tiompan
|
Re: Newgrange: quartz and granite wall
Jul 20, 2016, 13:22
|
The limits of where the quartz is predominant in the façade are K18 – K83 but it maintains the height of 3m all the way .
The quartz (was it only quartz ? the only mention I have seen says quartz /granite ) in front of K 79 extends the presence further around the mound but doesn’t contradict the O’Kelly findings of a decrease in volume which isn’t reflected in the reconstruction .
It is also problematic in terms of suggesting that it may have the result of a slip .
If only quartz we are back at the usual findings of quartz at monuments when there is no possibility of a wall , it doesn’t mean there was a 3m high near vertical revetment . Worth noting that the the quartz/granite layer was also found up against K 81 (not apparent in 0'Kelly 1982 but noted in O'Kelly 1983 ) more in keeping with the a platform ,and possibly a later one as there was nothing under collpased K96.
|
CianMcLiam
|
Re: Newgrange: quartz and granite wall
Jul 21, 2016, 09:26
|
The talk by Gabriel Cooney was pretty much along the same lines as the 2006 paper, topped up with the new publication from Ann Lynch.
One interesting thing that came up was Muiris O'Sullivan found quartz wedged in between where a kerbstone had split from the top, so at Knockroe this quartz seems to have fallen from the cairn at some point. I knew Muiris had said before that he felt it had been on the cairn but wasn't aware of the particular findings that led to that belief.
He also said that while Ann Lynch's new dates from a cattle tooth and a bronze age flake under the quartz suggested it wasn't there until the Bronze Age, finds of grooved ware on top of the quartz during the O'Kelly campaigns conflicted with this.
|
tiompan
|
Re: Newgrange: quartz and granite wall
Jul 21, 2016, 09:53
|
Thanks for the update .
Just had a quick look at the O'Sullivan paper and no mention there of the wedging . Little doubt that the quartz came from above but it's worth noting that quartz is often found wedged in fissures at rock art sites , with the suggestion is that it is intententional . It may well be in some cases but having seen a few examples I am not always convinced and much of it could be seen as being natural.
To add to the dating problems there is the lack of quartz under fallen K 96 ,which opens another can of worms .
|
CianMcLiam
|
Re: Newgrange: quartz and granite wall
Jul 26, 2016, 10:21
|
|
Tomorrow night's talk at Tara will be on Robert Hensey's theory that the roofbox and the first few orthostats at the passage entrance are a new 'extension' onto an existing passage.
|
tiompan
|
Re: Newgrange: quartz and granite wall
Jul 26, 2016, 18:26
|
|
If your'e going , could you please give us an update .
|
CianMcLiam
|
Re: Newgrange: quartz and granite wall
Jul 28, 2016, 14:02
|
Robert's talk was very insightful and well presented. His argument is that the passage was extended in a late phase enlargement of the mound, as Eogan has already shown at Knowth. The highly carved roofbox lintel that sits a couple of metres back from the present entrance marked the place where the old passage entrance was. The massive RS3 then would have been the front capstone.
As O'Kelly noted, the roofbox and the orthostats below it seem to have been built as a free-standing structure. Since the passage is on a slope the only way the passage could be extended while allowing the winter solstice alignment to function was to create the roofbox. The larger size of the six orthostats and the fact that RS1 rests directly on top of them marks this area as different from the rest of the passage.
That's pretty much the gist of it, of course the talk touched on various important aspects of the rebuilding of the roofbox and the precision required for it to function as well as antiquarian accounts of the monument before excavation and also the question of whether the alignment was known prior to the excavation which has been the whispers locally since.
BTW, I can't seem to find your email address, was going to get in touch about something else.
|
tiompan
|
Edited Jul 28, 2016, 15:53
Re: Newgrange: quartz and granite wall
Jul 28, 2016, 15:51
|
|
CianMcLiam wrote: Robert's talk was very insightful and well presented. His argument is that the passage was extended in a late phase enlargement of the mound, as Eogan has already shown at Knowth. The highly carved roofbox lintel that sits a couple of metres back from the present entrance marked the place where the old passage entrance was. The massive RS3 then would have been the front capstone.
As O'Kelly noted, the roofbox and the orthostats below it seem to have been built as a free-standing structure. Since the passage is on a slope the only way the passage could be extended while allowing the winter solstice alignment to function was to create the roofbox. The larger size of the six orthostats and the fact that RS1 rests directly on top of them marks this area as different from the rest of the passage.
That's pretty much the gist of it, of course the talk touched on various important aspects of the rebuilding of the roofbox and the precision required for it to function as well as antiquarian accounts of the monument before excavation and also the question of whether the alignment was known prior to the excavation which has been the whispers locally since.
BTW, I can't seem to find your email address, was going to get in touch about something else.
Great , thanks .
It's a reasonable suggestion .
There was the recent one , that (covered) passages in passage graves could have enhanced observation ,see http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/post/146421/news/british_isles.html
Newgrange wouldn't have been one of them , but the passage is still aligned on the solstice ,which is maybe more important than what can be "observed " .
The "put aerial life into him so that he will talk to me every day" phrase was always a cracker . Not sure if the whispers are sceptical of the alignmnet being known locally ,prior to excavation or not .
Had just sent a post to your hotmail addy ,but it bounced . Will find another .
|
