James Maclennan
|
Isle Maree - Scotland - Disputed Antiquity
Nov 13, 2019, 18:35
|
I would like to add some photos and narrative that might cast some light on the dispute, the well and coin tree are most certainly young (I believe the tree to be Victorian) but there are two graves that are certainly of Nordic Origin and are relatively old, there are also citations of this site being used by the Picts. I visited the Island this spring and found the coin tree to be dead and lying on the ground and no evidence of the well. There are crossed slabs estimated to be from the 8th century, the photos seem to tie in with diagrams I have seen in texts.
Excuse my ignorance as I am new to TMA but would this site merit being put back into an antiquity category with the well and tree being disputed?
Thanks in advance :)
|
thesweetcheat
|
Re: Isle Maree - Scotland - Disputed Antiquity
Nov 13, 2019, 18:44
|
Nordic and Pictish are too young for TMA really, it only includes prehistoric sites. The cut-off for British sites* is when the Romans arrived, which is obviously problematic in Scotland, where they didn't :)
Basically you're fine with Iron Age and we've certainly nudged into Romano-British a few times (Chysauster is an example of the latter).
*The cut-off for the Med etc would be much earlier of course.
|
thesweetcheat
|
Re: Isle Maree - Scotland - Disputed Antiquity
Nov 13, 2019, 18:47
|
PS, wells are notoriously difficult to date, on the basis that most have a medieval or post-medieval well structure but may be the site of a much earlier site. I think they're kind of tolerated on here with the "disputed" tag.
Goffik would be yer man for more info on them though.
|
James Maclennan
|
Re: Isle Maree - Scotland - Disputed Antiquity
Nov 13, 2019, 18:52
|
|
thesweetcheat wrote: Nordic and Pictish are too young for TMA really, it only includes prehistoric sites. The cut-off for British sites* is when the Romans arrived, which is obviously problematic in Scotland, where they didn't :)
Basically you're fine with Iron Age and we've certainly nudged into Romano-British a few times (Chysauster is an example of the latter).
*The cut-off for the Med etc would be much earlier of course.
Thanks for clarifying!! I will do a bit more digging but it looks like one for Flicker rather than TMA :)
|
thesweetcheat
|
Re: Isle Maree - Scotland - Disputed Antiquity
Nov 13, 2019, 18:57
|
|
Well, if the site's already on here it sounds like an excuse to add some pictures anyway :)
|
James Maclennan
|
Re: Isle Maree - Scotland - Disputed Antiquity
Nov 13, 2019, 19:12
|
|
thesweetcheat wrote: Well, if the site's already on here it sounds like an excuse to add some pictures anyway :)
I would love to but I cant find out how to, I was wondering if it was in the disputed category perhaps photos were not allowed??
|
thesweetcheat
|
Re: Isle Maree - Scotland - Disputed Antiquity
Nov 13, 2019, 19:33
|
No, you should be able to add to disputed sites.
Having said that though, some newer contributors were having trouble adding photos (and indeed any site posts at all) a few months ago, it sounds like it may not have been fixed.
If there are no photos on a site at all yet (as is the case with Isle of Maree), there should be a drop-down thing on the lower right of the page above the folklore etc posts that says -Add-. From that list you should be able to choose "Add photo", which opens another page where you add the details and your jpeg from wherever it's filed.
If you can't see the -Add- drop-down, that suggests you might have the same problem others have reported before. All I can suggest is emailing [email protected] to see if he can help.
|
James Maclennan
|
Re: Isle Maree - Scotland - Disputed Antiquity
Nov 14, 2019, 12:31
|
|
Thanks for the advice, i do not have this add icon so I will email TMA and try to get a fix, even if what is there now is not strictly of an age the island was very likely revered for thousands of years and it (at the risk of sounding clichéd) has a very special feel about it!! :)
|
