive fort of Rath Lugh.

Dr. Ron Hicks, who endorsed the TaraWatch nomination of Tara to the World Monuments Fund, 100 Most Endangered Sites List, stated in an affidavit:

Impact of the motorway on this landscape

It is clear from the foregoing that the proposed motorway transgresses the core landscape of Tara, severing, visually and physically, the key eastern component of the Skreen ridge from the rest of the archaeological and historical landscape. The landscape itself, therefore, will suffer a major impact. A reasonably intact, and hugely important, cultural landscape will be bisected by a four-lane motorway and its associated interchanges and ribbon development that will inevitably follow.

Moreover, in passing through the valley between Tara and Skreen, the proposed motorway will be impacting on the area of highest site and monument density in the immediate hinterland of the Hill of Tara. Notwithstanding the fact that the 26 known sites and monuments in the road corridor (and an unspecified number of yet undiscovered sites and monuments) will be scientifically excavated, ultimately they will be destroyed and we maintain that this degree of attrition is unacceptably high. All of the sites and monuments in this area are integral to the cultural landscape of Tara and destroying them in order to replace them with a motorway is a direct attack on the integrity of this landscape and its constituent parts. In truth, the landscape of Tara ought to be declared a World Heritage Site and proudly maintained for future generations. [See Appendix]
Jane C. Waldbaum, President, Archaeological Institute of America, USA, wrote in a letter to The Irish Times, 1 April 2004:

“Large ritual and settlement sites are well-known international phenomenon and Tara is famous in archaeological and historical all over the world as a particularly important and well-preserved example… We appeal to the Irish authorities as a matter of urgency to move this section of the M3 away from the Tara/Skreen valley and to save this precious legacy from our shared past for posterity.”

22 leading British archaeologists wrote in a letter to The Irish Times, 4 April 2004:

“Tara is a virtually intact archaeological landscape of monuments with the Hill at its centre. The Skreen side of the projected motorway is part and parcel of this complex. Driving a four-lane motorway through the valley will destroy the integrity of this ancient landscape forever.”

Professor George Eogan, Meath. (Letter to Meath Chronicle, 1 May 2004)

“The proposed motorway will run through what is widely acknowledged as one of the richest archaeological landscapes in Europe, in particular that section that traverses the Tara area.”

Meath Archaeological and Historical Society, Letter to An Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, T.D. (17 May 2004):

“If this motorway goes ahead as planned this unique landscape will be destroyed forever. Is this how our generation will be remembered?”

Joint-letter signed by 17 Irish and British academics (The Irish Times, 22 September 2004):

“The National Roads Authority continues to perpetuate the fiction that Tara is confined to the cluster of monuments on the hilltop. This is not the case. The hilltop is but one element of what our ancestors understood Tara to be in antiquity. The hilltop is part of a wider, integrated, archaeological and historical landscape. That part lying to the eastern side of the hilltop was especially important in prehistoric times and subsequently, in the early historic period became the royal demesne of the kings of Tara… Tara is the crossroads at which we should pause to reflect on the direction we, as a nation, choose to take with regard to our unique and valuable cultural heritage. We cannot afford to get it wrong.”

Brian Hodkinson, Member of the Institute of Archaeologists of Ireland (IAI) wrote in a letter to The Irish Times, 12 October 2004:

“I have never known the archaeological profession to be as united as it is at present over the desecration at Tara. The only archaeologists I have heard speaking in favour of the road are the NRA’s own in-house ones and I suspect that even they may hold different opinions in private.”

A letter co-signed by 11 Irish cultural associations from around Europe (The Irish Times, 15 March 2005):

“It is because of such culturally rich and naturally beautiful places as the Tara landscape that so many visitors come to Ireland and return again and again. To damage Tara is to damage Ireland’s tourist image and high international reputation… The landscape of Tara is indivisible and must remain entirely intact and undisturbed for the appreciation of not just the people of Ireland, but for all those around the world who cherish Ireland and its culture.”

Sam Green, Director, Landmarks Foundation, New York. (Letter to The Irish Times, 4 May 2005):

“We cannot find words to describe our horror at learning that your country is actually planning to go ahead with the construction of this invasive motorway with its accompanying hideousness and that all appeals to reason have been dismissed out of hand… This is not just an Irish issue.”

Joe Fenwick said, in his affidavit:

I say that in consequence of all of the above, measurements of the distance between the proposed motorway and the Hill of Tara, wildly varying though the may be, are irrelevant. So also is the fact that the proposed motorway lies to the east of the existing N3. Quite apart from the fact that they are simply incomparable in terms of scale and impact, both of them run north-south through the archaeological landscape of Tara. Although it was recognised at the time to be potentially injurious to Tara, the building of the existing N3 during the 1730s was undertaken without the same developed understanding of the scale and complexity of the Tara archaeological landscape. We do not have this excuse today. It is quite bizarre that, having basked in the reflected glory of Tara for so long, and after initiating one of the most successful archaeological and historical research programmes in the history of the State, the agents of the State are now rallied against the findings of this research and appear bent on ignoring and undermining it in order to facilitate the construction of a motorway.

Paragraph of 89 of the Operational Guidelines states:

For properties nominated under criteria (i) to (vi), the physical fabric of the property and/or its significant features should be in good condition, and the impact of deterioration processes controlled. A significant proportion of the elements necessary to convey the totality of the value conveyed by the property should be included. Relationships and dynamic functions present in cultural landscapes, historic towns or other living properties essential to their distinctive character should also be maintained.

The ongoing development of the M3 motorway breaches this requirment.

(viii) Comparison with other similar properties- Are there similar properties in Ireland/Europe/Worldwide ?, if so please provide a short description of the Property(ties)/Site(s) and indicate what are the similarities with the proposed Property/Site in Ireland

Ritual complexes and royal sites in Ireland

Conor Newman states in his book:

It was descriptions of the so-called ‘royal’ sites as places of assembly, inauguration and kingship in the documentary sources that first drew antiquarians, and later archaeologists, to study Tara, Emain Macha, Dun Ailinne and Cruachain, and prompted their continued identification in archaeological and historical literature as ‘royal sites’ or ‘royal centres’.  Although it has been customary to study these places through a synthesis of history and archaeology, advances in both disciplines have necessitated a re-evaluation of the suitability of this approach.

‘(R)oyal sites’ in fact consist of palimpsests of prehistoric monuments dating from the Neolithic to the later Iron Age: in current archaeological parlance they are ‘ritual landscapes’ or ‘ritual complexes’.

Moreover, if continuous development, vis-à-vis ongoing construction of large new ritual monuments, can be used as an indication of the sustained importance of such a complex, then it seems that, regardless of their importance during the historic period, material investment in some Irish ritual complexes, such as Loughcrew and the Boyne Valley, may have waned from the Middle Bronze Age onwards.  So, what distinguishes the four historically identified major ‘royal centres’ archaeologically from other ceremonial complexes is not the documentary evidence but rather the fact that they have remained active into the Iron Age, sustained by the addition of large, new monuments.  In fact, archaeologists have theorized for some time about the possibility of identifying such complexes on archaeological grounds alone (e.g. Wailes 1982), and this has now been realized in the case of Raffin Fort, Co Meath (Newman 1993b), which displays all of the attributes defining these complexes and yet has not been identified in the documentary sources (Edel Bhreatnach, pers. comm.)

While archaeology has demonstrated that these are, above all, prehistoric sites and complexes of considerable ritual importance (an aspect which incidentally fulfills one of the basic requirements of a center of sacral kingship), it is noteworthy that historians have for their part become increasingly reluctant to project documentary evidence into the prehistoric period.  So, while it is theoretically possible that these four sites were de facto royal or monarchical centers in the prehistoric period, proof of this is seen by some to be beyond the range of documentary evidence.  Neither has it been supplied archaeologically, although what form such evidence of kingship might take is unknown.

There are serious problems, ones which, from an archaeological perspective, raise doubts about the appropriateness of using the term ‘royal’ to distinguish these sites in the first place.  So deeply ingrained is the term, however, that it will not be replaced overnight, and any attempt to do so in a context such as this would only result in confusion.  However, in order to reflect and emphasise the continuing development of some ritual complexes into the later Iron Age, (including the four major sites), the term ‘developed ritual complex’ will be used where feasible in place of the terms ‘royal site’ or ‘royal centre’.  xiv-xv

A developed ritual complex is defined, therefore, as a large, compound ritual complex, including both burial and communal ceremonial monuments, the protracted development of which began in the early prehistoric period and continued, with the addition of significant new ritual monuments, into the Iron Age and possibly the later Iron Age.  The word ‘developed’ is used in a temporal rather than a qualitative sense to emphasise the longevity of building activity that distinguishes these complexes from others whose development was of shorter duration during early prehistory. Xv

Apart from the evidence from these two sites continuity at Tara can be postulated only on a general level.  Insofar as the Hill of Tara appears to have been specifically set aside for ritual activity it can be described as a developed ritual complex or ritual landscape. 240

Cooney has suggested that one way in which sacred places, which have had a ritual pedigree dating from Mesolithic times, are made permanent is by monument-building.  He has alluded to the likelihood that the first permanent ritual architecture at many of these complexes dates from the Neolithic period.

Once fixed in the landscape, these monuments no doubt provided a focus for further ritual activity at the same place, leading to the construction of still more ritual monuments. In time, it may have become implicitly understood that this was sacred ground and a tradition was born, bringing people back to the same place, generation after generation.  240

Quoting Gregotti (1984) Cooney (1994) observes that concepts of environment or site come with both physical and notional (qua historical) accretions that must be considered in any new development, and that this can be achieved either by imitation and assimilation, which will lead to creation of complex environments or by separation, distance and individualization, which will lead to the creation of independent and distinct environments.  The predominant theme at Tara appears to be one of imagination and assimilation.  240

Cooney goes on to suggest that the most significant transformation that can occur in the site case of a site such as Tara, which has seen prolonged ritual activity, happens when it enters into mythology, because from that moment onwards it is transformed into a (prospective) symbol whose meaning can be manipulated for ideological ends.  While this can and probably did happen, perhaps many times over, during the prehistoric period, it is an aspect that has dominated the later history of Tara and is at the root of modern attitudes towards it.  Thus Tara is as much an evolving concept as a physical reality, and it is in this sense that we may refer to the genesis of Tara.  240-241

The broad chronological range of the structures and monuments that comprise Irish developed ritual complexes is archaeological proof of their endurance, over many thousands of years, as sacred places.  241

Professor John Waddell, of NUI Galway, stated in an affidavit for Vincent Salafia’s High Court case:

1.                  Other internationally recognised landscapes in Ireland include the Céide Fields in Co. Mayo, covering about 1000 hectares. This is one whose monuments date to a relatively narrow time period of some 500 years at the end of which, about 2700 BC, the area was enveloped in blanket bog.

2.                  A lesser-known complex of settlements and ceremonial sites in the Araglin valley of the Monavullagh Mountains, north of Dungarvan, in Co. Waterford, has been the subject of a major study in the Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society (1995) by Michael Moore, another archaeologist in the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government. He has stressed the unique character of this complex among Irish prehistoric landscapes and considered the whole of the valley to be >an archaeological area.

3.                  Both Araglin and the Céide Fields are a good illustration of the fact that the monuments in some archaeological areas (many or all of them relatively minor sites and individually unlikely to be considered a National Monument) may have a very special collective significance in the particular landscape in which they are situated.

4.                  The landscape of Knocknarea and Carrowmore in Co. Sligo has been studied and defined by Dr Stefan Bergh in his Landscape of the Monuments. A study of the passage tombs in the Cúil Irra region, Co. Sligo, Ireland (Stockholm 1995). This is a landscape of monumental sites, the focal examples clustered near Sligo town, overlooked by monuments on the mountains to the east and west; some further sites on the Ox Mountains form a symbolic façade between this region and the outside world. In an archaeological landscape dominated by the great cairn on the summit of Knocknarea, Bergh reminds us that these are monuments that still impinge on our consciousness: the “religious and social elite in the Cúil Irra region made itself eternal by erecting spectacular, almost superhuman, monuments in the landscape, intended for all time to remind the passer-by of their presence”.

5.                  A concentration of smaller but no less significant monuments in the centre of the Burren, Co. Clare, has been the subject of intensive study by Dr Carleton Jones who has identifed settlement and burials sites of the period around 2000 BC and extensive traces of later, Medieval, land use as well. In one report, co-authored with Paul Walsh, an archaeologist in the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government, this has been described as “an entire prehistoric landscape” (Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland 1996).

Dr Ron Hicks wrote in his affidavit, ‘On the Significance of Lismullin’:

First it is necessary to put the Tara complex, of which the site of Lismullin is a part, in context through a brief statement regarding the nature and extent of sacred/ceremonial/ritual complexes in Ireland, and in particular the sites identified in medieval manuscripts as “royal sites,” of which Tara is the most important example.  It is quite clear that these sites are not royal residences but rather ceremonial/ritual complexes closely associated with the kingship.

Certain characteristics tend to be shared by such complexes:

1)  They can be identified by the presence of clusters of monuments recognized as being of a ritual or ceremonial nature–passage tumuli, earthen enclosures of the type usually called “henges” (after the penannular bank and ditch that constitutes the first construction phase at Stonehenge), stone circles, parallel banks of a sort known as “cursuses” (again named for an example in the Stonehenge complex), or a combination of such monuments, as well as others.  At Tara you have not only the “Mound of the Hostages” but also henge-like earthworks as well as standing stones, the cursus-like “Banqueting Hall,” and a considerable number of other monuments.

2)  They usually include monuments or other archaeological evidence belonging to more than one period.  This is indicative of their continuing importance as sacred places, as can clearly be seen in the Bend of the Boyne complex, where we find the central monument of Newgrange—reliably dated to over 5000 years ago—serving as a place for the deposit of apparently ritual offerings of coins and other objects dating to the immediate pre-Christian period (some sixty objects, most dating from the late third to early fifth centuries A.D., according to Raghnall Ó Floinn of the National Museum).  In the case of Newgrange (Brug na Boinne), as with Tara and Emain Macha, this continuing importance is emphasized by its role in Irish myth.  And in a the case of three of the royal sites–Tara, Dún Ailinne, and Emain Macha–there is an Early Christian site, in each case attributed to a founding by St. Patrick, within or adjacent to the complex.

3)  While these complexes often focus on one or more hilltops or other high points of land, they extend well beyond these.  Although not one of the royal sites, the Boyne complex provides a good comparative example.  It extends at least from the Dowth Hall henge on the east to Knowth passage tumulus on the west, a distance of over 4 km, and may originally have extended as far as the Hill of Slane, if the tumulus there is also Neolithic, which seems very possible.  The north-south extent of the complex is also over 4 km, from the henge and tumuli of Monknewtown and Townley Hall to the enclosures below Newgrange along the Boyne.  Thus the extent of the complex is 16 square km at a minimum.

The extent of the complex would seem to a key issue in the case of Tara and Lismullin.  That being so, a consideration of the extent of the other royal complexes should prove illuminating.  As at Tara, the earthwork complexes at Emain Macha, Rath Cruachan, and Dún Ailinne are mentioned in the early literature as having served as the foci for seasonal assemblies, either at Lughnasa or Samhain.  The assemblies at Lughnasa, as at Emain Macha, seem to have occurred on plains nearby rather than within any of the enclosures.  Thus each of these neighboring open areas must be considered an integral part of the ritual complex with which it was associated.  Thus, although much has undoubtedly been destroyed in the vicinity during recent centuries, the Emain Macha complex must at the least have included the enclosure itself, this plain to the south (perhaps extending as far as Drumconwell, some 6 km to the southeast), and several nearby sites, including Ard Macha (the hill upon which the Armagh cathedral stands where excavation revealed traces of a surrounding ditch of uncertain date), Haughey’s Fort, and the “ritual pond” known as the King’s Stables.  That would encompass an area extending perhaps 4 km east-west and at least 6 km north-south.

At Ráth Cruachan, there exists a wide variety of monuments spread across an area measuring at least 3 km east-west by 3 1/2 north-south.  The Dún Ailinne complex covers a similar extent.  Knockaulin Hill, at whose summit lies the major monument of the group, is a much more prominent feature of the landscape than the relatively small elevations at Emain Macha and Rath Cruachan, overlooking a considerable territory.  The early literature provides us with seven names for assemblies in this vicinity (Alend, Colmáin, Carman, Ailbi, Sengormain, Clochair, and Lethchraich).  While some are probably alternative names for single areas, they do not all seem to refer to the same location.  The dindshenchas for the assembly site of Carman mentions twenty-one enclosures as well as several distinct activity areas within the overall site.  The complex as a whole thus seems likely to have extended from the parish of Carnalway (Carn Ailbe) about 3 km to the north of Dún Ailinne, near Kilcullen, and across much of  the Curragh to the northwest of Knockaulin, where one finds ten henge-like earthworks, constituting a complex covering an area some 4 km by 8 km long.

While there is clearly some variation in the size of the ritual complexes that I have described, even using conservative estimates for their boundaries we see that the shortest dimension tends to be 3 to 4 km.  What, then, is the apparent and likely extent of the Tara complex?  Given that it was associated with the high kingship, it is unlikely to have been smaller than those associated with the royal centers of Ulster, Connacht, and Leinster and was most probably somewhat larger.  That it extends beyond the Hill of Tara itself can be easily seen.  It certainly must extend to include Rath Maeve, whose far edge lies 1.6 km to the south, and the Riverstown enclosure and linear banks lying nearly 2 km to the west and northwest and Ringlestown Rath to their south.  To the east the nearest prominent feature that might have marked a boundary to the district is the Hill of Skreen, some 3.4 km away, well within likely limits for such complexes.

The presence on the height of an early monastic site is another indication that it is likely to have been a pre-Christian sacred site.  It is undoubtedly significant that the Gabhra River flows between the two hills down the middle of this complex, given its name, which can be interpreted as the River of the White Mare, a symbol intimately associated with kingship in ancient Ireland.  To the north of Skreen lies Rath Lugh and west from there Rath Miles, each of which seems likely to lie within the boundaries of the complex, with the Lismullin enclosure between them.  In his survey of the Tara vicinity, Newman also describes a number of mounds nearby that likewise most probably lay within the limits of the complex.  This includes a line of four lying to the east and northeast.  The most northerly of these, in Clonardran Townland, lies on high ground somewhat more than 3.5 km from the Tara hilltop while the fourth lies in the valley just east of the Hill of Tara itself.  Newman points out that some of these mounds are comparable in size to the Mound of the Hostages and may, like it, be passage tumuli.  This would give the Tara complex overall dimensions of roughly 5 km both north-south and east-west.

(ix) Please list what legal protections are in place for the Property/Site

Convention for the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, Paris, 16 November

1972

For some reason, the Republic of Ireland has been very slow to join UNESCO, and to implement the Convention. While countries like Egypt have been members of UNESCO for 60 years, Ireland did not ratify the Convention until Monday, September 16, 1991, twenty one years after it was created.  Ireland currently contains only two World Heritage Sites: the Archaeological Ensemble of the Bend of the Boyne (1993) and Cultural site Skellig Michael (1996). Eight other sites were placed on the Tentative List in 1992, but that list did not include the Hill of Tara, Ireland’s premier national monument and cultural icon. However, once Ireland ratified the Convention, the Hill of Tara was entitled to legal protection under it.

Article 12 of the Convention states:

The fact that a property belonging to the cultural or natural heritage has not been included in either of the two lists mentioned in paragraphs 2 and 4 of Article 11 shall in no way be construed to mean that it does not have an outstanding universal value for purposes other than those resulting from inclusion in these lists.

In other words, Tara has always been a site of outstanding universal value, and the fact that Ireland failed to place it on the Tentative List until now, does not preclude it from application of the Convention. Article 4 applies to all sites of outstanding universal value within the State borders, and clearly outlines the obligations in relation to these sites:

Each State Party to this Convention recognizes that the duty of ensuring the identification, protection, conservation, presentation and transmission to future generations of the cultural and natural heritage referred to in Articles 1 and 2 and situated on its territory, belongs primarily to that State. It will do all it can to this end, to the utmost of its own resources and, where appropriate, with any international assistance and co-operation, in particular, financial, artistic, scientific and technical, which it may be able to obtain.

Between 1991 and 1999, when the M3 motorway was proposed, Ireland failed to use its national inventory of sites, for purposes of placing sites on the Tentative List. The Tentative List is supposed to contain all properties within the State, which are eligible for World Heritage Status. However, a UN report has recognised that Ireland has failed to use its national inventory, and therefore failed to properly implement the Convention, which clearly places an active duty on the State, upon signing the Convention, to identify all potential world heritage sites, within the jurisdiction, and place them on the List, and to protect them, even if they have not been placed on the Tentative List.

The Hill of Tara has never been even considered for the tentative list, until now.  Ireland breached Article 3 and 4, because from the time of signing the Convention, in 1991,  until now,  as it has failed to identify and delineate the Hill of Tara site. This failure has directly led to the current situation, where the M3 motorway is already under construction through the very area that will be nominated as a World Heritage Site.

On Wednesday, 18 February 2004 there was a meeting of NGOs with UNESCO-ICOMOS reactive monitoring mission report on the Archaeological Ensemble of the Bend of the Boyne (Ireland) which took place between 17-21 February, 2004. The mission was undertaken in order to implement the decision of the World Heritage Committee (27COM 7B.80) at its 27th session in 2003 to evaluate the impact of a municipal waste incinerator in the vicinity of the World Heritage site. The mission consisted of Fumiko Ohinata (UNESCO World Heritage Centre) and Tom Hassall (ICOMOS).  Having been elected to the position of Public Relations Officer for the NGO, Save Tara Skryne Valley group, in September 2003, Vincent Salafia had written to Fumiko Ohinata, in advance of the Mission. She agreed to meet our NGO on the 18th February 2004. At the meeting, she was presented with a letter to The Irish Times Mr Salafia had drafted, signed by twenty-nine concerned academics from Ireland and around the world. The letter was published on 23rd February 2004, and contains the following statement:

“The Convention Concerning the Protection of World Cultural and Natural Heritage…resolved to protect parts of the cultural or natural heritage that are of outstanding universal value and therefore need to be preserved as part of the world heritage of mankind as a whole. Tara warrants UNESCO protection, if ever an Irish site did.”

Subsequent to the meeting, the mission members published a report, which contained the following passage:

5. M3 and Hill of Tara

The mission feels it is necessary to record the strong feeling expressed by members of public concerning the proposed construction of the M3 highway and its potential impact on Hill of Tara. The area was the seat of the High Kings of Ireland in the first millennium AD as well as the site of a passage tomb known as the Mound of the Hostages that was built about 2500 BC. This is an area of extreme archaeological richness, confirmed by the geophysical surveys carried out along the proposed route corridor that will pass through the edge of Hill of Tara. The area is located approximately 15 km away from the southern edge of the inscribed area. The State Party has no intention of placing the Hill of Tara on the Irish Tentative List or proposing an extension to the existing World Heritage site of the Archaeological Ensemble of the Bend of the Boyne.

As you are no doubt aware, the State Party has since changed its position, and announced in a press release dated 11 April 2008 that it now intends to place the Hill of Tara on the Irish Tentative List.

After the 2004 meeting with UNESCO/ICOMOS campaigners established contact with Tom Cassidy, of ICOMOS Ireland, with a view to having Tara recognised as a heritage site at risk, but Mr Cassidy made it quite clear that he did not think it was appropriate for ICOMOS Ireland to address the matter, since planning permission for the M3 motorway had been granted in August 2003. We have always been concerned that ICOMOS Ireland did not want to get involved in the Tara dispute because so many of their members were on the NRA payroll, and many had been directly involved with the works at Tara, at all stages of the development, from the earliest assessment, though route selection, testing, to full excavation.

In May 2004 the European Association of Archaeologists (EAA) issued a statement, saying,

“EAA urges the Irish government to rethink its approach to the archaeology of this unique and highly significant landscape.”

However, numerous members of ICOMOS, along with the Chief State Archaeologist, lobbied successfully to have this statement withdrawn.

The National Monuments Acts (1930-2004)

The National Monuments Act supposedly protects the 100 acres of State-owned land, and all other national and historic monuments within the Tara complex/landscape. However, the State has denied that there is such a complex, and there is no legal protection for the site as a whole. National monument status has proven to be little or no protection, against State infrastructure. Lismullin national monument was discovered in 2007, during the course of road-building, but it was demolished and paved over the same as if it had not been delcared a national monument at all. Rath Lugh national monument has been directly impacted by the M3 motorway, and had a significant portion removed, with the aid of the Act. Finally, the process in determining what is and is not a national monument is fatally flawed, and rests in the hands of one man; the Minister for the Environment.

Professor John Waddell made the following statements in relation to the legal protections for Tara, in an affidavit that was prepared for, but exluded from, the Salafia case:

I am Professor of Archaeology and Head of the Department of Archaeology, National University of Ireland, Galway. I have over thirty years experience in teaching and research on aspects of the archaeology of western Europe and Ireland and am author of the standard textbook on Irish prehistoric archaeology: The Archaeology of Prehistoric Ireland (2000).

1.    The National Monuments (Amendment) Act 1987 defines an “archaeological area” as an area “which the Commissioners [now the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government under the terms of the National Monuments (Amendment) Act 2004, 4.1] consider to be of archaeological importance but does not include the area of a historic monument standing entered in the Register”. This was a new concept in Irish law as Professor Robert Clark has pointed out in Irish Current Law Statutes Annotated (1987 No. 17): the definition “takes account of the fact that geographical areas that the Commissioners are likely to consider as archaeological areas will normally contain buildings that will fall into the definition of historic monument e g. a medieval town will be an ‘archaeological area’ and each building in it will be a ‘historic monument’. The degree of protection afforded to an ‘archaeological area’ is less substantial than that available in respect to historic monuments and therefore the exclusion of the ‘historic monument’ from the ‘archaeological area’ is designed to secure greater protection for the ‘historic monument’ Section 5 provides that an archaeological area may be entered into the Register of Historic Monuments.”

2.                  Professor Clark further clarifies the distinction between a national monument and a historic monument, the term national monument being reserved to those whose protection is of national importance. The purpose behind the idea of a ‘historic monument’ was to produce a general concept by which monuments can be described. He states “the concept of a ‘historic monument’, while broader than that of national monument insofar as the connecting factors listed are more numerous (e g. commercial, industrial and military history) recognises that a ‘historic monument’ may be worthy of protection because of its importance for the country and not simply the region or place where it is situated.”

3.    In a memorandum to the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government on the 3rd December 2004, subsequently obtained by the archaeological community under the Freedom of Information Act (Appendix 1), Mr. Brian Duffy, Chief Archaeologist in the Department, did not inform the Minister that the monuments in the Tara landscape constitute an archaeological area or landscape and did not suggest that any of them might be a historic monument. On the contrary, he declared that he found it difficult to comprehend the claim “that all these sites are directly related to Tara, each of them a unique component of the Tara landscape”. His assertion there (and presented in his affidavit, paragraph 10) that “these monuments cannot be considered to be part of some greater Tara monument as while some of them are coeval with the phases of prehistoric activity on the hill, others are medieval or post-medieval in date” not only indicates a failure to recognise the medieval archaeology and history of Tara but also reveals an incomprehensible lack of knowledge of what constitutes an archaeological landscape. Landscape archaeology is now a highly-regarded field of study in many universities throughout the world with postgraduate programmes in Ireland in both University College Dublin and the National University of Ireland Galway. Thanks to much recent interdisciplinary scholarship in history, literature and archaeology, the landscape of Tara is actually one of the best defined.

4.    In that memorandum Mr Duffy goes on to state “many major monuments are surrounded by large concentrations of monuments of the same archaeological period” and cites the Boyne Valley and the famous tombs of Newgrange, Dowth and Knowth as an example. He is correct in saying that it has never been claimed that these three separate sites are all part of one National Monument as such, but it is an accepted fact that monuments of various periods in the Boyne Valley constitute an exceptionally good example of an archaeological area or landscape. The archaeological and other components of this well-known cultural landscape have been documented by Dr Geraldine Stout, herself an archaeologist in the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government, in her book Newgrange and the Bend of the Boyne (Cork University Press 2002).

5.    Archaeologists would consider the complex of monuments in the Bend of the Boyne an excellent example of an archaeological area, where a landscape is composed by human activity and has a number of landmark sites among monuments of various types constructed by a succession of inhabitants. This is a landscape with both a prehistoric and an historical dimension, being especially prominent in periods as diverse as the fourth millennium BC and the ninth century AD and later when the great mound at Knowth was the settlement of the kings of Brega. Medieval occupation took place here because of what went before, the monuments of the past were reclaimed as a symbol of power and legitimacy. Whatever its configuration and timespan, an archaeological landscape is usually one component in an evolving cultural landscape and this Boyne landscape plays a prominent role in the country’s heritage industry today. All of the elements of this archaeological landscape, from monuments of the Neolithic period (4000 BC) to Medieval settlements (1200-1450 BC), to military pillboxes of the Emergency (1940s), form the Boyne Valley Archaeological Park established by Dúchas, the Heritage Service in 1987. The area was declared a World Heritage Site by UNESCO in 1993 (Brú na Bóinne World Heritage Site Management Plan, Dúchas, the Heritage Service 2002).

6.                  The concept of an archaeological area or landscape has been accepted in international archaeological studies for decades. As in the Boyne Valley, it is recognised as a component of the cultural landscape comprising the ancient features that interest archaeologists, the natural features of interest to botanists and zoologists, and historic features studied by historians. These are the main elements of a “cultural landscape area” as defined by Professor Timothy Darvill on behalf of the Council of Europe in Landscape Study and Management published by the Office of Public Works, Dublin in 1996.

7.                  The various references to cultural or historic landscapes or to archaeological reserves or areas in the Valetta Convention (1992) to which Ireland is a signatory, the UNESCO Convention (1972), the Venice Charter (1964) and the ICOMOS Charter for the Protection and Management of the Archaeological Heritage (1990) are conveniently summarised in a report prepared a number of years ago for the Heritage Council. This report, Archaeological Landscapes in Ireland, was compiled (c. 2000) by Professor Gabriel Cooney of University College Dublin, Emmet Byrnes, and Tom Condit, the latter an archaeologist in the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Appendix 2). The authors offer a preliminary list of what they recognise as 54 vulnerable archaeological landscapes. Included are two detailed case studies, Loughcrew, Co. Meath, and the Curragh, Co. Kildare. Also listed is Mount Gabriel, near Schull in Co. Cork, one of the best preserved prehistoric copper mining locations in Europe which was acquired by the State in 1995 as its contribution to the Council of Europe’s ‘Year of the Bronze Age’.

The 1992 European Convention on the Protection of Archaeological Heritage (The Valetta Convention) has been ratified by Ireland. Sections of Articles 4 and 5 are relevant:

Article 4:

Each Party undertakes to implement measures for the physical protection of the archaeological heritage, making provision, as circumstances demand:

Article 5:

Each Party undertakes:

i. to seek to reconcile and combine the respective requirements of archaeology and development plans by ensuring that archaeologists participate:

a. in planning policies designed to ensure well-balanced strategies for the protection, conservation and enhancement of sites of archaeological interest;

b. in the various stages of development schemes;

iii. to ensure that environmental impact assessments and the resulting decisions involve full consideration of archaeological sites and their settings.

15.              Archaeological areas or landscapes have been recognised in the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government and its predecessors for many years. To assert, as Mr Duffy does in his memorandum of 3rd December 2004, that the monuments in the hinterland of the Hill of Tara “do not form part of some greater Tara national monument” is to entirely ignore this sort of evidence, the work of his colleagues and the possibilities afforded to the Minister under the terms of the National Monuments (Amendment) Act 1987. It also ignores the responsibilities to protect the archaeological heritage that fall to the Department and the Minister. In choosing this course of action, in failing to address the question that the Tara landscape constitutes an archaeological area and its monuments are historic monuments, the Chief Archaeologist, the Department and the Minister failed in their duty of care in respect of the country’s heritage.

16.              The State is charged with the ultimate responsibility for the protection of the archaeological heritage of the people. This duty of care on the part of the State was enunciated by Justice Finlay in the Supreme Court’s judgement in the Derrynaflan case (Webb v. Ireland and the Attorney General 1987). Referring to the terms of the Constitution, with an emphasis on its historical origins and a constant concern for the common good, he declared that the archaeological heritage was “a necessary ingredient of sovereignty” in a modern State: “It would, I think, now be universally accepted, certainly by the People of Ireland, and by people of most modern States, that one of the most important national assets belonging to the people is their heritage and knowledge of its true origins and the buildings and objects which constitute keys to their ancient history”.

17.              If the nature of the Tara landscape had been seriously considered by the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government, the present motorway route would never have been an option.

European Landscape Convention

There are no legal protections for landscapes in Ireland, as Ireland has not ratified the European Landscape Convention.

The Heritage Council announced funding for a pilot project designed to significantly improve the way we manage and plan for development and economic growth in the countryside, in July 2008, stating:

“The pilot project will be carried out in the Tara Skryne landscape in Co. Meath by the Heritage Council in conjunction with Meath County Council. It aims to provide a framework for better planning decisions in the future as well as safeguard the environment, quality of life and the heritage aspects of one of the most important and controversial landscapes in the country. As part of the project, a landscape management plan will be developed and agreed with the local community and key stakeholders on how the landscape that they live, work or enjoy leisure activity in is developed and managed. It will also progress the Meath County Development Plan objective to designate a Landscape Conservation Area.

However, the programme has not yet been put into place.

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive

The European Commission has sent a Reasoned Opinion to the Irish Government, concerning the legality of the M3 motorway, and in particular the imminent demolition of the newly discovered national monument in Lismullin. We understand that the Commission is of the opinion that the National Monuments Act 2004 is in breach of the EIA Directive, because it does not require a new Environmental Impact Assessment, in spite of the fact that the planning permission, granted by An Bord Pleanala in 2003, did not include permission to demolish national monuments, and no national monuments were detected in the original EIA.

The demolition of a national monument was beyond the scope of the original planning permission and such demolition was be a material change to the motorway scheme. The EU has initiated legal proceedings and is pursuing this matter. Section 14A gives the Minister a range of choices on how to resolve newly discovered national monuments found in the process of constructing an approved road scheme, ranging from preservation in situ to preservation by record. However, the National Monuments Act 2004 does not include any guiding principles and policies clause, to inform the decision-making process of the Minister for the Environment when he is deciding the fate of national monuments in this scenario.

Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Directive

A new milestone towards Sustainable Development is the implementation of Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Directive.  The Directive, which came in to effect in July 2004,  covers a process whereby plans and projects, whether local, regional, or national, are evaluated for their consequences on the environment at an early stage of the decision making process.  This process allows the integration of environmental issues into plans and programmes from the outset, thus avoiding conflicts between socio-economic and environmental issues when the plan or programme is being finalized.  It is an important step towards integrating environmental considerations into strategic decision-making.

The SEA Directive was transposed into Irish Law by the Planning and Development. (Strategic Environmental Assessment) Regulations 2004 (S.I. 436 of 2004) The M3 motorway is being built under the National Development Plan (2010-2013), but Ireland refused to put the Plan through SEA, and is now a defendant in two cases; one being taken by the European Commission and a second being taken by an Irish citizen, which is now before the Supreme Court. We are confident that if SEA had been performed on the NDP, that the M3 would have been deemed too damaging  and too expensive.

United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, Convention on access to information, public participation in decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters 1998 (the Aarhus Convention).

The Aarhus Convention recognises that the public and environmental non governmental organisations (ENGOs) have an important role in protecting the environment. The three pillars of the Convention, the right to information, the right to participate in decision-making and the right to access to justice are considered necessary to support the fundamental right of every person to live in a healthy environment and the duty, both individually and collectively, to protect or improve the environment for the benefit of present and future generations. Ireland has failed to ratify the AARHUS Convention, but is has been applied directly, through EU legislation.  Ireland is the only Member State not to have fully ratified the Convention to date.

Meath County Development Plan

2001 Meath County Development Plan was adopted 5 March 2001 and remained until effect until 4 March 2007. The 2007 Meath County Development Plan was adopted 2 March 2007, and will remain in effect until 2013.

The 2001 Meath County Development Plan – Vol 1 states:

2.8.4 Landscape Protection

Areas of high amenity in Meath include the Boyne and Blackwater valley areas, Slieve Na Calliagh and Lough Sheelin, shoreline, Hill of Tara and Skyrne Hill and a range of views and prospects throughout the county. The County Development Plan will have regard to the Landscape Guidelines being prepared at present, in assessing development proposals viz-a-viz landscape impact.

3.6.1 Rural Development Context

The rural parts of County Meath are at present facing various development pressures and challenges of unprecedented dimensions. The effect of European Union policies on agriculture, the proximity of rural and agricultural parts of Meath to the largest metropolitan area in the state, the resources of rural areas and the development opportunities and pressures they generate, all these factors create sometimes competing demands on a finite resource, the resolution of which is the role of the development plan.

The rural parts of Meath are the product of a complex interaction of natural processes and the influence of human activity. Together, these factors have created a pastoral landscape of high visual quality underlain by historical monuments, a large built heritage and which contains resources such as minerals, water, agricultural land of high food production capability, and construction materials.

3.6.2 Core Rural Development Objectives

There is a clear role for the development plan in resolving the competing demands on the Meath countryside. Maintaining the intrinsic qualities of the rural areas and developing them appropriately is not consistent with an unplanned approach to development.

Underlying the effective management of the countryside must be a number of basic development objectives.

3.6.3 Landscape Classification

The rural parts of Meath have been analysed for their visual characteristics with a view of offering a clearer picture to developers and others as to the sensitivity of various categories of development in areas with differing abilities to absorb development.

Objectives for these areas will include;

•     Protection of such areas from visually damaging development or proposals that     would cumulatively erode landscape quality.

•     Promotion of areas for appropriate development, primarily leisure tourism or     recreational based development.

•     Reviewing the extent of area currently designated as being of high amenity. This will     specifically address the division of the county into Landscape Character Groups and     identification of sensitivities within each area.

Area VQ9: The Tara and Dunsany District

Characteristics: This historic region, encompassing the hills at Tara and Skryne and the pastoral lowlands and demesne complexes at Dunsany/Killeen and the Kilmessan area, is one of the areas of premier visual quality in the county. It is part of a Strategic Green Belt identified in the Strategic Planning Guidelines and is of high value to the region as an area for walking, cycling and other amenity pursuits. The area’s character is defined by its archaeology and built heritage coupled to copses of deciduous woodland, stone boundary walling and pastoral grasslands.

Sensitivities: The area is extremely sensitive to all categories of development in so far as it would detract from the character appearance and interpretative experience of the region. The hills at Tara and Skryne are particularly sensitive to intrusive development such as sporadic housing, larger agricultural structures, masts and afforestation.

3.6.9 Views and Prospects

The Meath landscape contains a wide range of points where either there are fine views or which in themselves are landmarks or prospects. The conservation of these amenities are vital to the tourism attractions of the county. The Rural Detail Maps indicate the location of such features, which are also listed in Volume Three. Where development is envisaged adjacent to such features, the planning authority will pay close regard to the potential effect on the amenity value of these items with an overriding objective of their protection.

3.6.12 European and Heritage Sites

The principle of sustainable development emphasises the importance of the natural environment and the need to conserve its store of bio-diversity. It is vital to conserve habitats and heritage areas which frequently are stressed by the by products of human activities or processes. It will be the objective of the planning authority to protect;

3.6.15 Architectural and Archaeological Heritage

It will be an objective of the planning authority to consider its policy on the protection of the architectural and archaeological heritage of the county in the light of;

In particular, it will be an objective of the planning authority to preserve the buildings and

items of artistic, architectural and historic interest listed as protected structures and items

in Volume Three, including in particular their contextual setting. Permission will be

refused where a protected structure should, in the opinion of the planning authority, be

retained and conserved. To positively support such activity, the planning authority will

operate a conservation grant system in line with the availability of central funding.

The lists of structures and items in Volume Three will be reviewed upon the completion

and publication of the New Architectural Inventory of County Meath, currently in the

process of preparation by the Department of Arts and Heritage.

2001 Meath County Development Plan – Vol 3 – Conservation

This volume sets out details of various conservation, environmental and amenity designations for various areas, sites and buildings that are of environmental, historic, architectural or other interest and which deserve protection from unsympathetic development or activities which would be destructive to their integrity.

The detailed policies and objectives set out in Volumes One and Two set out the approach of the planning authority in relation to the conservation for example of built heritage, European sites, views and so on. By protecting and conserving these features, the Planning Authority seeks only to maintain and nurture the cultural heritage of the county and therefore an essential part of its identity.

Section 3 – Views and Prospects:

VP1   Hill of Tara

VP27 Skreen

Section 4 : Inventory of Natural Recreational Areas

SRUNA-Sustainable Recreational use of Natural Assets is funded under the EU programme Terra. The main aim is social inclusion of a wide variety of natural recreational assets such as walks, viewing points and picnic areas throughout the County. The following sites have been identified and may be cross referenced to the rural detail amenity maps:

(3)   Hill of Tara

(20) Dalgan Park

(21) Hill of Skryne

Areas of Visual Quality were designated in the County Development Plan 2001 with regard to the ‘sensitivity of various categories of development in areas with differing abilities to absorb development.’ The particular sensitivities of these areas are set out on pages 57 and 58 of volume 1 of the Meath County Development Plan 2001. Areas of Visual Quality include: “Area VQ9 – The Tara and Dunsany District”.

CH60: Tara. G.R. N.92,59. A first fruits type church with a tower.. It is now used as an interpretive centre for the hill of Tara.

CH34: Skryne. G.R. N. 95, 59. Dated from 1827. It has a tower with diagonally placed buttresses, pinnacles and single cell nave with octagonal piers on the corners, each with finely carved pinnacles. It has 3 doorcases an apse from 1863 but the inside is very plain.

A consulatants report, designed to constitute a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA), for Meath County Council Development Plan 2007, by CAAS Environmental Services Limited, states:

“Landscapes of Exceptional Value those which are perceived by the communities that inhabit them to be of the most value. This value arises from intrinsic attributes such as visual beauty, ecology, archaeology, social history, religious sites, and mythology. The following is a list of Landscapes of Exceptional Value in County Meath as are mapped and as are defined in the Landscape Character Assessment: Loughcrew  Hills, Boyne Valley, Rathmoylan lowlands and the Tara Skryne Area.

The CAAS SEA report states at Section 5.3.9:

“There are archaeological issues pertaining to the development of infrastructure as

highlighted during the assessment of the proposed M3 Motorway adjoining the Hill of Tara archaeological complex. The character of many of Meath’s towns and villages is changing rapidly.

The report concludes:

“This SEA has identified the most valuable landscapes, including Loughcrew Hills, Boyne Valley, Rathmoylan lowlands and the Tara Skryne Area, in order to facilitate the evaluation as to whether the County Development Plan would, if implemented, have significant effects on these landscapes.”

The report states at Section 7.4.2 – ‘Identified Impacts of Dunshaughlin to Ashbourne Urbanisation:

- Threatens Valuable Landscapes? Yes.

- Landscape Threatened? Tara Skryne Area

Development Plan Strategic Action [Table Part 36]

Section 8 is entitled ‘Cultural Heritage and Landascape Protection’. The report exhibits a table, at page 128. The first subcategory is entitled ‘Strategies/ Goals’.  Section 8.1.1 is entitled ‘Rural Development’. It contains the following entry:

“SOC POL2: To encourage the continued sustainable development of rural communities without compromising the physical, environmental, natural and heritage resources of the County.”

The next subcategory is entitled ‘Objectives’.  Section 8.1.1  includes the following objectives:

“To recognise the strategic roles the county will play in regional and national contexts in terms of recreation, heritage conservation, natural resources and food production, and ensuring compatibility between this plan and regional or national strategies.”

and

“To protect and enhance the visual qualities of rural areas through the sensitive design of necessary development.”

Section 8.2.2 is entitled “Archaeological Heritage” includes the following objectives:

“To ensure that all significant development proposals affecting sites specified in the Record of Monuments and Places or Zones of Archaeological Potential are referred to the Prescribed Bodies (as set out in the Planning and Development Act 2000) and to have regard to the advice and recommendations of the Prescribed Bodies in relation to undertaking, approving or authorising development.”

“To protect important archaeological landscapes in co-operation with the appropriate Government agency.“

“To employ the full extent of the statutory provisions of the Planning & Development Act to assist in the protection of landscapes of exceptional value and sensitivity, in particular Brú na Bóinne and the Tara – Skyrne area.”

“To ensure that when an unrecorded archaeological object or site is discovered, any works that threaten the object or site are immediately suspended and that the appropriate Government agency is informed.”

“To protect and enhance the visual qualities of rural areas through the sensitive design of necessary development.”

“To protect archaeological sites, monuments (including their setting), underwater archaeology, and objects within the jurisdiction of Meath County Council, including those that are listed in the Record of Monuments and Places or newly discovered sub-surface archaeological remains.

“To ensure that full consideration is given to the protection of archaeological heritage when undertaking, approving or authorising development in order to avoid unnecessary conflict between development and the protection of the archaeological heritage.

“To seek the preservation (in-situ, or at a minimum, preservation by record) of all sites and features of historical and archaeological interest.

“To require the retention of surviving medieval plots and street patterns in the villages and towns of Meath and to record evidence of ancient boundaries, layouts etc in the course of development. – transfer to archaeology.

“To protect historical burial grounds within Meath and encourage their maintenance in accordance with conservation principles.

“To encourage and promote the appropriate management and enhancement of the County’s archaeological heritage.

“To protect the heritage of groups of important national monuments, inclusive of their contextual setting and interpretation, in the operation of development management.

[All of the above objectives were categorised as being “Likely to Improve status of

environment.”]

8.3 Natural Heritage

“To prepare and implement, in partnership with the County Meath Heritage Forum, relevant stakeholders and the community, a Biodiversity Action Plan for Meath.”

“It is an objective of the Council to protect, conserve and enhance the County’s bio-diversity and natural heritage. This includes wildlife (flora & fauna), habitats, landscapes and/or landscape features of importance to wildlife or which play a key role in the conservation and management of natural resources such as water.”

Meath County Council County Development Plan 2001, Volume Three, ‘Conservation’:

Section 3 : Views and Prospects – View Reference Townland in which view is located:

“VP1 – Hill of Tara, Jordanstown, Castletown Tara, Castleboy, Belpere, Cabragh.”

Section 4 : Inventory of Natural Recreational Areas: “SRUNA-Sustainable Recreational use of Natural assets is funded under the EU programme Terra. The main aim is social inclusion of a wide variety of natural recreational assets such as walks, viewing points and picnic areas throughout the County. The following sites have been identified: …(3) Hill of Tara, and …(21) Hill of Skryne.”

On 26 November 1998, Mr. Noel Dempsey, T.D., for the County of Meath, and Minister for the Environment and Local Government, launched the project entitled SRUNA – Sustainable Recreational Use of Natural Assets – which was undertaken jointly by the local and regional authorities in the Dublin and Mid-East Regions and The Association of Local Authorities of Skane in Sweden. The project, involves the undertaking of seven pilot projects by each partner in the area of planning for sustainable recreation, examined issues relating to the sustainable use of natural heritage areas in south Sweden and around the Greater Dublin Area. The work carried out under the SRUNA project, with its emphasis on the Agenda 21 process – the development of sustainability indicators, public participation and the need to address social inclusion- was designed to help in identifying suitable management measures for these national assets.

Despite the fact that the Hill of Tara and the Hill of Skryne are only 3 km apart, they were designated as separate SRUNA areas, and the M3 motorway route was approved in September 2003 to pass through the valley between the two protected areas of natural .

Chapter 8 of the  Meath County Development Plan, (2007-2013) entitled ‘Cultural Heritage and Landscape Protection’ states:

8.1 Introduction

County Meath has a rich natural and built heritage, which includes scenic river valleys, rolling farmland, a network of mature hedgerows, diverse coastal habitats, an extensive array of protected structures, architectural conservation areas, heritage landscapes and towns, internationally important heritage sites and an enviable idealistic rural character, all of which are influenced by land use and management.

In the preparation and adoption of a Development Plan, there is a mandatory obligation on the Council to include objectives for, inter alia, the following;

This chapter outlines the contextual information followed by policies and objective sin relation to the built and natural heritage and to the preservation of the landscape character which they give rise to. The Planning Authority has determined the necessary policy context as required by the proper planning and sustainable development of Co. Meath. It is also acknowledged that other chapters of this Plan deal also with such matters indirectly, striving to achieve the overriding aim of protecting the county’s rich man made and natural heritage features. The Planning Authority has strived for consistency of approach throughout this Plan with regard to policy formulation and related objectives. The preparation of this chapter has been assisted by the commissioning of a Landscape Character Assessment which forms Appendix VI to the Development Plan.

8.2.14 Heritage Objects

The 1995 Heritage Act defined heritage objects as “objects over 25 years old which are works of art or of industry (including books, documents and other records, including genealogical records) of cultural importance.”

Policy

HER POL 35 To ensure the protection of heritage objects and their settings as appropriate.

8.2.15 Rural Tourism

It is the policy of Meath County Council to promote sustainable tourism in a way that maintains the quality of the rural landscape and rural townscapes, the quality of natural and man-made waterways, the county’s scenic character, and the archaeological and architectural heritage of the county.

Policy

HER POL 36 To promote, encourage and facilitate the development of the tourism industry through sustainable means, including the conservation, protection and enhancement of the built and natural heritage, and the protection of sensitive landscapes, cultural and community environments in order to maximise upon the economic benefits arising from the industry.

8.3 Built Heritage

8.3.1 Introduction/Context

This section establishes Meath County Councils policies and proposals for the protection,

conservation and enhancement of the built environment of Meath. Built Heritage refers to all built

features in the environment including buildings and other structures such as bridges, wells, pumps, archaeological sites and field boundary walls.

The Regional Planning Guidelines for the Greater Dublin Area (2004 – 2016) state that Planning Authorities should adopt policies in line with the mandatory objectives in the Planning and Development Act, 2000, and other relevant legislation, to protect the built heritage of their areas.

The RPGs emphasise that Planning Authorities should:

Conservation of the built heritage emerged as a significant issue during the pre draft consultation phase of preparing the County Development Plan. A number of submissions from members of the general public in addition to those received from statutory bodies such as the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and the Heritage Council related to the built heritage of the County. Areas of concern include the need to protect the rural character, setting and archaeological heritage of the landscape in the vicinity of Tara and the new M3 Motorway, the need to address the planning issues pertaining to the Brú na Bóinne World Heritage Site and the need to afford a greater degree of protection to the historic environment of the county, including towns and villages. Many specific comments were made regarding Protected Structures and suggestions were made for additions to the Record of Protected Structures (RPS).

It is the goal of the Planning Authority to protect, conserve and enhance buildings, areas, structures, sites and features of special architectural, historical, archaeological, artistic, cultural, scientific, social or technical interest. Conservation is a priority for Meath County Council, reflected in the policies and objectives outlined in this section of the Development Plan.

Built heritage is addressed in this section under the following subheadings:

Goal

To protect, conserve and enhance buildings, areas, structures, sites and features of special architectural, historical, archaeological, artistic, cultural, scientific, social or technical interest.

8.3.2 Archaeological Heritage

The Archaeological heritage of an area includes structures, constructions, groups of buildings, developed sites, moveable objects, monuments of other kind as well as their context, whether situated on land or under water. In this respect, Meath has a significant archaeological heritage, which provides a valuable and valued cultural, educational and tourism resource. The Planning Authority recognises the importance of preserving, protecting and fostering a greater public appreciation of the county’s archaeological heritage.

The National Monuments Acts 1930 – 2004 provide for the protection of the archaeological heritage. The Record of Monuments and Places (RMP) was established under Section 12 of the National Monuments (Amendment) Act 1994 and structures, features, objects or sites listed in this Record are known as Recorded Monuments. As well as extending protection to all known sites, now identified as Recorded Monuments, the National Monuments Acts 1930 – 2004 extends protection to all previously unknown archaeological items and sites that are uncovered through ground disturbance or the accidental discovery of sites located underwater. Where necessary, the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government will issue preservation orders to ensure protection is afforded to sites believed to be under threat.

All excavation, digging, ploughing or disturbance of the ground in proximity to National Monuments in the ownership or guardianship of the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government or of the Local Authority requires the consent in writing of the Minister (Section 14 as substituted by Section 5 of the National Monuments (Amendment) Act 2004).

Under the provisions of Section 12 of the National Monuments (Amendment) Act, 1994, any person who plans to undertake development work which may impinge upon a Recorded Monument must give 2 months written notice to the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government.

Copies of the Record of Monuments and Places are available for public consultation in the Council’s Planning Department and throughout the network of libraries in Co. Meath. County Meath has a wealth of archaeological sites ranging from cairns and passage graves to medieval churches and castles. For example, the archaeological complexes of Newgrange, Knowth, Dowth, Tara and Loughcrew are of international archaeological significance whilst the towns of Trim, Kells and Slane are also of particular archaeological significance with very important medieval structures surviving intact above ground and the potential of archaeological finds below ground.

These towns have zones of archaeological potential delineated by the National Monuments Section of the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government (DOEHLG), around their cores to protect their significant archaeological heritage.

The commitment of Meath County Council to the conservation of the prime archaeological resource in the county, namely Brú na Bóinne, can be seen in its objective to prepare an LAP in conjunction with Louth County Council for this World Heritage Site. (Refer to section 8.3.3). Meath County Council are also committed to the conservation of the Tara Skyrne area, another of the prime archaeological resources in the county. This can be seen in its objective to designate this area as a Landscape Conservation Area in conjunction with the Heritage Council.

Industrial Archaeology is also very evident in Meath. The County contains significant stretches of both operational and derelict waterways, which represent major heritage artefacts. The Planning Authority fully supports the aims of the document “Policy Paper on Ireland’s Waterway Corridors and the National Heritage” published by the Heritage Council in August 2005. The restoration of the Boyne Navigation and its unique industrial archaeological qualities remains an objective, which the Planning Authority supports and this has been acknowledged in the policy paper referred to above.

The Planning Authority also supports a detailed study into the possibility of a link between the Boyne Navigation, from its terminus at Navan, to the Royal Canal at Longwood. Meath County Council identifies the role that industry has played in the development of the County and shall seek to protect buildings and features of industrial heritage in situ and their related artefacts and plant.

The details of National Monuments and Sites with preservation orders are contained in Appendix IV. In relation to all such sites, whether Recorded Monuments or those carrying a higher status, the Planning authority recommends that potential developers consult as early as possible with the relevant agencies (such as the National Monuments division of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government) and the Planning Authority in order to ensure that archaeological concerns can be integrated into development proposals at as early a stage as possible.

Section 3 of the National Monuments (Amendment) Act 1987 makes specific provisions for the protection of shipwrecks and underwater archaeological objects. Meath’s rivers and tidal estuaries may contain such objects and any development within these areas should take into consideration the potential for archaeological discoveries.

Archaeological structures may, in some situations, also be considered as architectural heritage and, therefore, may appear on both the Record of Monuments and Places (RMP) and the Record of Protected Structures (RPS). This means that these structures are protected by both the National Monuments Acts and the Planning and Development Act 2000.

The value and significance of this archaeological heritage is acknowledged by Meath County Council and through policies contained in this Development Plan, they seek to ensure the effective protection, conservation and enhancement of archaeological sites, monuments and their settings.

(Please consult the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government’s Record of Monuments and Places for the location of Recorded Monuments and Zones of Archaeological Potential in Meath).

Policies

HER POL 56 To protect archaeological sites, monuments (including their setting), underwater archaeology and peatlands, and objects within the jurisdiction of Meath County Council, including those that are listed in the Record of Monuments and Places or newly discovered sub-surface archaeological remains.

HER POL 57 To ensure that full consideration is given to the protection of archaeological heritage when undertaking, approving or authorising development in order to avoid unnecessary conflict between development and the protection of the archaeological heritage.

HER POL 58 To ensure that all development proposals affecting sites specified in the Record of Monuments and Places or Zones of Archaeological Potential are referred to the Prescribed Bodies (as set out in the Planning and Development Act 2000) and to have regard to the advice and recommendations of the Prescribed Bodies in relation

to undertaking, approving or authorising development.

HER POL 59 To ensure that when an unrecorded archaeological object or site is discovered, any works that threaten the object or site are immediately suspended and that the appropriate Government agency is informed.

HER POL 60 To protect important archaeological landscapes in co-operation with the appropriate Government agency.

HER POL 61 To seek the preservation in situ (or at a minimum, preservation by record) of all archaeological sites or objects and their settings.

HER POL 62 To require the retention of surviving medieval plots and street patterns in the villages and towns of Meath and to record evidence of ancient boundaries, layouts, etc. in the course of development.

HER POL 63 To protect historical burial grounds within Meath and encourage their maintenance in accordance with conservation principles.

HER POL 64 To encourage and promote the appropriate management and enhancement of the County’s archaeological heritage.

HER POL 65 To protect the heritage of groups of important national monuments, inclusive of their contextual setting and interpretation, in the operation of development management.

HER POL 66 To employ the full extent of the statutory provisions of the Planning & Development Acts and Regulations and all other relevant legislation including the National Monuments Act to ensure the sustained protection of landscapes of exceptional value and sensitivity and in particular to protect the rural character, setting, amenity and archaeological heritage of Brú na Bóinne and the Hill of Tara, and of the surrounding areas including the area in the vicinity of the proposed M3 Motorway and its related Interchanges.

Objectives

HER OBJ 6 To make the Record of Monuments and Places (RMP) available to the public via the Council’s website.

HER OBJ 7 To establish in-house training programmes for Council staff carrying out repair and maintenance works to historic structures and produce a guidance note on this subject for contractors and local community groups.

HER OBJ 8 To identify appropriate archaeological sites in the County to which public access could be provided, and work to secure public access where appropriate in

consultation with the land owner.

HER OBJ 9 To undertake an inventory of the county’s industrial heritage – including canals, mills, railways and bridges.

Development Assessment Criteria

In considering developments which impact on Archaeology, the Planning Authority will:

“Meath County Council are also committed to the conservation of the Tara Skryne area, another of the prime archaeological resources in the county. This can be seen in its objective to designate this area as a Landscape Conservation Area in conjunction with the Heritage Council.”

A chart shows (13) -  ‘Tara –Skreen Area’:

Value:         Exceptional

Importance:     International

Sensitivity:     High

Section 2.8.4 of the Meath 2001 County Development Plan sought to protect the Hill of Tara and Skreen from ‘visually damaging development of proposals that would cumulatively erode landscape quality’

Section 3.6.3 of the Plan states that the area is ‘extremely sensitive to all categories of development insofar as it would detract from the character, appearance and interpretive experience of the region’.

In August 2003 (the same month that An Bord Pleanala approved the M3 route) the Department of the Environment and Local Government and Meath County council refused permission for the construction of a golf course in the Tara Skryne valley. A letter from the Department to Meath County Council in July 2003, which recommends refusal of permission, states:

“The Hill of Tara upon which the remains of over 30 monuments are visible represents on the of the nation’s most important national monuments and is of international significance. Significant to the experience and enjoyment of the Hill of Tara are the uninterrupted views of a pre-dominantly rural landscape, which enhance the symbolic and ceremonial nature of the archaeological landscape.the views to and from the Hill of Tara and the settlement at Screen (sic) are integral to the appreciation of both sites.archaeological research is ongoing on the Hill of Tara and environs and with further research, more and more sites are identified confirming that this area was for centuries the focus of ceremonial and ritual activity.”

European Convention on the Protection of the Archaeological Heritage (the ‘Valletta Convention’)

A key Government policy document, entitled, Framework and Principles for the Protection of the Architectural Heritage, produced by the Department of Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands (1999), describes the overriding policy objective in Irish archaeological practice. Article 3.0 states

“The archaeological heritage is a non-renewable resource. The first option in all circumstances must be non-destructive investigation and study. There should always be a presumption in favour of avoiding developmental impacts on the archaeological heritage.”

Article 2.2.1 of Framework and Principles for the Protection of the Architectural Heritage is entitled, “The European Convention on the Protection of the Archaeological Heritage” states:

“The 1992 European Convention on the Protection of the Archaeological Heritage (the ‘Valletta Convention’) was ratified by Ireland in 1997. The aim of the Convention is to ‘protect the archaeological heritage as a source of the European collective memory and as an instrument for historical and scientific study’ (Article 1).”

Article 4 of the Valletta Convention states: “Each Party undertakes to implement measures for the physical protection of the archaeological heritage, making provision, as circumstances demand:

    i.for the acquisition or protection by other appropriate means by the public authorities of areas intended to constitute archaeological reserves;

    ii.for the conservation and maintenance of the archaeological heritage, preferably in situ;

    iii.for appropriate storage places for archaeological remains which have been removed from their original location.”

Article 5 (iv) states that “Each Party undertakes… to make provision, when elements of the archaeological heritage have been found during development work, for their conservation in situ when feasible”;

Constitutional duty on the Irish State

The Irish Courts have recognised a constitutional duty on the State to protect heritage, and this still applies to the Hill of Tara.

“It is beyond doubt that it is a constitutional imperative that the State safeguard the national assets, including monuments of cultural and historical significance.”

- Justice Mary Laffoy, Dunne v. Minister for the Environment [2004] IEHC 304.

International human rights law

Heritage sites are protected by international human rights law, and all people have the universal right to culture and to a healthy environment. TaraWatch has signed the UN Global Compact, and is in the porcess of making complaints to the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. More information will be provided on these matters, in Part II of our submission, to be made when the Expert Advisory Panel publishes the proposed Tentative List, for public consultation.

(x) Please list any threats to the Property/Site e.g. erosion, decay, structural, waste etc.

The M3 motorway, urbanisation, commerical development, neglect, erosion.

(xi) Please list any Management Issues with regard to the Property/Site e.g. visitor management, access, traffic management,

There are two Management issues:

1. Defining the property and the buffer zone.

2. Creating an Action Plan, which will require the re-routing of the M3, as part of the Management Plan. This is necessary in order to avoid a repeat of the Stonehenge scenario, where the UK Government last year was told at the World Heritage Committee meeting in Quebec, that it had to remove the motorways adjoining the monument, or face sanctions. The UK Government pleaded that it would cost one billion pounds to remove the roads, but that cost did not deter UNESCO from insisting that the roads are moved. The sooner the M3 is moved, the less it will cost in the long run.

Paragraph 96 of the Operational Guidelines states:

Protection and management of World Heritage properties should ensure that the outstanding universal value, the conditions of integrity and/or authenticity at the time of inscription are maintained or enhanced in the future.

It is the duty of the Department of the Environment, the Minister for the Environment, the Expert Advisory Panel, ICOMOS and UNESCO to protect and manage the Hill of Tara, and to ensure the outstanding universal value, the conditions of integrity and authenticity at the time of inscription are maintained, and enhanced, by requiring the re-routing of the M3 motorway before inscription.

Section 100 of the Operational Guidelines states:

For properties nominated under criteria (i) – (vi), boundaries should be drawn to include all those areas and attributes which are a direct tangible expression of the outstanding universal value of the property, as well as those areas which in the light of future research possibilities offer potential to contribute to and enhance such understanding.

Section 101 of the Operational Guidelines states:

For properties nominated under criteria (vii) – (x), boundaries should reflect the spatial requirements of habitats, species, processes or phenomena that provide the basis for their inscription on the World Heritage List. The boundaries should include sufficient areas immediately adjacent to the area of outstanding universal value in order to protect the property’s heritage values from direct effect of human encroachments and impacts of resource use outside of the nominated area

FLAWED PUBLIC CONSULTATION

Paragraph 111. of The Operational Guidelines state:

In recognizing the diversity mentioned above, common elements of an effective management system could include:

a) a thorough shared understanding of the property by all stakeholders;

b) a cycle of planning, implementation, monitoring, evaluation and feedback;

c) the involvement of partners and stakeholders;

d) the allocation of necessary resources;

e) capacity-building; and

f) an accountable, transparent description of how the management system functions.

TaraWatch formally objects to the content and conduct of the Expert Advisory Panel. There has not been adequate public consultation, and the panel is far from ‘independent’, as the Minister claims.

PRESS RELEASE

TARAWATCH.org

18 January 2009

‘Heritage Bodies Excluded from Minister Gormley’s Advisory Group on Tentative UNESCO Sites, and Improper Public Consultation’

TaraWatch will file a complaint with Minister Gormley and UNESCO that the Expert Advisory Group, appointed by Minister Gormley to oversee the UNESCO Tentative List Review Process, is improperly constituted and is conducting a deeply flawed review process.

The Department of Arts, Sports & Tourism; The National Museum of Ireland; the National Tourism Development Authority (Fáilte Ireland); and the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland (R.S.A.I), have no membership on the Minister’s panel of experts.

The Chairperson of the Expert Advisory Group is Lord Donald Hankey, who is President of the United Kingdom chapter of the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS), who has no expertise in Irish sites. He is also Chairman of GHK International Limited (UK), private consultants in environment, governance, social policy, ports & logistics, and economic development.

TaraWatch is also objecting to the fact that one of expert panel, Dr. Jukka Jokilehto of ICOMOS International, expressed an opinion in April 2008, that the M3 would not interfere with the placement of the Hill of Tara on the Tentative List, before he had conducted his research. A press release from the Department of the Environment, 28 April 2008 stated:

“Referring to the review of the tentative list, the Minister mentioned the Hill of Tara National Monument in particular by saying “My Department recently engaged Dr Jukka Jokilehto to visit the sites currently on Ireland’s tentative list, as well as Tara. He concluded that the Hill of Tara National Monument has strong merit for inclusion in an application to UNESCO for consideration as a World Heritage site and he did not see the proposed new road as being an obstacle to making this recommendation.

Additionally, TaraWatch is complaining that legal public consultation rules were not being followed:

- There was no proper notification to the public, in national and local newspapers.

- There were no workshops, or public information events of any kind

- NGOs and civil society are not represented on the panel, other than by An Taisce, who are non-independent and funded by the Department of the Environment.

- There is only an 8 week period for consultation, which began just before the Christmas holidays, on December 1 and ends early in the new year, on January 30.

The fine print on the Department of the Environment Web site states that “Submissions should only be made on the formal proposal form”?, but said forms have not been distributed to the public, except for on the Department web site.

A TaraWatch spokesperson said:

“We are objecting to the composition and conduct of the Minister’s Expert Advisory Group, appointed to oversee the UNESCO Tentative List Review Process, on the basis that it excludes statutory bodies with responsibility for heritage a tourism, and has a chairman from the UK with no expertise in Irish heritage.

“The conduct of the group prevents the public from making submissions, due to a failure to properly advertise the process to the public, failure to distribute the mandatory forms, and failure to give adequate time to make submissions.

“One of the experts gave his opinion on the Hill of Tara and the M3 motorway before the review process even began, and he performed his inspection of the site.

“Our experts claim that Tara should be on the Tentative List, but only if the M3 is re-routed. Many of the experts and bodies that have been excluded, agree, as do the general public.

“The public have waited since the last List made in 1992 for a review of the candidates for UNESCO World Heritage status, and this group and process makes a mockery that vitally important process.

“The expert panel must be expanded to include all relevant experts on heritage, and representatives from NGOs and civil society. The consultation period should also be extended, and more basic information about it given to the public.”

ENDS

ACTION PLAN

The Operational Guidelines provide:

116. Where the intrinsic qualities of a property nominated are threatened by action of man and yet meet the criteria and the conditions of authenticity or integrity set out in paragraphs 78-95, an action plan outlining the corrective measures required should be submitted with the nomination file. Should the corrective measures submitted by the nominating State Party not be taken within the time proposed by the State Party, the property will be considered by the Committee for delisting in accordance with the procedure adopted by the Committee (see Chapter IV.C).

117. States Parties are responsible for implementing effective management activities for a World Heritage property. State Parties should do so in close collaboration with property managers, the agency with management authority and other partners, and stakeholders in property management.

The World Heritage Convention and Operational Guidelines require that an Action Plan is immediately developed, in order to protect the intrinsic qualities of the Tara complex and landscape, which are being threatened by the action of man in building the M3 motorway. Corrective measures should be taken immediately, in order to protect the integrity and authenticiy of Tara.

(xii) Ownership- Please list the relevant owners of the Property/Site, including within the core and buffer areas

The Irish Government,  Meath County Council, Coillte, and private owners.

(xiii) Name and Contact Details of Submitter

Name: Vincent Salafia

Status: Member of TaraWatch

Address: Suite 108

The Capel Building

Mary’s Abbey

Dublin 7

Tel: 087-132-3365

Email: info@gmail.com

SENT VIA EMAIL from salafia@gmail.com

Please forward completed applications to

Ms Anne Costello

Heritage Policy and Architectural Protection Section

Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government

1, Ardcavan Business Park

Ardcavan

Co. Wexford

worldheritagetentativelist@environ.ie

Closing date for receipt of submissions: 30 January 2009

APPENDIX:
Attached

FIGURES 1 & 2

Attached