Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-rdgjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-09T04:06:17.445Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ireland's Discovery Programme: progress and prospect

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

John Waddell
John Waddell*
Affiliation:
Department of Archaeology, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Much archaeology is publicly funded, but rarely as a venture that is the personal initiative of a head of government. In this invited contribution, John Waddell (National University of Ireland, Galway) reports on the vigorous initiative of the Irish Discovery Programme since its 1991 launch. (And ANTIQUITY's editor notes the speedy rhythm of publication, in which John Waddell has had a role!)

Information

Type
Reports
Information
Antiquity , Volume 71 , Issue 273 , September 1997 , pp. 513 - 518
Copyright
Copyright © Antiquity Publications Ltd. 1997 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bhreathnach, E. 1995. Tarn: a select bibliography. Dublin: Discovery Programme/Royal Irish Academy. Discovery Programme Reports 3.Google Scholar
Eogan, G. 1997. The Discovery Programme: initiation, consolidation and development, Negentiende Kroon-Voordracht gehouden voor de Stichting NederlandsMuseum voor Anthropologie en Prahistorie. Amsterdam: Netherlands Museum voor Anthropologie en Praehistorie.Google Scholar
Newman, C., 1997. Tam: an archaeological survey. Dublin: Discovery Programme and Royal Irish Academy. Discovery Programme Reports 5.Google Scholar
Weir, D. 1995. A palynological study of landscape and agricultural development in County Louth from the second millennium BC to the first millennium AD: final report, Discovery Programme Reports 2: 77–126.Google Scholar