|
Post by Ptarmigan on Jun 5, 2008 19:04:18 GMT
Dalriada Project ~ YouTubeThe Dalriada Project
|
|
emdee
Sparrowhawk
Posts: 46
|
Post by emdee on Jun 5, 2008 23:43:02 GMT
Very commendable, but I think that the whole concept is focussing too much on the Mid-Argyll area, and thereby missing a lot of the historical region of Dalriada. Because of Dunaad, etc., this seems to be the emphasis, unless the scope of the project will widen as time goes on.
There was a lot more to the historic Dalrida than the Mid-Argyll/Lochgilphead area.
Kintyre itself obviously has the greatest connection with North Antrim, and there is a wealth of history in the peninsula alone. it would be wrong if this were not recognised.
|
|
|
Post by sarach on Jun 6, 2008 9:45:09 GMT
Emdee
Don't hold your breath - the Dalriada Project is more to do with funding expediency than accuracy. As far as I recall the impetus came from the forestry sector and they used the Dalriada moniker to lever in funding for Mid Argyll. Unfortunately this has been around for a number of years now, and a lot of people take is as gospel that Dalriada was Mid Argyll. They also continue to perpetuate the myth that Dunadd was the original capital of Dalriada when it was more likely to have been in Kintyre (e.g. Tir Fergus) and of course there are claims that the original settlement that is now Campbeltown was "the first capital of Scotland".
There are one or two people associated with the Dalriada Project who do recognise the need to have Kintyre associated with it and something might happen in relation to the Year of Homecoming, but the problem is most of the movers and shakers are either ignorant about the extent of the kingdom of Dalriada, or more alarmingly, don't actually care! (Sadly as an outsider looking in, my impression is that it is the latter...)
|
|
emdee
Sparrowhawk
Posts: 46
|
Post by emdee on Jun 6, 2008 15:38:55 GMT
Sarach These very thoughts were in my mind when I made that post, but without full background knowledge I did not want to be too cynical of the motives behind the project. The prime consideration in cultural and historical conservation and interpretation should be the history and culture itself, not where funding can be obtained from, and distortion of historical fact to procure same. Now I am being cynical!
|
|
|
Post by sarach on Jun 6, 2008 16:40:59 GMT
Emdee
It's hard not to be cynical!
I've spoken to a few people around Kintyre that are offended by this fashion for bending historical facts to fit a personal agenda. It's hard knowing what to do about it. It's dangerous if left unchecked. However, informal discussions with those on the other side tend to suggest that any attempt at debate will be a dialogue of the deaf......
That said, you would think that whoever is providing funding would be checking the accuracy of applications or adding conditions to make projects more inclusive?
One thing's for sure - confusion reigns!
|
|
emdee
Sparrowhawk
Posts: 46
|
Post by emdee on Jun 6, 2008 23:12:06 GMT
It looks like those charged with custody and disbursement of public funds do not know enough about the projects, their historical, goegraphical and social context, and their objectives. How can they then justify their position.?
|
|