Newgrange forum 26 room
Image by CianMcLiam
close
more_vert

There is no problem about the walls standing at Gavrinis , Petit Mont, Barnenez etc.. They used walling , something entirely different from quartz cobbles ,and suited for the job .

It shouldn’t be difficult to work out the volume of quartz used in the façade then compare it with what had been discovered at the site .
O’ Kelly commented “"A good quantity was shattered and could not be used " on the facade ,and how the volume " decreased gradually in amount and extent " ,whereas the facde maintains a solid homogenous wall . Where did it come from ? It doesn’t quite add up .
If nothing else it shows that what see was not typical of the finds .But even what we see ,i.e. the more usable stuff , still needs the steel and concrete to stay up .

I'm not sure what the motive would be to bring extra quartz in though? All O'Kelly maintained was that the passage tomb had been drum shaped and that quartz had been used on the front facing. Whether that was for 1/3 of the diameter or almost half shouldn't matter to him. In fact he even let the tourist board decide to cut into the entrance area and he finished this in limestone rather than quartz to show it wouldn't have looked like that.

Surely in all this time someone would have said 'yes, I drove the truck with all the quartz' or 'I saw a pile of quartz being dropped off'. This is the most controversial reconstruction in Irish history and O'Kelly has had more than his share of critics and character assassins, yet no one has dug up this smoking gun? The whole O'Kelly archive was opened up a few years ago, this would be a big operation to leave out.