An archaeologist believes the OPW's restoration works on Skellig Michael have rendered parts of the protected site 'inauthentic' and have compromised its heritage value, writes Lorna Siggins
Taoiseach Bertie Ahern hit on a highly sensitive issue when he visited Co Clare several months ago. If the Giant's Causeway and Brú na Boinne could hold Unesco world heritage status, why not the mighty Cliffs of Moher, which he compared to a "giant cathedral on our western shore".
Ironically, an actual, as distinct from metaphorical, ecclesiastical setting further down the Atlantic coastline is said to be at risk of losing its invaluable Unesco emblem. Last year, the international organisation requested a copy of the management plan for Skellig Michael - a decade after it should have been written.
In fact, there has been no such plan for the sixth century monastery, in spite of a requirement for same under Unesco world heritage guidelines since the prestigious international designation was conferred formally in December, 1996. Late last year, Minister for the Environment Dick Roche promised that "public consultation" on a "new management plan" would take place early this year, with publication of the final document in April/May.
The Department of Environment says that public consultation will follow preparation of a draft document, which is in its "final stages", and this consultation is planned for "April/May".
A management "strategy" submitted to Unesco as part of the original application, and released recently under a Freedom of Information request, involves an 11-page description of the monastic site and several appendices, included a four-page discussion on the conservation programme. A subsequent review was carried out by the Department of Environment in 2005. However, the absence of a formal plan to date has been at the heart of a row over the State's custody of the national monument.
The works programme dates back to 1978, and "major structural interventions" were required "in places" when there was "no other avenue open", the Minister said in a Dáil reply last October. However, the approach taken in these "interventions" is now the subject of intense debate in archaeological circles, since a former Office of Public Works (OPW) archaeologist, Michael Gibbons, began raising questions about it on an Institute of Archaeologists of Ireland (IAI) internet forum last year.
The specific focus for the criticisms levelled by Gibbons was the work programme on the South Peak hermitage, which began in 2004. It is so treacherous that mountaineers were required to assist in the first serious survey of the South Peak in 1984 and 1985. Details of the discovery of a hermitage, comprising three separate terraces, were published in The Forgotten Hermitage of Skellig Michael by Walter W Horn, Jenny White Marshall and Grellan D Rourke.
As the authors noted, the hermitage, comprising three terraces, had been protected by its near invisibility from anywhere on the island, and by a difficult climb, made more dangerous by the Atlantic winds and rain. Horn and his team estimated that it was built after the monastery below, sometime in the ninth century, as a retreat for those who wished to be "closer to God".
In an article due to be published in History Ireland, Gibbons says that the "present wholesale restoration/ reconstruction" of the South Peak monastic site has resulted in "a series of significant alterations to the original structures and fabric". These include, he says, "the destruction of original features on the oratory terrace without full archaeological record, including a recently discovered and exceptionally rare ninth century altar, and the inappropriate rebuilding" of some features. This has "rendered it inauthentic" and has comprised its heritage value, he concludes.
He says that Unesco has not been informed of the South Peak works, nor has any environmental impact assessment (EIA) been carried out for same. He quotes paragraph 169 in chapter four of Unesco's operational guidelines for implementation of the world heritage convention, which requires parties to submit specific reports and impact studies "each time exceptional circumstances occur, or work is undertaken which may have an effect on the state of conservation of the property".
WITH 25 YEARS of experience as a field archaeologist, and a number of publications under his belt, Gibbons has been a member of the Heritage Council's archaeology committee, and a former co-director of the National Sites and Monuments Record Office. He has worked with the Department of Antiquities in Jerusalem and for the Museum of London's City Excavation Programme. An experienced mountaineer, he knows Skellig Michael extremely well.
As he argues, even if Skellig Michael didn't have a Unesco listing, the fact that the work began before any EIA on a proposed special protected area and a statutory nature reserve (and national monument) is in breach of the EU Habitats Directive. The Heritage Council did raise concerns in 2004, he says, but was over-ruled on the grounds that the national monument was in State ownership and the conservation and "consolidation" didn't require planning permission.
He contrasts this approach with the level of regulation on other projects and cites, for example, the case of repairs on an 18th-century roof in Co Roscommon. Roscommon County Council sought a conservation report and an archaeological assessment before approving the repairs.
Critical features have been destroyed both on the South Peak and in the lower main monastic complex, Gibbons says, and have been replaced with "replicas" of no cultural value. Original stonework has also been replaced, and within the main monastery, an altar that was used by pilgrims into the middle of the 20th century was removed. This was justified on the grounds that it was built by 19th-century lighthouse keepers who lived for a time on the rock. "Not only is this sacrilege," Gibbons says, "it is also contrary to the Venice Charter, which deals with restoration."
In a detailed response to the IAI forum last year, OPW archaeological and architectural staff comprising Grellan D Rourke, Dr Ann Lynch and Edward Bourke refuted Gibbons's criticisms, which they described as "ill-informed and unjustified".
The project team was highly skilled and multi-disciplinary, they stated, and any drystone work by masons was inspected by an architect and archaeologist. They emphasised that the "highest standards" were being met.
MINISTER FOR THE Environment Dick Roche told Labour TD Ruairí Quinn in a Dáil reply last October that all archaeological works were carried out with ministerial consent under the National Monuments Act, and there was "no question" of a ninth century altar being destroyed. The joint OPW/departmental team responsible for conservation and preservation works on the South Peak comprised professionals who are "highly qualified and experienced", including a conservation architect and archaeologist specialising in the early Christian period, he said.
Gibbons believes the OPW's approach is influenced by an "architectural urge to rebuild and remodel", which conflicts with the "archaeological imperative to acquire and preserve the original data in an accurate form".
Commissioning a management plan now is akin to closing the proverbial stable door after the horse has bolted, he says. What's worse, the State is treating the Unesco and EU Habitats Directive designations as "marketing tools and status symbols", rather than as "central vehicles for the management of the site".
John Whelan, a senior lecturer in archaeology at University College Cork believes that while some of Gibbons's criticisms are justified, many of his concerns are "unfair". Whelan is also very familiar with South Peak, and is aware the island is "infested" with puffins and rabbits - both of which burrow, he points out.
"They can do more damage than a bulldozer, so the quality of archaeology is very poor as a result of the natural wildlife process, and a certain amount of stabilisation has been required," he says.
The OPW hired one of the leading experts in island monastic sites to excavate, he says, and the conservation that follows excavation is "always going to leave a location looking different", he notes. "It can take 30 to 40 years for the lichen to grow again."
The involvement of the OPW with Skellig Michael over the last 20 years has been positive, he says, and it is the only State body holding statutory responsibility for ensuring its long-term care.