Deputy Bruton has received permission to raise on the Adjournment the delay in publication of the archaeological survey carried out by the Office of Public Works in respect of counties in regard to which the survey is complete.
Adjournment Debate. - Archaeological Survey.
The archaeology survey was begun in 1963. It is concerned with all ancient monuments in the country, to mark them out in a comprehensive manner so that we will know what monuments exist and, in other words, to find out and establish in one document our physical heritage. The survey was being carried out on a county by county basis. As far as I know, only three countries have been completed so far in almost 20 years—County Louth, County Meath and County Monaghan. One might be forgiven for saying that the rate of progress has been less than speedy. I think work has commenced on three other countries—Westmeath, Longford and Cavan. Notwithstanding that the survey is proceeding slowly—I suggest it should proceed much faster—there is strong argument for publishing what has been done already in respect of these three countries. I understand that the County Louth survey has been completed for more than ten years and has been gathering dust on the shelves of the Office of Public Works where nobody except the staff can see the result of ten years' work in surveying the ancient monuments of County Louth. The same applies, only for a lesser period, in regard to the survey done in my own County Meath and in County Monaghan. It seems to be a great waste of public resources that the Board of Works should do a survey of this nature of something which is of intense public interest and allow that survey to remain unpublished particularly when one bears in mind, given that the survey has been in operation for almost 20 years and has involved staff of various grades up to probably ten people, that it has probably cost about £500,000 or more over the entire period. This is a considerable amount of money and that the result of the expenditure of such a sum of money should not be available to public inspection is to my mind a matter of some concern, whether the information is of great interest or not.
There are other arguments for publishing the survey. First, publishing the results of the survey of the counties in which it has been carried out would make available to people all over the world information which is not now available in a comprehensive form about all our ancient monuments, ring forts, medieval sites and other material of immence interest. There are more remains of Celtic civilisation in this country than in any other and there is intense international interest in these remains. Yet people who want a comprehensive guide to all the available sites in this country cannot get it because it has not been published notwithstanding that the Board of Works has been collecting that information for 20 years. If the survey were published it would lead to much greater international interest in Irish archaeology and would boost tourism because people like to see things of archaeological interest when on holiday. If there were more interest internationally as a result of the publication of this survey in Irish archaeological remains and more international discussion of the subject, more tourists would come here. Therefore, publication of the document would contribute to tourism.
Publication of the survey would greatly assist in preventing the destruction of many national monuments. In the course of land reclamation work particularly, and also other developments, large numbers of monuments are being destroyed. Ancient monuments which cannot be replaced are being bulldozed. In one parish of Nobber in north County Meath an archaeologist who recently carried out a survey there discovered that in that small parish six ring forts had been destroyed which had been previously recorded as existing there. In County Wicklow there are records of 16 medieval moated sites, but in a recent survey it was shown that only two or three of them still exist. The remaining 13 or 14 have disappeared in the course of land reclamation.
Officers of the Department of Agriculture who are concerned with giving grants for land reclamation are very anxious to stop this kind of activity as also are local people, I feel sure, but at present they do not have the power, the ability or the knowledge to do so because they have no list of the relevant sites which they can consult and say: "There is a site of particular interest on Johnny Murphy's farm at Nobber and if any agricultural development takes place in that area we must ensure that nothing happens to destroy this particular monument." Such a document could be on the shelves of the county council planning department so that any planning application in respect of any townland and inrespect of which there was an entry in the book could be immediately checked to ensure that nothing in the planning application could destroy the ancient monument. The same result could be achieved by having the survey available to the farm development service so that any land reclamation work in a townland could be cross-checked to ensure that it would not interfere with any previously recorded monument.
That information is not now available in that form and, unless either the county council planning officials or the Department of Agriculture inspectors actually see in the course of approving the proposed work that there is a monument of some interest there, they can do nothing about stopping that work. Most of them are not trained to recognise such monuments and, perfectly innocently, might easily approve, even while intending to avoid such a situation, a particular land reclamation programme or housing development which would interfere with the monument without knowing they were doing so. These monuments are not always things that stand up; they may very well be underground. If the project is approved, the work is done and by the time the Board of Works discover this the monument is gone. If the survey were published and available to all these official agencies this situation could be avoided without any inspection, by simply looking up the book to see if there was a recorded monument in the townland concerned and ensuring that any development work did not interfere with the monument. That would be of immense benefit.
The rate of destruction of these monuments is alarming in this country. I would say that up to half the monuments in parts of rural Ireland have already been destroyed. There was a tremendous furore about the destruction of Wood Quay but I believe far more destruction is taking place every day in other parts of the country without any public controversy and without measures being taken to prevent it. I should like to see this interest extended and, if the survey were published as I propose, it would be a useful contribution. If there were frequent publications of this work it would improve the whole ethos and the morale of the national monuments section of the Board of Works. If they were working towards specific publications for specific counties there would be much more impetus to get the work done. At the moment they are producing a survey on particular monuments in the knowledge that when the work is done and everything is completed painstakingly all that will happen is that the report will remain on a shelf and not be published. It would be surprising if the archaeologists engaged in the survey were not a little demoralised—in County Louth their work has been completed for almost ten years but has not yet been published—by the fact that they are not working towards any particular target at all.
I know the Minister for Finance gave a commitment to publish this survey in reply to a question I put to him about six months ago. I am raising this matter again not because I belive that there is any suggestion that his successor would wish to go back on the commitment previously given—I am sure he would wish to honour it—but to get the maximum pressure brought to bear on having this material published quickly. Although a government may decide to publish something, unless continued pressure is put on them it may not be published for many years. I hope in raising this matter this evening that I will be able to get this survey published quickly.
The Archaeological Survey of the Republic was initiated in 1963, and field work commenced in 1965 in County Louth. The aim of the survey is the systematic recording of all monuments in the country, (a) to enable the Commissioners to formulate a comprehensive programme for the protection and preservation of monuments of national importance and (b) as an aid towards historical studies.
The survey is in two parts, first, an inventory of all monuments of every period and second, a scientific survey of each monument depending on its state of preservation. It is intended that the results of the survey will be published and the question of publication is being actively considered at present but no indication can be given at this stage as to when publication will take place.
The Archaeological Survey has been completed in Louth, Monaghan and Meath. The survey of Westmeath will be completed in 1980. In Longford, Cavan, Kildare, Dublin and Offaly preliminary surveys have been carried out.
Through lack of suitably qualified staff, either architects or architectural historians, it has not yet been possible to undertake the scientific survey of architectural monuments. Recently, however, an architectural historian (senior archaeologist) has been allocated to the preparation of the preliminary inventory for County Dublin. The authorised fulltime staff of the survey until recently was one senior archaeologist, two archaeologists and three surveyors, working under the general guidance of the Chief Archaeologist. However, to expedite the work two additional archaeologists and a draftsman have been released from the general staff of the National Monuments Section and have been temporarily assigned to the survey in recent years.
Much preparatory work for the publication of the survey for the counties where the field work has been completed has been done. However, strength of the survey staff up to now did not allow of any archaeologists being assigned fulltime to this task. The momentum of the field work had to be maintained and, if staff were diverted from this, many more monuments would have been destroyed before they were reached. The survey material however was availed of all the time to afford protection to threatened monuments brought to notice through the Department of Agriculture's inspectors, Land Commission inspectors, local authorities and conservation interests. In the past ten years 269 monuments in the counties where the survey has been in operation have been afforded legal protection, 223 subject to listing order and 46 subject to preservation order.
The Department of the Public Service have sanctioned additional staff for the survey as follows: one senior archaeologist, three archaeologists and two surveyors, to enable an additional survey team to be set up and to allow of one archaeologist being assigned to preparing survey material for publication. When these posts are filled, greater progress will be made both in the field work and towards publication of the survey in respect of the counties where the field work had been completed.
Would the Minister try to have the first one published as quickly as possible?
The Dáil adjourned at 5.20 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 26 February 1980.