EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Investigating the character of early medieval archaeological excavations, 1970-2002

Aidan O'Sullivan and Lorcan Harney Report for The Heritage Council
January 2008
(Revised Edition)

AN C HOMHAIRLE O IDHREACHTA

T HE H ERITAGE C OUNC IL

UCD School of Archaeology

Early Medieval Archaeology Project: Investigating the character of early medieval archaeological excavations, 1970­2002

by Aidan O’Sullivan and Lorcan Harney, UCD School of Archaeology January 2008
Funded by The Heritage Council Archaeological Research Grants 2007 and UCD Seed Funding 2007 Scheme

Edited from Original Report for The Heritage Council

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Contents

LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................VIII LIST OF FIGURES.....................................................................................................IX ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................XI PREFACE TO RE­EDITED EMAP REPORT................................................................ XII EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..........................................................................................XIII

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION.............................................................. 1
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................1 THE EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT (EMAP).....................................1 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES OF EMAP 1..................................................................2 SCOPE OF EMAP 1 .......................................................................................2 STRUCTURE OF EMAP 1 REPORT.....................................................................3 SOURCES OF INFORMATION FOR EMAP1 ..........................................................3
Excavations Bulletin .................................................................................................. 3 Issues with the Excavations Bulletin ........................................................................... 4 Other Published Information ...................................................................................... 4

OTHER USEFUL SOURCES ...............................................................................5 THE LEGACY OF EARLY MEDIEVAL EXCAVATION .................................................5 LEGISLATION AND PROTECTED SITES AND MONUMENTS ......................................6 THE CHARACTER OF EARLY MEDIEVAL EXCAVATIONS ..........................................6

Consequences........................................................................................................... 7

CHAPTER 2. DESIGNING THE EMAP DATABASE ................................. 9
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................9 THE ‘SITE’ FORM IN THE EMAP 1 DATABASE .....................................................9
The Character of Potential Early Medieval ‘Sites’ ......................................................... 9 EMAP Site Definition................................................................................................ 10 Early medieval ‘sites in Rural Contexts.................................................................. 10 Early medieval ‘sites’ in rural towns and villages.................................................... 11 Early medieval ‘sites in Hiberno­Norse Towns ....................................................... 12 Site Classification: EMAP Class Field ......................................................................... 12 Site Categorisation: Category Field........................................................................... 12 Site Categorisation: Environs of Category Field ......................................................... 13 Locational Information ............................................................................................ 13 SMR Monument Numbers and Classes ...................................................................... 14 ‘Synopsis’ ............................................................................................................... 14 ‘Other Publications’ ................................................................................................. 15 ‘Highly Significant’ ................................................................................................... 15 ‘Significant’ ............................................................................................................. 15 General .................................................................................................................. 16 Uncertain................................................................................................................ 16 No Significance ....................................................................................................... 16 License Field Information......................................................................................... 16 Tick Boxes .............................................................................................................. 17 Activities................................................................................................................. 18 Monuments, Structures and Artefacts ....................................................................... 18 EMAP Stage 1 Data Collection .................................................................................. 18

‘SIGNIFICANCE’ CRITERIA ...........................................................................15

‘LICENSE’ FORM .........................................................................................16

ASSESSING THE EXCAVATED MATERIAL ..........................................................18

i

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Contents

DATABASE MANAGEMENT ISSUES AND POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS ...........................19
EMAP Stage 1 Data Management ............................................................................. 19 EMAP Stage 1 Data Issues....................................................................................... 20 Potential Solutions .................................................................................................. 21 Locational and License­specific details ...................................................................... 22 Archaeological Bibliography ..................................................................................... 22

CHAPTER 3. THE CHARACTER OF EARLY MEDIEVAL EXCAVATIONS IN IRELAND, 1970­2002........................................................................ 23
INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................23 EARLY MEDIEVAL EXCAVATIONS 1970­2002 .................................................23

THE RATE OF EXCAVATIONS UNDERTAKEN ANNUALLY BY ARCHAEOLOGICAL ORGANISATIONS IN IRELAND .......................................................................30

Early Medieval Excavations Annually 1970­2002........................................................ 23 Annual Excavations per County ................................................................................ 27 The Character and Scale of Excavations in the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland .............................................................................................................................. 29 The Character and Scale of Excavations in the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland .............................................................................................................................. 29

EXCAVATION TYPE ......................................................................................35 SIGNIFICANCE OF SITES ..............................................................................42 SCHEMES AND INFRASTRUCTURAL PROJECTS ...................................................49 THE CHANGING CHARACTER OF EARLY MEDIEVAL EXCAVATIONS IN IRELAND, 1970­ 2002 .......................................................................................................54 WHAT EARLY MEDIEVAL SITES WERE EXCAVATED 1970­2002? A SUMMARY OF MAIN FINDINGS ..................................................................................................54 SITE CATEGORIES .......................................................................................54 EXCAVATED SITES, MONUMENTS AND STRUCTURES ..........................................57

University Excavations and associated Excavation Licenses........................................ 32 State­funded Excavations and associated Excavation Licenses ................................... 33 Commercial Excavations and associated Excavation Licenses ..................................... 34 Excavation Types Annually....................................................................................... 36 Excavation Types per County ................................................................................... 40 Excavations Annually and Sites of Different Significance ............................................ 44 Significance of Sites per County ............................................................................... 47 Significance of Sites in which excavations were undertaken along Schemes/Projects ... 50 Excavations Types along Schemes/Projects .............................................................. 52

Excavated Site Categories........................................................................................ 55 Excavations environs of Site Category ...................................................................... 56

CHAPTER 4. EARLY MEDIEVAL DWELLINGS, SETTLEMENTS AND LANDSCAPES..................................................................................... 59
INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................59 EARLY MEDIEVAL RURAL SETTLEMENT A.D. 400­1170 .....................................59 EARLY MEDIEVAL CASHELS ...........................................................................61 EARLY MEDIEVAL RINGFORTS........................................................................62
Excavated Rural Settlement Sites 1970­2002 ............................................................ 60 Background ............................................................................................................ 61 EMAP Results.......................................................................................................... 61 Background ............................................................................................................ 62 Definition............................................................................................................ 62 EMAP and Ringforts Excavated 1970­2002................................................................ 63 Archaeological Significance of Excavated ringforts (incl. Raised and Platform)............. 64 Interpreting the archaeology of early medieval ringforts ............................................ 65 Origins and chronology........................................................................................ 65

ii

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Contents

OTHER EARLY MEDIEVAL ENCLOSURES ............................................................75 THE EXCAVATED EVIDENCE FOR THE SOCIAL STATUS OF EARLY MEDIEVAL RINGFORTS ...............................................................................................................76

Morphology and form .......................................................................................... 66 Social and economic function............................................................................... 67 Distribution and siting ......................................................................................... 67 Stout’s normative models of ringfort morphology and social hierarchies.................. 68 The Cultural Biographies of ringforts .................................................................... 69 Seeds of Doubt: Non­circular enclosures................................................................... 71 An appraisal of the evidence................................................................................ 72 Chronology and Occupation ................................................................................. 73 The Cultural Biographies of Non­Circular Enclosures.............................................. 73 Size.................................................................................................................... 74 Topography ........................................................................................................ 74 Material Culture and Status.................................................................................. 74 A new settlement type or not? ............................................................................. 75

EARLY MEDIEVAL SETTLEMENT/CEMETERY SITES ..............................................78

Ringforts of low status social groups ........................................................................ 76 Ringforts of ordinary farmers ................................................................................... 77 Ringforts of nobility and prosperous farmers............................................................. 77 Early medieval royal sites ........................................................................................ 78 Introduction............................................................................................................ 78 Enclosure size and morphology ................................................................................ 79 The origins of the enclosed cemetery and settlement ................................................ 80 Chronology ............................................................................................................. 81 The Relationship between the Cemetery and Settlement ........................................... 81 Form and extent of settlement................................................................................. 83 The Extent of Burial Evidence .................................................................................. 83 Functions................................................................................................................ 83 Distribution............................................................................................................. 84 Definition................................................................................................................ 84 EMAP Survey and early medieval crannogs excavated 1970­2002 .............................. 85 Origins and Chronology ........................................................................................... 86 Distribution............................................................................................................. 87 Morphology and Construction .................................................................................. 87 Social and Economic Function .................................................................................. 87 Background ............................................................................................................ 89 EMAP survey and promontory forts excavated 1970­2002.......................................... 89 The social, economic and ideological role of early medieval promontory forts ............. 89 Background ............................................................................................................ 91 Distribution............................................................................................................. 91 EMAP survey and souterrains excavated 1970­2002 .................................................. 91 The chronology of souterrains.................................................................................. 92 Radiocarbon dating ............................................................................................. 92 Souterrains and building form: An indicator of possible date .................................. 93 Souterrains and Unenclosed Settlements .................................................................. 93 Souterrains and Ringforts ........................................................................................ 95 Souterrains and other enclosures ............................................................................. 96 Souterrains and cashels........................................................................................... 97 Souterrains and Promontory forts............................................................................. 97 Souterrains and Settlement/Cemetery Sites .............................................................. 97 Souterrains and Ecclesiastical Sites .......................................................................... 97 Associations with other sites .................................................................................... 98 Souterrains and the phasing of early medieval enclosed sites .................................... 99

EARLY MEDIEVAL CRANNOGS ........................................................................84

EARLY MEDIEVAL PROMONTORY FORTS ...........................................................89

EARLY MEDIEVAL SOUTERRAINS ....................................................................91

iii

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Contents

EARLY MEDIEVAL UNENCLOSED SETTLEMENTS ................................................100
Background .......................................................................................................... 100 Rural Unenclosed Settlement; Souterrains with no associated buildings .................... 100 Rural Unenclosed Settlement; Souterrains with associated Buildings ........................ 101 Rural Unenclosed Settlements – unenclosed sites with early medieval buildings and objects ................................................................................................................. 102 Rural unenclosed settlements within field systems .................................................. 104 Background .......................................................................................................... 105 EMAP survey and excavations of early medieval shell middens, 1970­2002 ............... 106 Homes of the Poor or Specialised Craftworking Sites?.............................................. 107 Background .......................................................................................................... 107 EMAP survey and excavated caves, 1970­2002 ....................................................... 107 Background .......................................................................................................... 108 Discussion and areas for future research ................................................................ 109 Background .......................................................................................................... 110 EMAP and Viking raiding periods: the archaeology of the early Viking Longphort....... 112 EMAP and the archaeology of the Viking/Hiberno­Norse Towns................................ 113 Viking/Hiberno­Norse town defences ...................................................................... 113 Viking rural settlements and the archaeology of Dyflinaskiri..................................... 114 Viking Age rural miscellaneous finds 1970­2002 ...................................................... 115 Other potential Viking/Hiberno­Norse coastal settlements........................................ 116 Conclusion and Areas of Research.......................................................................... 116 Background .......................................................................................................... 118 EMAP and early medieval rural buildings................................................................. 119 Previous research.............................................................................................. 119 EMAP rural building survey ................................................................................ 119 Early medieval rural buildings – form and character ............................................ 120 Early medieval rural buildings shape................................................................... 121 Viking/Hiberno­Norse Buildings .............................................................................. 122 Previous Surveys............................................................................................... 122 EMAP Survey and Viking/Hiberno­Norse Buildings ............................................... 122 The character of Viking Type Buildings ............................................................... 123 EMAP Viking Type building results ...................................................................... 123 Conclusions .......................................................................................................... 125

EARLY MEDIEVAL UNENCLOSED COASTAL OCCUPATION SITES (SHELL MIDDENS)...105

EARLY MEDIEVAL OCCUPATION AND USE OF CAVES ..........................................107 THE ENIGMA OF EARLY MEDIEVAL SETTLEMENT AT THE END OF THE PERIOD? .......108 THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF VIKING SETTLEMENT, AD 800­1200............................110

EARLY MEDIEVAL BUILDINGS ......................................................................118

CHAPTER 5. THE EARLY MEDIEVAL CHURCH ................................. 128
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................128
Early Ecclesiastical Research .................................................................................. 128 Swan’s Criteria for identification of early ecclesiastical sites ..................................... 129 Issues with Swan’s Criteria .................................................................................... 129 Additional Ecclesiastical Criteria.............................................................................. 130 Excavated Ecclesiastical Sites 1970­2002 ................................................................ 131 Distribution of Excavated Ecclesiastical Sites 1970­2002 .......................................... 131 Significance of Excavated Ecclesiastical Sites 1970­2002.......................................... 132 Excavated Ecclesiastical Structures 1970­2002 ........................................................ 133 The Origins and Location of Ecclesiastical Sites ....................................................... 134 Previous Research and the Development of Ecclesiastical Sites ................................ 135

EMAP SURVEY AND ECCLESIASTICAL ARCHAEOLOGY .......................................131

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE EARLY IRISH CHURCH (5­9TH CENTURY A.D.) .....................................................................................................136

Enclosures ............................................................................................................ 136

iv

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Contents

THE MONASTIC TOWN DEBATE ...................................................................138 THE EVIDENCE FOR PASTORAL CARE AND AGRICULTURAL ESTATES ...................140

Wooden Churches and Structures .......................................................................... 137 Agriculture, Craftworking and Pottery ..................................................................... 138 Conclusion............................................................................................................ 138 The debate – a brief outline................................................................................... 138 How can archaeology contribute?........................................................................... 139 Background .......................................................................................................... 140 Mortared stone churches ....................................................................................... 140 Drystone churches in peninsular Kerry.................................................................... 140

EARLY MEDIEVAL CHURCH ARCHAEOLOGY ­ FUTURE RESEARCH AREAS ................141 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................143 BACKGROUND ..........................................................................................143 BURYING THE DEAD IN EARLY MEDIEVAL IRELAND – HOW WAS THE CORPSE TREATED? ...............................................................................................143 EARLY MEDIEVAL BURIAL AND THE USE OF ANNULAR BURIAL ENCLOSURES/RING­ TH DITCHES (5­7 CENTURY A.D.) ..................................................................145

CHAPTER 6. EARLY MEDIEVAL BURIALS AND CEMETERIES .......... 143

EARLY MEDIEVAL BURIALS AND STANDING STONES (5­7TH CENTURIES A.D.) .....149 EARLY MEDIEVAL MOUND BURIALS (5­7TH CENTURY A.D.) ...............................150

Introduction.......................................................................................................... 145 Early Medieval burial in Penannular Enclosures/Ring­Ditches.................................... 145 Early Medieval Burial in Annular Enclosures/Ring­Ditches......................................... 146 Early Medieval Burial in Ancient Ring­Barrows ......................................................... 147 The Origins and Chronology of the Iron Age/Early Medieval Annular Burial Enclosure 148 The abandonment of Iron Age/early medieval transition annular enclosures as we move on into the early medieval period ........................................................................... 149 The Evidence for Standing Stones and Iron Age/early medieval transition Burial ....... 149 Continuity of burial on into the early medieval period .............................................. 150 The Evidence for Transitional Mound Burials ........................................................... 150 Ad hoc burial and the concept of the ‘burial mound’ ................................................ 151 Continuity of burial into the early medieval period................................................... 151

EARLY MEDIEVAL BURIAL AND PREHISTORIC MOUNDS AND CAIRNS (5­7TH CENTURY A.D.) .....................................................................................................152

ENCLOSURES AS FOCI OF EARLY BURIAL ........................................................153 EARLY MEDIEVAL UNENCLOSED CEMETERIES ..................................................154

The evidence for the re­use of prehistoric monuments by Iron Age/early medieval transition burials ................................................................................................... 152 Continuity into the early medieval period ................................................................ 153 The Evidence ........................................................................................................ 153 The evidence: unenclosed cemeteries .................................................................... 154 The evidence: unenclosed cemeteries located along gravel ridges/mounds ............... 155 Burial across the early medieval period................................................................... 155

UNDATED ENCLOSED CEMETERIES ...............................................................156 ISOLATED UNENCLOSED BURIALS ................................................................156 THE ANCESTRAL DEAD: INTERPRETING IRON AGE/EARLY MEDIEVAL TRANSITIONAL AND EARLY MEDIEVAL BURIAL PRACTICES .....................................................157

EARLY MEDIEVAL ‘SETTLEMENT/CEMETERIES’ – THE ENIGMATIC ROLE OF BURIAL GROUNDS WITHIN SETTLEMENTS .................................................................159

Burials in the landscape: natural landmarks and ferta cemeteries: hill­tops, gravel ridges and waterways ..................................................................................................... 157 Who was buried? The burial rite............................................................................. 157 Early medieval Anglo­Saxon burials and contacts .................................................... 158

Re­introduction ­ settlement/cemeteries size and morphology ................................. 159

v

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Contents

EARLY MEDIEVAL ECCLESIASTICAL BURIAL GROUNDS – THE EMERGING ROLE OF CHURCH GRAVEYARDS ...............................................................................162

Chronology ........................................................................................................... 160 The Relationship between the Cemetery and Settlement ......................................... 160 Early medieval settlement/cemeteries – some emerging research questions ............. 161

VIKING/NORSE FURNISHED BURIAL PRACTICES .............................................165

Background .......................................................................................................... 162 The origins of Christian ecclesiastical cemeteries and their relationship with earlier ferta cemeteries............................................................................................................ 162 Early Medieval Ecclesiastical Cemeteries ................................................................. 164 EMAP survey and excavated early medieval ecclesiastical cemeteries ....................... 164 Significant Excavated Ecclesiastical Cemeteries ................................................... 164 Ecclesiastical Cemeteries and Burial Rites ........................................................... 165 Background .......................................................................................................... 165 Viking Burials in Viking/Hiberno­Norse Dyflin .......................................................... 166 Viking/Norse burials in Dyflinarskiri ........................................................................ 166 Viking/Norse burials in coastal and rural Ireland...................................................... 167 Viking/Norse Burial Rite ......................................................................................... 167 Viking Burial and ‘Irish’ ecclesiastical Sites .............................................................. 167

THE LIVING AND DEAD IN EARLY MEDIEVAL IRELAND: SOME FUTURE RESEARCH AREAS .............................................................................................................168

The people of early medieval Ireland – in life and death.......................................... 168

CHAPTER 7. EARLY MEDIEVAL AGRICULTURE AND ECONOMY ..... 170
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................170 SOURCES OF EVIDENCE ..............................................................................170 RE­INVENTING AGRICULTURE IN EARLY MEDIEVAL IRELAND ............................171
Livestock and Dairying .......................................................................................... 171 Archaeology of crop cultivation .............................................................................. 172 Interpreting early medieval agriculture ................................................................... 172

EMAP AND THE EVIDENCE FOR THE PLOUGH IN EARLY MEDIEVAL IRELAND .........173 EMAP AND THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL EXCAVATION OF RIDGE AND FURROWS ..........174 EARLY MEDIEVAL HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL MILLS ......................................175 EARLY MEDIEVAL CORN­DRYING KILNS .........................................................176

Previous Studies ................................................................................................... 174 EMAP survey and ridge and furrows ....................................................................... 174 Previous Studies ................................................................................................... 175 Background .......................................................................................................... 176 Function ............................................................................................................... 176 Kiln Types ............................................................................................................ 176 Early medieval kilns – some chronological issues..................................................... 176 EMAP survey and early medieval kiln excavations.................................................... 177 Discussion of EMAP analyses of kilns ...................................................................... 179 Background .......................................................................................................... 180 Upland and Lowland Field Systems......................................................................... 181 EMAP survey and field systems and unenclosed settlements .................................... 181 EMAP survey, field systems/Enclosures and associated monuments ......................... 182 Isolated field systems/enclosures ........................................................................... 182 Previous Studies ................................................................................................... 183 EMAP survey and some potential early medieval burnt mounds................................ 184 Previous Excavations ............................................................................................. 184 EMAP survey and early medieval trackways ............................................................ 185 Research Areas ..................................................................................................... 185

EARLY MEDIEVAL FIELD SYSTEMS AND ENCLOSURES ........................................180

EARLY MEDIEVAL BURNT MOUNDS ..............................................................183 EARLY MEDIEVAL TRACKWAYS IN WETLANDS .................................................184

vi

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Contents

EARLY MEDIEVAL COASTAL AND ESTUARINE FISHTRAPS ...................................186
Background .......................................................................................................... 186 Early medieval fishtraps......................................................................................... 186 Early medieval fishtraps on Strangford Lough ......................................................... 187 Early medieval fishtraps on the Shannon estuary .................................................... 188

CONCLUSIONS..........................................................................................188

CHAPTER 8. EARLY MEDIEVAL CRAFTS AND TECHNOLOGY – A FOCUS ON IRONWORKING............................................................. 190
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................190 PREVIOUS STUDIES OF EARLY MEDIEVAL IRON WORKING .................................190

EMAP AND EXCAVATED EARLY MEDIEVAL IRONWORKING EVIDENCE ..................191

Background .......................................................................................................... 190 The Technological Process..................................................................................... 191 Sourcing and mining Iron Ore ............................................................................ 191 Charcoal Production .......................................................................................... 191 Smelting........................................................................................................... 191 Smithing........................................................................................................... 191 Excavated Sites..................................................................................................... 191 Excavated charcoal producing pits.......................................................................... 192 The EMAP Survey and Smelting and Smithing ......................................................... 193 Evidence for Smelting and Smithing ....................................................................... 193 Distribution of Excavated Sites............................................................................... 194 The context of early medieval ironworking.............................................................. 195 The economic and political context of early medieval ironworking ............................ 196 Isolated ironworking sites and modest settlements: The ironworking of the lower classes?................................................................................................................ 196 Iron Production and the Well­to do Farmer ............................................................. 197 Specialised iron working: ecclesiastical sites, royal sites and Viking towns ................ 198 The status of the blacksmith in early Irish society ................................................... 199

CHAPTER 9. EARLY MEDIEVAL TRADE AND EXCHANGE – A FOCUS ON POTTERY ......................................................................................... 200
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................200 EMAP AND EXCAVATED POTTERY TYPES 1970­2002 ....................................200 NATIVE SOUTERRAIN WARE .......................................................................201
Background .......................................................................................................... 201 Previous Surveys and EMAP surveys....................................................................... 201 Distribution........................................................................................................... 202 Quantities............................................................................................................. 204 EMAP Results: Imported Ceramics (A.D. 400­700) from excavated sites 1970­2002 as reported in the excavations bulletin........................................................................ 204 Distribution........................................................................................................... 205 High Status Settlements and Imported Wares......................................................... 205 Islands and Imported Ceramics.............................................................................. 206 Other Wares and Vessels....................................................................................... 206

EARLY MEDIEVAL IMPORTED POTTERY C. 400­700 A.D. ................................203

CHAPTER 10. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE CHALLENGES.............. 207
BACKGROUND ..........................................................................................207 SETTLEMENT AND LANDSCAPE .....................................................................207 CHURCH ..................................................................................................208 BURIAL ...................................................................................................209 AGRICULTURE ..........................................................................................209 CRAFTS AND TRADE & EXCHANGE ................................................................210
vii

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Contents

EMAP STAGE 2: CHALLENGES FOR FUTURE DATA ANALYSIS AND RESEARCH ........210

APPENDIX 1: EXCAVATED SITES AND ASSOCIATED LICENSES ..... 212
EXCAVATED SITES AND ASSOCIATED LICENSES ..............................................212

APPENDIX 2: EARLY MEDIEVAL RINGFORTS, UNENCLOSED SETTLEMENTS AND ECCLESIASTICAL SITES .................................. 299
RINGFORT LIST ........................................................................................299 UNENCLOSED HABITATION SITES ................................................................305 EARLY MEDIEVAL ECCLESIASTICAL SITES .....................................................307

APPENDIX 3: GAZETEER OF SETTLEMENT/CEMETERY SITES ........ 318 APPENDIX 4: EXCAVATED EARLY MEDIEVAL BUILDINGS ............. 326
UNIDENTIFIED BUILDING TYPE...................................................................326 BUILDINGS (POST AND WATTLE) ................................................................329 BUILDINGS (SILL­BEAM)...........................................................................336 BUILDINGS (SOD­WALLED) .......................................................................336 BUILDINGS (STONE) .................................................................................337 BUILDINGS (VIKING POST AND WATTLE) .....................................................339 BUILDING TYPE 1 (VIKING POST AND WATTLE) ............................................342 BUILDING TYPE 2 (VIKING POST AND WATTLE) ............................................344 BUILDING TYPE 3 (VIKING POST AND WATTLE) ............................................345 BUILDING TYPE 4 (VIKING SUNKEN FLOORED) .............................................345 BUILDING TYPE 5 (VIKING POST AND WATTLE) ............................................346 BUILDING TYPE 6 (VIKING SILL­BEAM).......................................................347 BUILDING TYPE 7 (VIKING STONE) .............................................................347 STRUCTURE .............................................................................................347

APPENDIX 5: CEMETERY AND BURIAL SITES ................................ 351
CEMETERY/BURIAL SITE (5­7TH CENTURY A.D.)............................................351 CEMETERY OR BURIAL SITE (EARLY MEDIEVAL AND UNDATED) ........................353 ECCLESIASTICAL CEMETERY........................................................................355

BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................................................... 361 List of Tables
TABLE 1: EARLY MEDIEVAL EXCAVATIONS ANNUALLY 1970­2002............................................................. 24 TABLE 2: EARLY MEDIEVAL EXCAVATED SITES PER COUNTY 1970­2002................................................... 26 TABLE 3: EARLY MEDIEVAL EXCAVATIONS ANNUALLY PER COUNTY 1970­2002 ........................................ 27 TABLE 4: COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF EXCAVATIONS ANNUALLY 1970­2002 IN COUNTIES IN THE REPUBLIC OF IRELAND AND NORTHERN IRELAND.............................................................................................. 30 TABLE 5: EXCAVATIONS ANNUALLY PER ARCHAEOLOGICAL INSTITUTION 1970­2002 ................................ 31 TABLE 6: EXCAVATION LICENSES AND SITES EXCAVATED PER UNIVERSITY UNIT 1970­2002 ..................... 33 TABLE 7: EXCAVATION LICENSES AND SITES EXCAVATED PER GOVERNMENT BODY 1970­2002 ................. 33 TABLE 8: EXCAVATION LICENSES AND SITES EXCAVATED PER COMMERCIAL COMPANY 1970­2002............ 34 TABLE 9: ISSUED EXCAVATION LICENSE TYPES 1970­2002 ...................................................................... 36 TABLE 10: EXCAVATION TYPES ANNUALLY 1970­2002............................................................................. 37 TABLE 11: EXCAVATION TYPES PER COUNTY 1970­2002 ......................................................................... 40 TABLE 12: EARLY MEDIEVAL SIGNIFICANCE OF EMAP SITES 1970­2002 ................................................. 43 TABLE 13: EXCAVATIONS ANNUALLY ON SITES OF DIFFERENT SIGNIFICANCE ............................................. 44 TABLE 14: EARLY MEDIEVAL SIGNIFICANCE OF EXCAVATED SITES ............................................................. 47 TABLE 15: EXCAVATIONS ALONG SCHEMES AND PROJECTS 1970­2002..................................................... 50

viii

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Contents

TABLE 16: SIGNIFICANCE OF SITES EXCAVATED ALONG SCHEMES AND PROJECTS........................................ 51 TABLE 17: EXCAVATION TYPES ALONG SCHEMES AND PROJECTS ................................................................ 52 TABLE 18: EMAP EXCAVATED SITE CATEGORIES ...................................................................................... 55 TABLE 19: EXCAVATION NEAR SITE CATEGORIES 1970­2002 ................................................................... 57 TABLE 20: EXCAVATED RURAL SETTLEMENTS 1970­2002 ........................................................................ 60 TABLE 21: EXCAVATED CASHELS 1970­2002 ........................................................................................... 61 TABLE 22: EXCAVATED RINGFORTS PER COUNTY 1970­2002................................................................... 64 TABLE 23: ARCHAEOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF EXCAVATED RINGFORTS ........................................... 65 TABLE 25: EXCAVATED CRANNOGS 1970­2002........................................................................................ 86 TABLE 26 EXCAVATED SOUTERRAIN SITES AND COUNTIES 1970­2002 ..................................................... 92 TABLE 27: EXCAVATED UNENCLOSED SOUTERRAINS 1970­2002 .............................................................. 95 TABLE 28: EXCAVATED RINGFORTS CONTAINING SOUTERRAINS 1970­2002 ............................................. 95 TABLE 29: OTHER EXCAVATED ENCLOSURES CONTAINING SOUTERRAINS 1970­2002................................. 96 TABLE 30: EXCAVATED CASHELS CONTAINING SOUTERRAINS 1970­2002 ................................................. 97 TABLE 32: EXCAVATED SETTLEMENT/CEMETERY SITES CONTAINING SOUTERRAINS .................................... 97 TABLE 33: EXCAVATED ECCLESIASTICAL SITES CONTAINING SOUTERRAINS 1970­2002 ............................ 98 TABLE 34: EXCAVATED SOUTERRAINS (1970­2002) AND SITE CATEGORIES ............................................. 98 TABLE 35: EXCAVATED VIKING SITES 1970­2002.................................................................................. 111 TABLE 36: EXCAVATED VIKING TOWN DEFENCES 1970­2002................................................................. 113 TABLE 37: EXCAVATED RURAL BUILDINGS 1970­2002 ........................................................................... 120 TABLE 38: EXCAVATED VIKING BUILDINGS 1970­2002 .......................................................................... 125 TABLE 39: EXCAVATED ECCLESIASTICAL SITES 1970­2002 .................................................................... 131 TABLE 40: DISTRIBUTION OF EXCAVATED ECCLESIASTICAL SITES 1970­2002 ........................................ 131 TABLE 41: SIGNIFICANCE OF EXCAVATED EARLY MEDIEVAL ECCLESIASTICAL SITES .................................. 132 TABLE 42: EXCAVATED ECCLESIASTICAL STRUCTURES 1970­2002.......................................................... 133 TABLE 43: EXCAVATED RIDGE AND FURROW 1970­2002 ....................................................................... 174 TABLE 44: EXCAVATED CORN­DRYING KILN TYPES 1970­2002............................................................... 177 TABLE 45: EXCAVATED POSSIBLE EARLY MEDIEVAL CORN­DRYING KILNS 1970­2002 ............................. 178 TABLE 46: MONUMENTS WITH ASSOCIATED FIELD DIVISIONS/ENCLOSURES ............................................. 182 TABLE 47: EXCAVATED IRONWORKING EVIDENCE PER COUNTY 1970­2002............................................ 194 TABLE 48: EXCAVATED IRONWORKING EVIDENCE AND SITE CATEGORIES 1970­2002 ............................. 195 TABLE 48: LICENSES AND SITES WITH EARLY MEDIEVAL POTTERY WARE 1970­2002............................. 200 TABLE 49: QUANTITY OF SITES PER COUNTY CONTAINING IDENTIFIED SOUTERRAIN WARE 1970­2002.. 202 TABLE 50: QUANTITY OF SITES CONTAINING IMPORTED (A.D. 400­700) POTTERY WARES ..................... 204

List of Figures
FIGURE 1: EARLY MEDIEVAL EXCAVATIONS ANNUALLY 1970­2002 ........................................................... 25 FIGURE 2: EARLY MEDIEVAL EXCAVATED SITES PER COUNTY 1970­2002................................................. 26 FIGURE 3: COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF EXCAVATIONS ANNUALLY 1970­2002 IN COUNTIES IN THE REPUBLIC OF IRELAND AND NORTHERN IRELAND.............................................................................................. 30 FIGURE 4: EXCAVATIONS ANNUALLY PER ARCHAEOLOGICAL INSTITUTION 1970­2002 .............................. 32 FIGURE 5: ISSUED EXCAVATION LICENSE TYPES 1970­2002 .................................................................... 36 FIGURE 6: EXCAVATION TYPES ANNUALLY 1970­2002 ............................................................................. 38 FIGURE 7: EXCAVATION TYPE PERCENTAGES ANNUALLY 1970­2002......................................................... 39 FIGURE 8: EXCAVATION TYPES PER COUNTY 1970­2002 ......................................................................... 41 FIGURE 9: EXCAVATION TYPE PERCENTAGES PER COUNTY 1970­2002 ..................................................... 42 FIGURE 10: EARLY MEDIEVAL SIGNIFICANCE OF EMAP SITES 1970­2002................................................ 43 FIGURE 11: EXCAVATIONS ANNUALLY ON SITES OF DIFFERENT SIGNIFICANCE ........................................... 45 FIGURE 12: PERCENTAGES OF EXCAVATIONS ANNUALLY ON SITES OF DIFFERENT SIGNIFICANCE ................ 46 FIGURE 13: EARLY MEDIEVAL SIGNIFICANCE OF EXCAVATED SITES PER COUNTY ....................................... 48 FIGURE 14: SIGNIFICANCE PERCENTAGES OF EXCAVATED SITES PER COUNTY ............................................ 49 FIGURE 15: EXCAVATIONS ALONG SCHEMES AND PROJECTS 1970­2002 ................................................... 50 FIGURE 16: SIGNIFICANCE OF SITES EXCAVATED ALONG SCHEMES AND PROJECTS ...................................... 51 FIGURE 17: EXCAVATION TYPES ALONG SCHEMES AND PROJECTS .............................................................. 53 FIGURE 18: EMAP EXCAVATED SITE CATEGORIES..................................................................................... 56

ix

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Contents

FIGURE 19: EXCAVATIONS NEAR SITE CATEGORIES 1970­2002................................................................ 57 FIGURE 20: EXCAVATED RURAL SETTLEMENT TYPES .................................................................................. 60 FIGURE 21: EXCAVATED RINGFORTS PER COUNTY 1970­2002 ................................................................. 64 FIGURE 22: EXCAVATED SOUTERRAIN SITES AND COUNTIES 1970­2002 .................................................. 92 FIGURE 23: EXCAVATED SOUTERRAIN(S) AND EMAP SITE CATEGORIES 1970­2002................................. 99 FIGURE 24: EXCAVATED VIKING SITES 1970­2002 ................................................................................ 111 FIGURE 25: EXCAVATED VIKING TOWN DEFENCES 1970­2002............................................................... 114 FIGURE 27: EXCAVATED VIKING TOWN BUILDINGS 1970­2002.............................................................. 125 FIGURE 28: EXCAVATED EARLY MEDIEVAL ECCLESIASTICAL SITES PER COUNTY 1970­2002 ................... 131 FIGURE 29: SIGNIFICANCE OF EXCAVATED EARLY MEDIEVAL ECCLESIASTICAL SITES ................................ 133 FIGURE 30: EXCAVATED ECCLESIASTICAL STRUCTURES 1970­2002........................................................ 134 FIGURE 31: CORN­DRYING KILN TYPES 1970­2002 ............................................................................... 178 FIGURE 32: EXCAVATED POSSIBLE EARLY MEDIEVAL CORN­DRYING KILNS 1970­2002 ........................... 179 FIGURE 33: EXCAVATED IRONWORKING EVIDENCE PER COUNTY 1970­2002 .......................................... 195 FIGURE 34: EXCAVATED IRONWORKING AND SITE CATEGORIES 1970­2002 ........................................... 196 FIGURE 35: LICENSES AND SITES WITH EARLY MEDIEVAL POTTERY WARE 1970­2002 ........................... 201 FIGURE 36: QUANTITY OF SITES PER COUNTY CONTAINING IDENTIFIED SOUTERRAIN WARE 1970­2002 203 FIGURE 36: QUANTITY OF SITES CONTAINING IMPORTED (A.D. 400­700) POTTERY WARES. .................. 205

x

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Acknowledgements

Acknowledgements
The Early Medieval Archaeology Project (EMAP) has received the welcome support of the archaeologists within UCD School of Archaeology; from members of the EMAP international expert panel and colleagues and friends from across the profession. Without this help, advice and encouragement, this initial stage of the project could not have been completed. We would like to acknowledge the support and advice of Robert Sands, Conor McDermott, John Ó Neill, Helen Lewis and Stephen Davis, and the members of the EMAP group; Prof Martin Carver (University of York), Dr. Nancy Edwards (University of Wales at Bangor), Dr. Stephen Driscoll (University of Glasgow), Dr David Griffiths (University of Oxford), Dr Finbar McCormick (Queens University Belfast), Dr Mick Monk (UCC), Ronan Swan (NRA), Margaret Gowen (Gowen & Co), Donald Murphy (ACS), Eamonn P Kelly (National Museum of Ireland), John Bradley (NUI Maynooth), Chris Corlett (National Monuments Service), Dr, Niall Brady (The Discovery Programme), Dr Brian Lacey (The Discovery Programme), Dr Elizabeth O’Brien (independent scholar), Dr Stephen Mandal (CRDS), Dr. Finola O’Carroll (CRDS) and Dr Tomás Ó Carragáin (UCC). We would like to particularly thank Conor McDermott and Dr. Robert Sands for support and suggestions with all issues concerning the construction of the initial database and the remedying of countless issues about the database through the whole project and all matters relating to Irish archaeology in general. Beyond these people, we would like to thank quite a number of other archaeologists who gave us access to their unpublished reports in the writing of the EMAP report. In this regard, we would particularly like to thank the ACS archaeological researchers Jonathan Kinsella, Niall Kenny and Amy McQuillan as well as Neil Carlin (currently in School of Archaeology, UCD). Their unpublished reports and great advice through the whole project were massively helpful. We would also like to thank a range of other people including Kim Rice, Emmett O’Keeffe, Patrizia La Piscopia, Tiernan McGarry (UCD), Matt Seaver (CRDS), Stephen Harrison (TCD) and Ian Doyle for their insights into various issues. The members of UCD School of Archaeology’s Early Medieval and Viking Age Research Group also offered many inspiring and useful comments, including Maureen Doyle, Sharon Greene, Triona Nicholl, Rebecca Boyd, Brian Dolan, John Nicholl and Louise Nugent. Several people kindly read the report in draft form and gave detailed comments and advice, including Jonathan Kinsella, Betty O’Brien and Tomás Ó Carragáin. We would like to thank the assistance of the administrative staff of the School of Archaeology, UCD and in particular Angela McAteer. Finally, we would like to acknowledge UCD Research for their provision of a research grant from the UCD Seed Funding 2007 scheme and to thank the members of the Archaeological Standing Committee of the Heritage Council for their generous funding of EMAP from the Archaeological Research Grants 2007 scheme. We hope that this EMAP report makes a contribution to our understanding of early medieval Ireland and that it now enables research across all archaeological sectors; museums, state services, the universities and in the professional archaeological sector.

Aidan O’Sullivan Lorcan Harney UCD School of Archaeology, 28th November 2007.

xi

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Preface to Re­edited EMAP Report

Preface to re­edited EMAP report
This is a re­edited version of the original EMAP report; O’Sullivan, A. and Harney, L. 2007 Early Medieval Archaeology Project: Investigating the character of early medieval archaeological excavations, 1970­2002 previously submitted in November 2007 to the Heritage Council and then subsequently circulated to the members of the EMAP International Expert Panel. We gratefully acknowledge the various supportive comments and encouraging advice from many Irish and UK archaeologists since the original report was completed. We have now taken the opportunity to re­edit the EMAP report and to correct various spelling and grammatical errors in the original text (some of them wince­inducing, e.g. ‘Vikin’?). More importantly, we have substantially re­written Chapter 6, which describes and analyses the fascinating and increasingly complex evidence from early medieval burials and cemeteries and we gratefully acknowledge here the generous and detailed comments provided by Dr. Elizabeth O’Brien on the original chapter. We have also taken this opportunity to introduce a new and hopefully useful section in that chapter describing the treatment of the corpse in early medieval burial ceremonies and rites (i.e. the use of kerbstones and lintels, ‘ear­muffs’, occasional finds, etc). Obviously, all remaining mistakes and errors in this report are our own. We intend this EMAP report – and all the project’s research ­ to be useful to all interested in early medieval Ireland and consequently it is now available as a PDF to download, along with other news from the EMAP research, on the project’s website. Hopefully, the next stage of EMAP’s research can build on this initial review and help support research and publication on this fascinating period in Ireland’s past.

Aidan O’Sullivan Lorcan Harney UCD School of Archaeology and somewhere in Australia January 31st 2008.

xii

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Executive Summary

Executive Summary
! The Early Medieval Archaeology Project (EMAP) was established in April 2007 with the support of a Heritage Council Archaeological Research Grant (2007) and UCD Seed Funding support (2007). EMAP’s stage 1 database analysis has revealed that 1,397 early medieval sites were excavated (using 1,968 licenses) between 1970­2002. EMAP has shown that there has been immense research capacity building in the commercial sector, although the resources devoted to research and interpretation of this data in the Universities, Museum and State sectors have not seen a similar expansion. However, despite a general perception of a ‘crisis’ of non­publication in Irish archaeology, EMAP has shown that the problem may not be quite of the scale hitherto believed. EMAP suggests that of the 1,397 early sites excavated 1970­2002; only 74 would be considered to be ‘Highly Significant’; 202 ‘Significant’; 325 ‘General Significant’, 190 ‘Uncertain’ while 606 site excavations were of ‘No Archaeological Significance’. Irish archaeology, through well­funded collaborative research programmes such as EMAP (and other projects for other periods) could easily cope with the publication and dissemination of this new archaeological evidence. EMAP has demonstrated that a wide range of new early medieval settlement types have been identified, with significant insights available into the wider settlement landscape. Of the EMAP site categories investigated, a total of 224 sites were ‘settlement enclosures’; 266 were ‘settlement landscapes’; 65 were ‘unenclosed’ and 7 were ‘settlement/cemeteries (the Appendix on settlement/cemeteries also lists sites investigated since 2002). A total of 86 sites were in Viking/Hiberno­Norse towns. EMAP has demonstrated that an increasing range of evidence has been uncovered for the role of the church in the Irish landscape. Of EMAP’s site categories, a total of 218 sites excavated were Church/Ecclesiastical’. This can be used to trace the function of ecclesiastical sites and how they related to settlement/cemetery sites, unenclosed cemeteries, ecclesiastical cemeteries and to settlement, travel and the economy. EMAP has shown that there is significant diversity and variety in burial rites and contexts in early medieval Ireland, AD 400­1200. Of EMAP’s site categories, 49 were ‘Cemetery/Burial’; 7 were ‘Settlement/Cemetery’ and 218 were ‘Church/Ecclesiastical’. EMAP has revealed that there has been a significant amount of discoveries of archaeological evidence for agriculture in early medieval Ireland. Of EMAP’s site categories, a total of 43 were ‘Agricultural (mills, kilns, fields) while much of the other site categories had evidence for agricultural activities. This EMAP report concludes with a preliminary outline of future research challenges and opportunities.

!

!

!

!

!

!

!

xiii

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 1: Introduction

Chapter 1. Introduction

Introduction
The Early Medieval Archaeology Project (EMAP) was established in UCD School of Archaeology through Heritage Council funding from the Archaeological Research Grants Scheme 2007 and through support from UCD Seed Funding 2006. The Early Medieval Archaeology Project (EMAP) aims to investigate one of the most significant periods of social, ideological, environmental and economic change in Ireland (c.A.D. 400­1200), when the landscape of Ireland went through a series of extraordinary changes. This included population growth and social and demographic developments that saw the expansion and intensification of settlements and dwellings; radical innovations in agricultural practices (i.e. new plough technology and the earliest horizontal water mill technology in medieval Europe); in crop production and in livestock management (i.e. introduction of dairying). Early medieval society changed radically too, as developments in political power and territorial organisation led to transitions from tribal­based chiefdoms and local kin­based social polities to regional dynastic lordships. A socio­economic system that was based on reciprocity and clientship was gradually transformed into one that was based on feudal labour services to a lord. Emerging urban markets (both monastic and Hiberno­Norse) and expanding networks of re­distribution brought an increase in international trade and exchange with Britain, Scandinavia, western Europe and beyond. In Ireland, the slow conversion from paganism to Christianity transformed people’s religious beliefs, ideologies of personhood and burial practices and saw significant developments in the landscape (e.g. in cemetery organisation and the growth of monastic centres and estates).

The Early Medieval Archaeology Project (EMAP)
In recent years, an extraordinary range of entirely new, and still largely untapped, archaeological evidence has been uncovered for all these changes, thus presenting an unparalleled opportunity to create new understandings of the dynamics of historical change as experienced by the early medieval peoples of Ireland, within their wider European context. Entirely new types of sites have emerged that do not fit with traditional explanatory models (e.g. settlement/burial complexes; non­ringfort type enclosures; industrial iron­working sites; unenclosed dwellings; complexes of field­systems and enigmatically­isolated corn­drying kilns and mills). The excavation of both rural and urban ‘classic’ early medieval settlements and burial grounds has produced vast amounts of objects, plant and animal remains and human skeletons. Unfortunately, the Irish professional archaeological community – understandably focused mostly on the imperatives of rescue and development­lead excavations – has been largely unable to develop research opportunities offered by these new sites and landscapes. Most recent Irish archaeological policy statements (by the UCD Foresight group; the Royal Irish Academy vision for Irish archaeology seminar; and the Heritage Council’s research frameworks) recognise that the failure to transform ‘data into knowledge’ is the single­most problematic issue in modern Irish archaeology, almost unique in European terms. What Irish archaeology needs are good examples of collaborative research between the academy and the commercial archaeological sector, and more importantly, works of academic synthesis and publication that begin to interpret this new data. In the early medieval period, this is particularly so as the most recent works of synthesis are either out of date or have not sufficiently considered the newly discovered material (e.g. Edwards 1990, 2005; Laing 2006).

1

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 1: Introduction

Aims and objectives of EMAP 1
The Heritage Council Archaeological Research Grants 2007 and UCD Seed Funding Scheme 2007 provided generous funding to establish a pilot project to review the potential of the early medieval archaeological material. The report of this project is provided here. The pilot phase of the EMAP project involved the employment of a researcher under the supervision of Aidan O’Sullivan between 1st April­9th November 2007. The main aim of EMAP Stage 1 was to construct and compile an initial database that could usefully and rapidly quantify and synthesise the number, type, form, character, significance and results of excavations of early medieval (c. A.D. 400­1200) sites, structures and artefacts between 1970­2002. The principal resource for the compilation of this database was to be the online published excavation bulletin reports (1970­2002) located at excavations.ie and a review of selected relevant published monographs and articles. The objective of EMAP Stage 1 was to write a detailed report, based on the characterisation and analyses of the provisional initial results, to discuss the implications, identify important research areas and devise a future research strategy for EMAP.

Scope of EMAP 1
The scope of EMAP 1 was wide­ranging as it involved reviewing all forms of excavated early medieval settlement, ecclesiastical, industrial, agricultural and burial evidence in both rural and urban contexts excavated from 1970 through to 2002. The accession to the EU, the redevelopment of urban centres, the construction of an extensive infrastructural network of road and pipeline schemes and the urban sprawl of Irish towns and cities across the Irish landscape has had a profound effect on the legislative framework protecting the Irish landscape, has transformed the face of Irish archaeology and had led to the well­known expansion of excavations annually. However, as is well­known, infrastructural and residential developments, particularly since the latter phases of the ‘Celtic Tiger’ years, have placed a serious strain on Irish archaeological organizations with the effect that most resources have been devoted singly towards field recording rather than research. This imbalance between excavated information and the resources available to access this data has raised a number of critical issues which are essential to understanding both a) the nature and practice of early medieval archaeological research and discovery today and b) the character of early medieval Ireland in the past. This EMAP report will initially examine a number of key issues concerning the character and practice of early medieval archaeological excavations from 1970­2002. They comprise: ! What is the approximate number of annual excavations between 1970­2002 that concern early medieval­related material? ! What is the distribution of these excavations and excavated sites across the country? ! Who has been responsible for these excavations (e.g. University units, government and commercial sectors) and how has patterns changed over time? ! What is the balance of types of excavation between 1970­2002 carried out across the country (e.g. testing, rescue, research) and how has the character of these changed over time? ! How significant is the early medieval archaeological evidence recovered from these excavation types and how have patterns changed over time? ! Why have excavations been undertaken and what has been the impact of different infrastructural and development schemes and projects on the early medieval archaeological resource? The EMAP report will then analyse and discuss the character of the archaeological evidence recovered from excavations from 1970­2002, although use will also be made of available published or emerging archaeological evidence discovered prior to (e.g. 1930­1970) or after these dates (2002­2007). It is hoped that this information can be used by scholars to further

2

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 1: Introduction

understand and examine early medieval landscape and society in the past. It will also seek to identify potential research areas in early medieval archaeology. The report will review key themes such as: ! Early medieval Rural Settlement (Enclosed and Unenclosed Sites A.D. 400­1170) ! Viking/Hiberno­Norse Settlement ! Early Medieval Buildings ! Early Medieval Ecclesiastical Sites ! Early Medieval Burial ! Early Medieval Agriculture and Landscape ! Early Medieval Ironworking ! Early Medieval Pottery Production

Structure of EMAP 1 Report
The Sources used in this project are first mentioned and appraised to outline the range of resources consulted and the problems and quality of the data. An overview of Irish planning legislation and the transforming character of early medieval archaeological excavations from 1930­2002 is then outlined to highlight the factors that have affected the form and character of the Irish excavations over time. This review served to highlight the complexity of the archaeological evidence when a database had to be designed. An outline of the decision­making criteria employed when designing the database structure is then given to give greater clarity about how the data was collected. Issues and problems are also identified. The character and scope of early medieval excavations 1970­2002 is then outlined in Chapter 2. The character of the archaeological evidence recovered from excavations is then appraised and discussed based on the identified themes above. Excavated material both prior to 1970 and after 2002 are also discussed. Potential research areas concerning each theme are also outlined. The conclusions of EMAP 1 are then outlined. Finally, a number of appendices are provided.

Sources of information for EMAP1
EMAP’s long­term principal objective is to establish an online database containing excavated early medieval evidence that can be used by scholars and the interested public alike. Stray finds, metal­detecting discoveries, survey work and evidence from antiquarian investigations were excluded from this project and are beyond the immediate focus of the EMAP project. Ultimately it is intended that every scientifically undertaken excavation since 1930 that been accorded an excavation license or emergency license across Ireland will be examined by EMAP. Excavations Bulletin The objectives of EMAP Stage 1 were a rapid quantification and synthesis of excavated early medieval monuments, structures and artefacts across the Island. The Excavations Bulletin www.excavations.ie was singled out as the important resource to achieve this immediate aim. Excavations.ie provides succinct reports about every single excavation undertaken across the island from 1970­2002. EMAP Stage 1 decided to focus on excavated material from 1970­2002, as this was the only complete material available on the online bulletin when data was being collected in mid­2007. Archaeological excavations from the period 1930­1970 were also excluded for this immediate EMAP Stage 1 task not because they are unimportant or relatively few in number (i.e. less than 50), but because they are relatively well published in such journals as PRIA, JRSAI, the

3

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 1: Introduction

Ulster Journal of Archaeology and other regiona/local publications (e.g. the Hencken excavations at Lagore, Balllinderry crannog No. 1, Ballinderry crannog No. 2; Ó Ríordáin’s excavations at Garranes, Ballycatteen etc; O’Kelly’s excavations at Church Island, etc). It is envisaged that an EMAP stage 2 will place these earlier early medieval excavations on the EMAP database. Excavation bulletin reports from excavations from 2003­2007 are not currently available for review (although 2003 and 2004 have been published in ‘hard copy’). It was felt that the task of collating data from the published (as opposed to online) Excavations 2003 and 2004 editions was beyond the task of the first stage of EMAP. The archives of the relevant development (e.g. the NRA), governmental, academic and Museum authorities were also not examined by EMAP and will form part of a later phase of the EMAP project (an EMAP stage 2, with funding to be sought from various sources). Issues with the Excavations Bulletin It is well known that the excavations bulletin is an extremely valuable database in itself for early medieval archaeology. The excavations bulletin reports are however also provisional by nature – often written only some months after excavations and also often represent reports which are submitted when excavation is still ongoing. It is likely then in some cases that interpretations of the sites and other data may have changed subsequently. As these reports are interim by nature, radiocarbon determinations are often pending for undated archaeology such as ironworking furnaces or kilns and specialist reports may not have been received. This was a major issue for the EMAP database. It was decided to be cautious and include those undated sites that were described as ‘uncertain’ in terms of their significance and dating within the EMAP database. The quality of the information itself within the bulletin reports also varies quite extraordinarily due to the fact that the findings in many of the reports are provisional and also because different archaeologists are responsible for writing them. In some cases, detailed information can be supplied about the number, type and character of monuments and structures like buildings for example while in other instances no such data is forthcoming. There can also be lack of consistency in including information such as SMR numbers or excavation license numbers within the reports. The other issue with the excavations bulletin is that there is no standardization of terminology employed in the site type or site name descriptions. It is then difficult to search for site types because they can be described in multiple ways such as ‘ecclesiastical’, ecclesiastical enclosure’, ecclesiastical site’ and ‘ecclesiastical remains’ etc. Similarly, there is no standardisation in terms of townland or place names. The excavations bulletin is then principally a database of excavation reports written by numerous different archaeologists rather than one of discrete entities of information compiled and organized through a central authority. It is however the most significant archaeological resource in Ireland whose shortcomings are only described here to highlight the issues with the dataset that the EMAP Stage 1 project was working with. The ‘best is the enemy of the good’ and it is considered here that Excavations bulletins, despite their limitations, are the source that can be most rapidly assessed to consider the character of excavated early medieval archaeological evidence in Ireland. Undoubtedly future EMAP research can make better use of unpublished excavations reports, journal articles and monographs to build on this preliminary picture. Other Published Information Published material concerning excavations of early medieval evidence from 1970­2002 was another important resource consulted for compiling the database. The Excavations Bulletin was incorporated into the Irish Journal of Archaeology between the years 1977­1984. Excavations bulletin reports for those years in particular often only contained the name of the

4

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 1: Introduction

published article associated with the excavation. The associated published article was tracked down in these instances to discover information about the excavations at these sites.

Medieval Archaeology also contains concise yearly synopses written by various authors about important excavations undertaken in Ireland over several years. This source was also consulted when no information could be established from the excavation bulletin report about an excavated early medieval site.
Particular journals that were consulted when compiling the database included the Ulster Journal of Archaeology, Journal of Irish Archaeology, Medieval Archaeology, Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy and Journal Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland. Published monographs were also a valuable source of information – particularly for the significant archaeological excavations that have been conducted in Cork. Of particular importance were works by Rose Cleary and Maurice Hurley for urban excavations in Cork (1997 & 2003), by Hurley, Scully and McCutcheon (1997) for urban excavations in Waterford and Heather King’s (1994 & 1998) edited Clonmacnoise Studies monographs. A wide range of other sources was consulted such as, for example, Wallace’s (1992) publication on Viking Buildings in Dublin when dealing with specific monuments or structures for the EMAP database. The Unpublished Archaeological Excavations Survey (Doyle et. al 2002) commissioned for the Heritage Council is undoubtedly the most comprehensive review of the unpublished and published archaeological reports from 1930­1997 in the Republic of Ireland. It provided additional important information about the changing character of excavations in this period while its appendixes of unpublished sites were invaluable as a source of information for locating previously unknown sites and identifying excavation license numbers. Other useful Sources The Internet proved to be a valuable resource for this project. It was often necessary to consult online maps to establish the location of townlands and excavated sites along urban streets. Both online and published national maps provided valuable information in tracking down excavations along road schemes. The NRA (NRA.ie) and Bord Gáis websites were particularly valuable in this regard. Information about archaeological projects was also often made available on web pages such as the NRA’s Archaeology Leaflets and Poster Series. Commercial archaeological company websites like that, for example, hosted by Margaret Gowen & Co. Ltd. also proved very useful as they contained information about excavations and projects conducted by companies. EMAP also decided that historical research of ecclesiastical sites was also required to identify the early medieval origins of these sites. It was hard to sometimes establish which ecclesiastical sites could have an early medieval origin as the excavation bulletin often described these sites under multiple ecclesiastical terms including ‘ecclesiastical site’, ‘ecclesiastical enclosure’ ‘church and graveyard’, ‘burial­ground’ and ‘cemetery’ etc. with no information given or provided about their dates or origin. A number of sources particularly Gwynn & Hadcock’s (1970) comprehensive study of Irish Religious Houses as well as local historical books and articles, local web pages and County Library web sites were consulted in order to try to establish the antiquity of these ecclesiastical sites. The information allowed the database to collect information about ecclesiastical sites with known early medieval historical origins; medieval ecclesiastical sites whose early medieval origins could not be established and undated ecclesiastical sites.

The Legacy of Early Medieval Excavation
It is evident that before one can begin to design a preliminary database that could be used to rapidly quantify the quantity and character of excavated early medieval archaeology 1970­ 2002, that consideration must first be given to the legacy and practice of early medieval excavations and the type of questions and issues that one envisages asking the database. 5

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 1: Introduction

The excavated archaeological data that we deal with today is primarily a legacy of how, why and where archaeological excavations have been undertaken since the early part of the twentieth century. To understand this, we must first succinctly appraise the historiography of archaeological legislative protection and early medieval excavation. Legislation and Protected Sites and Monuments Archaeological monuments have been accorded protection by the state on the island of Ireland through a whole string of enactments dating back to the disestablishment of the Church of Ireland in 1869. It was not till the early 20th century that records or ‘Schedules’, in the case of Northern Ireland, began to be compiled of archaeological monuments in private ownership across the island. The National Monuments Act 1930 was the first enactment to truly make provision for the protection of archaeological monuments and objects in Saorstát Eireann. Not only did it create a forum for archaeological excavation but it also established the Archaeological Survey of Ireland, which set up the Sites and Monuments Record in the 1980s. A similar SMR record exists in Northern Ireland. Archaeologists in both jurisdictions have continuously updated these two inventories since then. The great majority of protected SMR sites in both jurisdictions encompass traditional easily identifiable monuments like ringforts, cashels and ecclesiastical sites that have been the focus of antiquarian and archaeological surveyors since the early twentieth century. Since then both lists have grown incrementally over time as new monument classes have been discovered and more importantly recorded over the history of the archaeological surveys See http://www.archaeology.ie/ArchaeologicalSurveyofIreland/#d.en.87. To date, the Sites and Monuments Record has established a list of over approximately 120,000 monuments while a further 800 major archaeological sites are in state care in the Republic. Approximately a further 15,000 sites are recorded in the Northern Ireland SMR. In total then, at least 135,000 monuments are listed in the records of archaeological authorities in Ireland. As discussed below, some of these protected monuments were the focus of salvage excavations in the 1970’s and 1980’s due to farm improvement schemes or residential developments. In more recent years, both the National Monuments Amendment Act 1994 in the Republic as well other enacted legislation such as the EU Valletta Convention 1992 have introduced new forms of archaeological investigation such as environmental impact statements (EIS), testing and monitoring which have provided further protection of archaeological landscapes and monuments across the island. The Urban Archaeological Survey of Ireland has also delineated areas of archaeological potential in the historic cores of Irish towns and cities further protecting the archaeological resource in these areas. It is evident then that both these base­line inventories of Irish monuments, compiled by surveyors with vastly different methods and interests since the early 20th century as well as transforming legislative protection of Irish archaeological sites and monuments have informed the origins, quality and quantity of excavations over different periods of time since the early 20th century. The Character of Early Medieval Excavations It is evident then that the character of early medieval excavations has been informed by archaeological legislation protecting state surveyed sites and monuments across the island. Many early excavations of early medieval monuments in the Ireland, as elsewhere, were undertaken under the auspices of research bodies, often sponsored by the state sector. The Harvard Archaeological Mission excavation in the 1930’s at significant crannogs at Ballinderry crannog No. I, Co. Westmeath; Ballinderry crannog No. II, Co.Offaly and Lagore crannog, Co. Meath as well as Sean P. Ó Ríordáin’s excavations of a series of ringforts in the Cork/Limerick area in the 1940/50’s were the principal highlights of this formative period.

6

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 1: Introduction

Up until the 1960s, in the public imagination and in the planners’ minds, archaeology was about the significant monuments of mythical or real kings and the monastic treasures of the Saints and Scholars. There were very few excavations of less impressive and identifiable monuments like unenclosed settlements or agricultural and industrial sites as these sites tended not to have the aura of extraordinary wealth and quality of evidence which royal sites like Lagore or Garranes had to offer to the under equipped archaeological community. Most importantly however, they were no real reason for these sites to be excavated, as no legislation existed to protect and test for archaeology beyond the bounds of identified archaeological monuments. An increasing number of rescue excavations were undertaken particularly from the 1960­80’s across the island in advance of EU­grant inspired farm improvement initiatives and development­led excavations in both rural and urban contexts. Archaeologists from the Northern Ireland Historic Monument’s Branch including A.E.P. Collins, David Waterman, Chris Lynn and Brian Williams undertook a series of important excavations of ringforts and raised ringforts. State bodies in the Republic such as the National Museum and OPW also continued to provide the initiative and were involved in significant excavations in Viking Dublin although there were a series of important research excavations undertaken by University academics at sites like Lisleagh ringfort, Co. Cork and Knowth, Co. Meath. The effects of EEC (subsequently EU) membership had a significant impact on the island from the 1980’s onwards in particular. European funding provided the financial support for a number of important large­scale infrastructural projects such as the Bord Gáis Cork­Dublin Gas Pipeline and more recent NRA roadway development schemes. Along with excavations in advance of large­scale urban and rural development projects, a whole collection of previously unknown archaeological evidence has been discovered beyond the bounds of the cartographic circles protecting SMR and Scheduled monuments. The most important effects of this is the shift away from excavations focused on traditional surveyed monuments such as ringforts and ecclesiastical sites towards new forms of archaeological evidence such as isolated ironworking hearths, unenclosed settlements and settlement/cemetery sites. The emergence of a large independent commercial sector of archaeologists to cope with the increasing demands of these large­scale redevelopment projects has been a parallel phenomenon in this later period. EU membership also placed the Irish archaeological resource under the protection of tighter planning legislation. During the 1990’s, new forms of archaeological investigation have required excavations to be undertaken both on and significantly near protected SMR and Scheduled monuments in advance of any form of development initiative. Archaeological Surveys have also delineated the boundaries of areas of archaeological potential within the historic core of urban towns and cities while the protection of archaeological landscapes has also received some recognition. These tighter planning requirements have increased the number of excavations being undertaken on or near particular protected SMR monuments. To conclude then, both tighter legislation as well as a simultaneous massive increase in development­led excavation has transformed the character of Irish archaeological excavations in recent years. Consequences ! In the formative years of Irish archaeology, excavations were few in number and focused on significant early medieval monuments/sites. Excavations in the early years were largely undertaken as part of research projects with the intention of maximizing the generation of knowledge of early medieval landscape and society. From the mid twentieth century onwards, increasing number of excavations were also undertaken as part of rescue/salvage operations of important recorded monuments and also tended to generate significant archaeological knowledge.

!

7

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 1: Introduction

!

During the 1980’s and 1990’s and early twenty first century, large­scale development­ led rescue projects and EU funded infrastructural schemes have revealed a whole new character of previously unidentified archaeological evidence as excavations have moved beyond the boundaries of protected SMR and Scheduled sites/monuments towards the investigation of entire landscapes. Simultaneously, the rights of archaeological SMR monuments, landscapes and areas of archaeological potential have been accorded extra protection through the introduction of new types of archaeological excavations which are more about complying with tighter planning requirements than generating meaningful knowledge about past landscapes and societies. Finally, it is also clearly evident that a number of excavations can be undertaken near or on archaeological sites due both to tighter legislation and development­led excavation pressures. This last piece of detail highlights the importance of distinguishing between ‘sites’ and ‘excavations’ within the design of any database.

!

!

8

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 2: Designing the EMAP Database

Chapter 2. Designing the EMAP Database
Introduction
The EMAP Stage 1 Microsoft Access database currently holds data on archaeological excavations carried out on 1,397 early medieval sites in Ireland, between 1970­2002; amounting to a total of 1,968 archaeological excavation licenses. The EMAP 1 database design phase had to consider a wide range of issues such as the rapidly changing character of the recognised archaeological resource and the changes in the practice of archaeological excavations from 1970­2002. These issues were not readily apparent when first attempts at designing the database was made. It is evident that only through the experimental use of different sets of archaeological evidence, that these issues could be encountered and possible solutions devised to these problems­ and all of this completed over the relatively few months of this pilot study. It was decided early on that some distinction should be made in the database between ‘excavation licenses’ and archaeological ‘sites’ which are often the focus and setting of multiples of the former. The first part of the database design then involved working out the diverse character of the archaeological resource and archaeological excavations on the definition of an EMAP ‘site’ and their relationship with associated excavation licenses.

The ‘Site’ Form in the EMAP 1 database
The Character of Potential Early Medieval ‘Sites’ An archaeological ‘site’ is something that does not exist externally in the physical world but is instead construed and perceived through the modern archaeological identification and classification of various criteria and defined attributes. Thus, the ‘typical’ or idealised early medieval ‘site’ would usually be the single ringfort or crannog; both distinctive and well­ known monuments in the Irish landscape and often the sole focus of one or a number of different excavations. While there many examples of such ‘sites’, the above review has highlighted – as is well­known in archaeological debates ­ that no perfect example of an early medieval ‘site’ existed, so that the scope, character and significance of ‘sites’ (and archaeological ‘licenses’) can vary to a significant level. The scope and character of excavation licenses can include isolated ironworking hearths, large enclosed settlements, and entire local landscapes comprising a number of protected SMR monuments and previously unidentified structures, as well as excavations of no significance near SMR and Scheduled monuments. As ‘sites’ provide the setting for one or a number of excavation licenses, it is clear that their scope and form must be flexible enough to deal with these ranges of potential scenarios. Possible scenarios, which the design of the EMAP 1 database had to consider, included: ! How should the ‘site’ be defined when excavations are undertaken near one or a number of protected SMR or Scheduled monuments? Should the ‘site’ be described by the archaeology discovered within the excavated area, though many examples of these excavations (See Below) reveal no archaeology of any significance or should the excavation be described under the heading of the nearby protected site/monument? How should a ‘site’ be defined when a number of excavations are undertaken both on and near a protected SMR or Scheduled monument?

!

9

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 2: Designing the EMAP Database

! !

How should a ‘site’ be defined when one or a number of excavations are undertaken near a number of separate SMR and Scheduled monuments. How should a ‘site’ be defined and described when one or a number of excavation licenses comprise a number of SMR/Scheduled monuments as well as previously unidentified sites? What happens if a further or subsequent excavation is undertaken in a particular area of this excavation license? How should a ‘site’ be defined when a number of separate and unrelated phases of early medieval activity take place on the same excavated area? How should a ‘site’ be defined in an urban context today? Should excavations near early medieval ‘sites’ and monuments such as churches and cemeteries in urban contexts be considered as valid sites for the database though in fact they may reveal archaeology of no related early medieval significance? How do you define the character and scope of a previously unidentified urban settlement ‘sites’ in the five Viking/Hiberno­Norse towns in Ireland? Should the excavated area, the associated street or a region within the towns constitute the geographical area of the ‘site’?

! !

!

EMAP Site Definition The EMAP database, as discussed above, made a distinction between an archaeological site and an archaeological excavation though the differences between both are not always that different if only one excavation has been undertaken. The excavation license ‘form’ was then embedded within the site form in the database allowing the opportunity to have one or multiple licenses associated with a particular site. The basic criterion governing the definition of a ‘site’ for EMAP Stage 1 was that it contains early medieval archaeological evidence that is spatially distinct to other early medieval archaeology beyond the area of the excavation. The definition of a ‘site’ is governed by its archaeological evidence revealed within the excavated area firstly and then secondly in the absence of any early medieval evidence, by its location or proximity to the nearby early medieval protected Site or Monument. A number of decisions were reached for EMAP Stage 1 about the issues identified above in defining ‘sites’ in different contexts. They are outlined below.

Early medieval ‘sites in Rural Contexts Protected SMR and Scheduled monuments like ringforts, cashels or ecclesiastical sites with early medieval origins can be defined as ‘sites’ as they are easily morphologically­defined by enclosures in particular and prove often the setting for a number of separate excavations.
! In cases where an excavation has taken place at a ‘site’ that is not at a protected SMR monument or is easily morphologically identifiable, the site is defined by the early medieval archaeological evidence uncovered. The excavation of an isolated metalworking site along a road scheme is a good example of this type of ‘Site’. The vast majority of these sites are fully excavated the first time and are likely to contain only one associated excavation license. In time, these ‘sites may be accorded protection under the SMR. An excavation that occurs at a ‘site’ that reveals early medieval evidence like ironworking a distance from a protected monument or important early medieval settlement will be defined by the activities taking place at its ‘site’. If these activities are immediately adjacent to the protected monument or early medieval settlement and appear to be related to it, then the excavated evidence will be described as part of this associated monument.

!

10

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 2: Designing the EMAP Database

!

Excavations that take place near protected monuments or early medieval ‘sites’ identified in the excavations bulletin but reveal no early medieval archaeological evidence will nevertheless be described as part of the protected monument. A typical example is a testing excavation undertaken near a ringfort in advance of a residential development. The scale of excavations in recent years has dramatically increased due to the construction of large residential and infrastructural projects. Many excavations now encompass protected monuments as well as the landscapes around these settlements. Testing and Monitoring are usually undertaken across the entire area to establish the archaeological evidence of the landscape. Both they and the excavation licenses for the rescue excavations of SMR Sites and monuments or previously undiscovered areas of early medieval archaeology are compiled together under the one ‘site’. In cases where an entire area containing a number of early medieval monuments are excavated under only one license, the definition of the ‘site’ in these cases is governed by the size of the area and the nature of the archaeological evidence within the excavation license, not by the individual monuments like ringforts revealed or excavated within its area of investigation. If a subsequent excavation occurs within the bond of this area, it will also be incorporated into the same ‘Site’ form within the database.

!

!

Early medieval ‘sites’ in rural towns and villages It proved more difficult to define an early medieval ‘site’ in a modern urban context. The Urban Archaeological Survey was established in 1982 and set about defining areas of archaeological potential in the historic core of certain Irish Towns and villages that were known to have had borough status prior to A.D. 1700 (http://www.heritagecouncil.ie/publications/archresearch/11.html). In contrast to an excavation near a rural protected SMR ecclesiastical site, archaeological investigations were undertaken in many cases because of their location within an area of archaeological potential rather than simply their proximity to an early medieval monument.
! It is evident that many rural Irish towns like Kildare, Kilkenny, Kells, Trim or Killaloe have early medieval origins. The EMAP survey identified ecclesiastical sites with known early medieval origins as potential ‘sites’ or zones of archaeology within these modern urban contexts. Excavations, which were undertaken on these ecclesiastical sites regardless of whether they revealed archaeological evidence, were considered as a ‘site’ in the EMAP database. The scale of excavations within the historic cores of these towns adjacent to these early ecclesiastical sites raised questions about the usefulness in collecting this form of data. It became evident that many of these excavations contained little or no early medieval archaeology, which had often nothing to do with the ecclesiastical ‘sites’ either. It was decided that only excavations which could be identified as immediately adjacent to historically known early medieval ecclesiastical ‘sites’ would be collected within urban towns and villages would be collected within the EMAP database. It was also decided to collect information about excavations on or immediately adjacent to ecclesiastical sites whose early medieval origins were not established. These sites have been described as possible ecclesiastical sites within the EMAP Stage 1 database. Excavations finally that uncovered evidence for early medieval settlement, industry or agriculture within modern urban towns and villages and were spatially independent from ecclesiastical ‘sites’ were described as a separate site within the EMAP database.

!

!

!

11

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 2: Designing the EMAP Database

Early medieval ‘sites in Hiberno­Norse Towns The Hiberno­Norse towns of Dublin, Waterford, Cork, Limerick and Wexford brought new sets of requirements to defining a ‘site’. With the exception of Wexford, these areas form part of significant modern Irish cities today and have undergone large­scale urban redevelopment in recent years. The other significant feature of these sites was that they were also urban centres in the early medieval period in contrast to evidence from rural towns and villages described above that may have evolved from an ecclesiastical site. These Hiberno­Norse towns then revealed a different set of archaeological evidence, which was primarily settlement, related.
It was decided to only collect excavations that were undertaken on historically known early medieval ecclesiastical ‘sites and monuments’ within the Hiberno­Norse towns. This was due both to the scale of the excavations in the Hiberno­Norse towns and the presence of settlement evidence around these ecclesiastical sites that dated to the early medieval period. The archaeology of Hiberno­Norse towns will obviously also be considered in the EMAP 1 study. Defining the size and character of previously unidentified settlement/industrial ‘sites’ within the Hiberno­Norse towns proved another issue. It was not immediately clear if the ‘site’ should be defined by the area of excavation within the particular license or the street or Ward the excavation was undertaken within. It was felt that to identify the ‘site’ by the street or district area would prove problematical, as excavations tend to front onto or be located on the boundaries of streets and districts. It was decided to define a ‘site’ by the area of excavation within a particular license. The ‘site’ could constitute an area along a street, a spot fronting onto two streets in which case it was identified by the name of either streets or a whole block of land between a number of streets. The ‘site’ often encompassed an area like 9­12 High Street and contained both the testing and rescue excavation licenses of one particular project. Subsequent excavations within this defined area would also be incorporated into this ‘Site’ rather than constitute in themselves a separate ‘site’. Site Classification: EMAP Class Field The criteria used to define an EMAP site has been outlined above. A range of fields was created in the ‘site’ form to collect basic information about the site. An EMAP drop down Class field was constructed to describe the type of archaeology excavated within the site in which a number of excavations had taken place on or immediately adjacent to. A number of archaeological monuments and other ‘site’ classes were listed in a drop down box. A ringfort for instance can be listed in the EMAP class field and refers to excavations at one ringfort that contained only archaeological evidence concerning that class of ‘site’. However, excavations at ringforts might not always necessarily be described as ‘ringforts’ within the EMAP Class. One example is the excavations at Ninch, Co. Meath which revealed a possible ‘ringfort’ that was replaced by a cemetery site during the later early medieval period (Cia McConway 2000 & 2001, Excavations Bulletin­ 98E0501). This ‘site’ was described in the EMAP Class field as a ‘Multi­Phase Settlement’ instead of a ‘Ringfort’. A ‘site’ that comprised one or a number of excavations of early medieval structures and monuments like ‘ringforts’ within a landscape was described as an ‘early medieval settlement landscape’ in the EMAP Class field. The EMAP Class field was then designed to reflect the complete archaeological evidence contained within the excavation licenses that constituted that ‘site’. The total amount of excavated monuments or structures was collected within the license form as outlined below. Site Categorisation: Category Field A ‘Category’ field was created within the ‘Site’ form whose function was to group excavated ‘site’ types into broader categories concerning their site form and range of activities. The list comprised: ! Settlement Enclosure

12

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 2: Designing the EMAP Database

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

Settlement Landscape Settlement/Cemetery Unenclosed settlement Ecclesiastical Cemetery/Burial Agricultural Industrial Routeway Viking/Hiberno­Norse town Miscellaneous

The term ‘settlement enclosure’ refers to those settlement sites like ringforts, cashels and crannogs that were enclosed by banks or palisades. The term ‘settlement landscape’ refers to those sites that comprise a number of early medieval monuments including ringforts, ecclesiastical sites and industrial sites for instance. It also refers to multi­phase sites in which a number of different phases of early medieval activity were uncovered. The other categories terms are self­explanatory. Site Categorisation: Environs of Category Field An ‘environs of Category’ field was also created to group excavations which were undertaken near or on early medieval protected SMR and Scheduled monuments. The environs of category terms were the same as those employed for the category section. As legislation demanded testing and monitoring in the environs of protected monuments, this issue was specifically concerned with rural ecclesiastical and settlement enclosure sites. In cases where excavations were undertaken near a range of protected monuments including cashels and ecclesiastical sites, the site was categorized under the term ‘settlement landscape’. This issue did not affect the other terms such as cemetery/burial, settlement/cemetery and industrial or agricultural sites to any great extent as they are not traditional forms of monuments accorded protection within the Sites and Monuments Record and the Scheduled list of Historic Monuments in Northern Ireland. Perhaps in time as the sites are updated onto the SMR files, excavations may be undertaken because they are in the proximity to these monuments. It also did not affect excavation near SMR sites within Hiberno­norse towns as only excavations which derived early medieval evidence in these contexts was included in the database, as discussed above. Locational Information With the identification of the criteria concerning the definition, classification and categorisation of a ‘site’ complete, the next stage involved establishing what information was necessary to collect about each ‘site’. It was decided that this information would be primarily locational and would collect data about the name, townland, parish, barony and county in which the ‘site’ was located. SMR, 6­inch map data and the Eastings and Northings would also be collected. ! The site name could often be the same as the townland. The name of the street and street number (if given) was mentioned for excavations in urban contexts. The name of the Saint reputedly responsible for founding early medieval ecclesiastical sites was also given when could be established, as for instance; St. Ciaran, Clonmacnoise. The excavations bulletin provided information about the townland or townlands that an excavation was located within. The online Irish townland atlas was then used to provide information about the parish and barony the townland or townlands were situated inside. The fields were not filled when there was some doubt about the accuracy of the information or some difficulty in establishing which parish and barony a townland belonged to. 6 inch map details and easting and northing information was also collected when provided by the excavations bulletin. No data was again filled into the EMAP fields

!

!

13

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 2: Designing the EMAP Database

when this data was not provided by the bulletin reports. It is evident that there could be problems with the accuracy of this information that will need to be rechecked in subsequent stages of EMAP. SMR Monument Numbers and Classes It has been noted above how the SMR files in both the Republic and Northern Ireland originated in the early 20th century. There are hundreds of monument classes (See http://www.archaeology.ie/smrmapviewer/mapviewer.aspx) in the SMR files in the Republic of Ireland that have been added incrementally over time as new monument classes have been discovered by archaeological surveyors. A broadly similar picture is evident for the Northern Ireland SMR files. These classes can range from enclosures and crannogs to a ‘Holy Stone’ or cross slab and therefore constitute monuments as well as a range of structures and artefacts. It is evident that an SMR site can contain a whole number of associated SMR numbers. One extreme case in point is the ecclesiastical site at Glendalough, which has both an SMR number as a complex and also contains SMR numbers for a whole range of crosses and cross­slabs. The Archaeological Survey of Ireland, in the Dept. of Environment, Heritage and Local Government is currently embarking on an ambitious project of upgrading and re­establishing these SMR numbers with the intention of according a unique SMR associated number to every artefact, structure or monument on a protected SMR site. In the EMAP database, a field was also created for the SMR numbers of excavated monuments within the Site form of the EMAP database. The field was left blank when no information was provided by the excavation bulletin reports. A potential field for excavated SMR Class monuments were also constructed though has been currently left blank. It is currently being explored whether it could be possible to link the SMR number and classes of excavated SMR monuments such as ‘enclosure’, ‘ringfort’, ‘cemetery’ or even ‘cross’ with the EMAP database. It could be possible to create a multi­column box that could contain one or a number of excavated SMR Classes within its field. It may be relatively straightforward for instance to link excavated SMR classes and numbers in the SMR files with fields in the EMAP database for an isolated ironworking site. However, it may prove trickier and potentially quite time consuming to do a similar feat at a site like Clonmacnoise with all its excavated evidence for churches, crosses, high crosses, burial and industrial evidence etc. Excavations were also undertaken adjacent to SMR monument classes such as ringforts, souterrains and ecclesiastical sites as discussed above. In contrast to excavated SMR sites, a restricted range of these monument classes were collected within the database. It was a relatively straightforward task as the SMR number and the class of monument was often only required. In some cases, only the SMR number and not the SMR monument class was provided in the excavation bulletin reports. Further research will also be required in this field in the EMAP database. It is evident then that further discussion and research, perhaps in collaboration with the Archaeological Survey of Ireland, will now be required to examine the archaeological potential and possibilities of constructing fields of information for excavated early medieval SMR numbers and associated classes. ‘Synopsis’ In the EMAP 1 database, a memo box was created at the bottom of the Site form. The purpose of this field was to describe the conditions and reasons for the excavation or excavations at a site and enumerate and briefly synthesise what was discovered within the associated excavation or excavations’ licenses. It was particularly useful for long­term projects conducted over a number of years, like the archaeological excavations at Knowth by George Eogan or those at Moynagh Lough crannog by John Bradley, for example.

14

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 2: Designing the EMAP Database

‘Other Publications’ A field was created within the Site form to list relevant archaeological publications for the site in question and source quoted information if used within the archaeological synopsis.

‘Significance’ Criteria
As EMAP was concerned with the potential contribution of past excavations to our knowledge of early medieval Ireland, the significance of any ‘site’ had to be assessed – primarily on the basis of excavated material (as described in Excavations bulletins) and not by extant structural early medieval evidence. For instance Glendalough could be described as a highly significant ecclesiastical landscape with few archaeological parallels across the country. However in terms of excavated archaeological material, it has so far been largely insignificant in generating knowledge about the early medieval church. There were a number of ways in which the significance of an excavated site could be assessed. One means of calculating the significance of a site was to assess it in terms of their importance in relation to its class of monument. For instance, the excavation of a ringfort would be assessed in relation to finds from other excavated ringforts, Iron Age/early medieval transitional cemeteries in relation to other Iron Age/early medieval transitional cemeteries or metal/ironworking sites in relation to other metal/ironworking sites etc. In the end, it was decided that the quantity and quality of early medieval archaeological evidence uncovered on any given ‘site’ should be the basic criterion governing the assessment of the significance of a site. The five terms of No Significance, Uncertain, General, Significant and Highly Significant were created within a drop down list to categorise the evidence. It should be emphasized that this grading system does not pre­suppose that sites may or may not in the future be re­graded, or indeed that this EMAP grade outweighs other forms of archaeological significance (i.e. an intact Pre­Romanesque church that has never been excavated), but at least these criteria will help future decisions on more focused research on unpublished excavation reports, for example. ‘Highly Significant’ A ‘Site’ was described as ‘Highly Significant’ when excavations uncovered evidence for an extensive range of buildings, structures, environmental materials and associated material or artefacts. These ‘sites’ had often been the subject of large­scale excavation projects that revealed complex levels of stratigraphy and phases of activity. Typical ‘sites’ in an urban Hiberno­Norse town context included those that revealed highly significant amounts of occupation and industrial archaeology as well as evidence for property divisions and defensive banks/ditches or walls constructed over a period of time. Well­known examples of a highly significant site may also include the ecclesiastical sites of Clonmacnoise, Co. Offaly (where recent excavations have uncovered evidence for monastic settlement, crafts and economy) or the raised rath at Deer Park Farms, Co. Antrim where a sequence of early medieval occupation between AD 700­1000 produced houses, workshops, evidence for crafts, technology and economy. That said, other sites unlike these were also ascribed to the ‘Highly Significant’ class. ‘Significant’ A ‘site’ was described as ‘Significant’ when excavations uncovered good evidence for a number of buildings, structures and artefacts and/or for some amount of domestic, industrial and agricultural activities. ‘Significant Sites’ included important excavations at ringforts, crannogs, cashels, souterrains and ecclesiastical sites which uncovered a number of buildings, structures and industrial/agricultural activity as well as an increasing body of burial evidence, within a local landscape as well as important transitional Iron Age/early medieval burial grounds, unenclosed cemeteries and unenclosed habitation sites.

15

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 2: Designing the EMAP Database

General A ‘site’ was ascribed a ‘General’ significance when excavations uncovered a moderate or low amount of archaeological evidence that could be dated to the early medieval period. Such ‘Sites’ could include excavations at ringforts, crannogs, cashels, souterrains and ecclesiastical sites that uncovered evidence for some domestic artefacts, hearths, enclosing features, possible structures, animal bone and limited burial evidence in a specifically ecclesiastical context. It also concerned excavations at unenclosed sites that revealed scatters of early medieval archaeological evidence as well as ‘sites’ with limited ironworking and cereal cultivation evidence. Excavations at ‘sites’ in Hiberno­Norse towns that revealed banks and ditches in isolated contexts as well as limited pottery and domestic/industrial artefacts could also be described as ‘General’. Uncertain A site’s significance was described as ‘Uncertain’ when excavations uncovered archaeology of uncertain date which it was felt possible could well belong to the early medieval period (recognising that many excavations bulletins reports were completed before radiocarbon or other dating evidence had been obtained by the excavator). Typical ‘sites’ described as of ‘uncertain’ significance were undated ecclesiastical sites, habitation sites, field systems, kilns, charcoal pits, ironworking evidence, trackways and isolated burials. These excavations will have to be tracked down at a later stage of the EMAP project. It is very likely that some sites of uncertain significance in the EMAP database will be found to be not early medieval in date (i.e. many ironworking sites could be Iron Age or Late Medieval, or even Post Medieval in date). No Significance Excavations undertaken on or immediately adjacent to a site that revealed no archaeology of early medieval significance were described of no significance (this, of course, does not mean they were of no significance in prehistoric, late medieval or post­medieval terms). The great majority of No Significance Sites dealt with testing excavations near protected monuments like ringforts and ecclesiastical sites in both rural and urban contexts. It should be noted that the bulk, perhaps up to half of all archaeological excavations are deemed to be of ‘no archaeological significance’ – a potentially troubling issue for Irish archaeology that needs to be resolved (i.e. it could reasonably be asked if public and private expenditure should continue be devoted to such a quantity of excavations, while other areas of archaeology remain hopelessly understaffed and under funded?)

‘License’ Form
License Field Information The database embedded the license form within the site form. The license form was concerned with excavation­specific information. The source of this excavation material was the excavations bulletin as outlined above. ! The first field was the ‘excavations license No.’ that in many cases was supplied by the excavations bulletin reports. An appendix within the Unpublished Excavations Survey 1930­1997 (Doyle et. al 2002) also supplied a number of excavation license numbers for the EMAP database. Two other fields contained within the license form were the ‘excavations Bulletin No.’ and ‘excavations Bulletin name’. They were typically in the form of 1973:0034 & Crannogs. Fields in the EMAP database were created to help establish a link between

!

16

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 2: Designing the EMAP Database

the numbers and names employed by both the excavation bulletin database and the EMAP database. ! An ‘Area’ field specific to the excavation license was also created. It was found that urban ‘sites’ often encompassed a whole area or number of streets. This field was used in urban excavations to contain location information about excavations in different streets adjacent to or immediately on ‘Sites’ like churches and cemeteries or Hiberno­Norse settlement plots etc. The year or years, which an excavation license was used, was also contained within a year field. Drop down lists were created to store information about either the commercial company or archaeological institution involved in the excavation and the report writer as mentioned in the excavations bulletin reports. In the great majority of cases, the report writer appears to have been synonymous with the director of the excavation. Drop down lists were constructed to store Information about the excavation type (Testing, Monitoring, Research, Conservation, Rescue & Non Excavation) and about the development schemes undertaken, if any (e.g. Bord Gáis Schemes, Road Scheme, Sewerage Schemes, Development, Residential Development or Farm Improvement Schemes etc.). A Drop down list was provided to contain information about the early medieval dates of the archaeology. It gave a list of options including early medieval, None, Uncertain and 7th century, 7/8th centuries etc. The term ‘early medieval’ was used when the excavation only revealed archaeological evidence that could be generally dated to this period or if the evidence dated to a number of centuries across the early medieval period. ‘None’ was employed when the excavation revealed no early medieval evidence, as was often the case at excavations on or near protected monuments. ‘Uncertain’ referred to those ‘excavations’ whose date was currently uncertain but who were deemed necessary to be described as such as they could ‘potentially’ date to the early medieval period. The Drop down list then contained a number of options particular to the century or group of centuries through the early medieval period. For instance, an excavation which only revealed a horizontal mill that was dated to the 8th century would be listed as ‘8th century’ in this field. Two fields were finally created to contain early medieval radiocarbon and dendrochronological dates.

! !

!

!

!

Tick Boxes ! It was important to establish if the excavation undertaken on a ‘site’ was of archaeological significance. This task has already been completed by a team of archaeologists working for the unpublished excavations Survey 1930­1997 (Doyle et al 2002). commissioned by the Heritage Council who dealt with licenses from all periods. It was decided not to categorise the excavations in terms of their importance at this Stage of EMAP but to simply state whether they were considered to be of early medieval archaeological or non­archaeological significance. A tick box was employed in this instance. A tick box was also used to describe an excavation near or on a ‘site’. Excavations that were undertaken near protected monuments like ringforts or ecclesiastical sites received a tick. A tick box was also used to describe excavation reports in the excavations bulletin that contained no information. It appears that no excavation report was submitted to the excavations bulletin in these instances. Excavations of potential early medieval

!

!

17

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 2: Designing the EMAP Database

sites were listed in the database and will need to be checked at a later stage. They were described as uncertain in terms of their archaeological significance and dating, as discussed above. Activities There are problems in using the excavation bulletin as a source of information to reconstruct evidence for different settlement, industrial and agricultural activities as different report writers are likely to give more detail than others about these practices. Information was collected for a range of activities. It was decided to make the below visible only as there still exists issues with the quality of the data currently available. Tick boxes were used to identify different activities uncovered within different excavations. It must be said that the same excavation can contain a number of different activities while different excavations within a site form can contain the same activities. Tick boxes for metal/ironworking, cereal cultivation and animal husbandry as well as burial evidence were recorded. Burial activities were also collected within the excavation form. They were subdivided into the three groups of Transitional Iron Age/early medieval burial, Formal Christian Burial and Miscellaneous/Viking Burial. Evidence for any form of burial outside an ecclesiastical context from the 5­7th century A.D. was classified as ‘Transitional Iron Age/early medieval burial’. Evidence for formal Christian burial practices in ecclesiastical contexts was collected under the term ‘Formal Christian Burial’. ‘Miscellaneous/Viking Burials’ referred to those excavations which revealed evidence for unenclosed cemeteries/burials as well as burials on settlement /cemetery sites. It was entirely plausible for a license to evidence for two or even three of these different burial categories.

Assessing the Excavated Material
Monuments, Structures and Artefacts It was necessary to assess the nature of the archaeological evidence when basic data about the site and the excavation license had been collected. It is axiomatic that the excavated archaeological evidence is of variable character and can comprise monuments, structures and artefacts. The objective of this initial phase of EMAP was a rapid quantification of the excavated early medieval archaeological evidence. This evidence could comprise a wide spectrum of excavated monuments, structures and artefacts including field systems, ringforts/enclosures, souterrains, mills, kilns, hearths, slag and ironworking debris, domestic artefacts and animal bone. EMAP Stage 1 Data Collection ! The principal objective of EMAP Stage 1 was a rapid quantification of the excavated archaeological evidence reported in the excavations bulletin reports 1970­2002. It was decided to collect all forms of excavated monuments, structures and artefacts within the same multi­choice box for this stage of the project. This multi­choice column was embedded inside the excavation license and contained all the excavated material belonging to that license. Each excavated monument, structure and artefact are best viewed as constituent parts of an excavated ‘site’ found during a particular excavation. The multi­choice column contained a whole range of monuments including enclosure, ringfort, ecclesiastical site and souterrain (See Appendix 1). It also gathered data about different types of burials, buildings, structures and churches, mills, kilns, trackways and town defences as well as a range of other evidence including property divisions, holy wells, ogham stones, pilgrimage sites, hearths, slag & metalworking

!

18

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 2: Designing the EMAP Database

debris, pottery, field systems/enclosures and banks/ditches etc. Excavations of enclosing features of settlement and ecclesiastical enclosure sites were also collected. ! It is evident that the excavation bulletin reports do not provide specific detail about artefacts discovered during excavations. The study of artefacts, for this stage of EMAP, was gathered into a number of groups that comprised domestic artefacts, bodily artefacts (i.e. clothing, brooches, etc), agricultural artefacts, military artefacts, recreational artefacts, religious artefacts and commercial artefacts. A related column was created known as type and it contained fields for the different types of pottery, coins and bullion and other material­culture. It is envisioned that these multi­column fields will be expanded and re­organised at a later stage in the project when accurate information can be provided in excavation reports and published journals/monograms. Another associated multi­column box collected information about the shape of monuments and structures. It contained a whole list of options to deal with the shapes of enclosures, field systems, kilns and buildings. The multi­choice column is again in its infancy and information was not always provided about the shape of ecclesiastical enclosures or cashel enclosures for instance. Excavation reports will have to be consulted at a later stage to fill and expand this field. Two other associated multi­choice columns were also created and were known as the quantity and range fields. The Quantity field gave accurate information about the amounts of excavated monuments, structures or artefacts. This quality of information was not always provided in the excavations bulletin however. In cases where an indeterminate number of monuments, structures and artefacts were excavated, it contained a number of ranges that could be used (e.g. 1­10, 11­50 & 51­300). It was particular useful for dealing with artefacts. One issue arose when a number of excavations were undertaken on a monument like an ecclesiastical site. The ecclesiastical site obviously encompassed the whole monument yet it was also listed in the multi­choice column within the license form as an excavated feature of the site. Each license had obviously excavated the ecclesiastical site but the term could only be contained within one license, as it would otherwise distort the amount of excavated ecclesiastical sites if a query were made. This problem included monuments like ringforts, cashels, souterrains, enclosures and ecclesiastical sites. It was decided to contain the excavated monument within one license form of the site. This method did not affect the accuracy of the data collected though it did make for an untidy current data model. In retrospect, it would have been perhaps wiser to collect excavated monuments within the separate associated license forms and devise another way of establishing accurate figures for excavated ‘sites’ like ringforts within the database.

!

!

!

Database Management Issues and Potential Solutions There is a wide range of issues with the current EMAP database which concern how the data is presented, organized and managed. It is envisaged that these issues can be resolved during a period in EMAP Stage 2 when the database is re­organised. The principal issue with the database concerns the management and organization of the excavated archaeological evidence. This issue will involve a good deal of thought and testing as the archaeological evidence by its character is quite diverse and complex. Two other issues relate to locational and license­specific details and the construction of an archaeological bibliography. EMAP Stage 1 Data Management Data about the types of monuments, structures and artefacts are collected at two levels within the present EMAP database. The EMAP Class field was located within the site form. It designed to reflect the complete archaeological evidence contained within the excavation licenses that constituted that ‘site’. The EMAP Class field would be described as a ringfort if

19

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 2: Designing the EMAP Database

only that one ringfort was excavated by one or a number of excavation licenses. The same could be said for excavated crannogs, enclosures, ecclesiastical sites, ironworking sites and even bullaun stones. The site was described as ‘early medieval settlement landscape’ if a number of monuments were excavated within one or a number of associated excavation licenses. The site was described as a ‘multi­phase settlement’ if it contained evidence for a number of discrete phases of early medieval activity containing different monument types such as ringforts or unenclosed settlements. The EMAP Class field did not contain then a completely accurate figure of excavated ringforts for instance but instead reflected the scope of the associated excavated licenses. A category field also grouped these EMAP Class site into broader terms as discussed above. Excavated monuments, structures and artefacts were contained within a multi­column box embedded within the associated excavation licenses, as outlined above. Accurate Quantities or ranges of Quantities of these excavated monuments, structures and artefacts were also provided in a linked multi­column box. It was observed that excavated monuments like cashels, crannogs or even structures like buildings and kilns which were the focus of more than one excavation license within the associated site form were only listed in one excavation license. This, perhaps, unwise method was utilised to establish accurate figures for the amount of excavated monuments such as ringforts or structures such as buildings. The database cannot currently provide accurate information about the amount of excavation licenses in which a monument or structure such as a building was excavated. The figure is likely to be slightly larger than the figures for excavated monuments and structures outlined in the results section. The database finally toyed with the idea of creating an SMR Class field within the Site form. It was speculated whether it could be possible to collect data about the number and classes of excavated SMR monuments and structures such as ‘enclosure’, ‘ringfort’, ‘cemetery’, ‘kiln’ and ‘building’ within a multi­column box in the site form of the EMAP database. No decisions were reached about this field and no data was collected for excavated SMR Classes though excavations near SMR monument Classes such as ecclesiastical sites were collected in a separate field in the Site form. Other than the tick boxes used to describe evidence for activities within the separate excavation licenses, that then is the current standing of how archaeological data is gathered within the EMAP database. EMAP Stage 1 Data Issues The method outlined above proved a useful preliminary way of establishing figures for the type, shape and number of excavated early medieval monuments, structures and artefacts. The EMAP Class field described the complete archaeological evidence of the defined ‘site’ while the multi­column box in the license forms contained information about the constituent parts, be they a ringfort or artefact. However there are a number of problems with such a way of collecting such diverse forms of excavated data. There are cases, as outlined above, in which large monuments like ringforts could potentially represent only one constituent part of an EMAP Site. However, it is evident that monuments such as ringforts, enclosures, ecclesiastical sites and souterrains are significant morphological features that should be distinguished in some way from artefacts or structures. It is evident that a single multi­ column box is unsuitable for collecting accurate and detailed information about this diverse set of evidence. This list will then have to be broken up into discrete sets of evidence dealing with different monuments, structures, artefacts and activities, as discussed below. Another problem with the database is that it can only extract information about the number of excavated ringfort monuments/structures and not the number of excavation licenses that contain excavated monuments/structures. If the cathedral at Glendalough was excavated by a number of different archaeologists with different licenses, the present database could only provide information that a ‘church’ at Glendalough was excavated in one associated license in

20

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 2: Designing the EMAP Database

the ‘site’ form. It is evident that a potential database needs to be able to be able to distinguish between monuments, structures and artefacts and that it should be able to extract accurate information about the number of excavated monuments, structures and artefacts and the number of excavation licenses that contain monuments, structures and artefacts. Potential Solutions One potential solution could be to create three tiers or levels in which data was gathered about these archaeological features. The first and ultimate level of description is the EMAP Class which provides a complete description of the archaeological evidence on the EMAP defined site. It can comprise such classes as promontory fort; hillfort; settlement/cemetery site; transitional Iron Age/early medieval cemetery; unenclosed settlement; ironworking sites to other sites like bullaun stones. Sites that comprise a number of monuments either spatially or vertically can be described as ‘early medieval settlement landscapes’ and multi­phase settlement. Perhaps more discriminatory terms can be suggested for the EMAP Class field but is must be said that the concept of an overarching EMAP Class, particular to the database, does appear attractive. The broader category field also appears to be workable. The next level of data gathering could comprise a monuments/structures Class List situated within a separate multi­column box within the ‘site’ form. The Class terms would be based on the SMR Class list that comprises hundreds of terms describing monuments and structures. EMAP could review these terms and use a restricted range of these classes such as ringfort, enclosure, Building, cemetery, Church, field system, high cross, Kiln­ corn drying, souterrain, promontory fort & Town defences etc. These excavated monuments, as well as some structures would be situated in a multi­column field in the Site form. The SMR number, if any, of these restricted ranges of early medieval monuments/structures could also be collected in the Site form. This field could importantly provide information about the number of relevant early medieval SMR Classes excavated and would provide an important link between excavated early medieval SMR monuments/structures and the EMAP database. In broader terms, it would be able to extract accurate information about the number of excavated important monuments and structures at EMAP defined sites. A further multi­column field will collect data about excavations undertaken adjacent to SMR Sites and Monuments. A field with a list of drop down options for a restricted range of SMR sites such as ringforts, cashels, ecclesiastical sites, crannogs and cemetery site are present within the site form in the present database. This field would have to be transformed into a multi­column box in phase 2 of EMAP. This multi­column box could provide information about excavations near protected SMR sites. The next tier of data gathering would be at the level of the excavation license form. Information from the single multi­column box on the current EMAP database would be re­ organised into discrete tables of information concerning monuments, structures, morphological features, artefacts and activities. A unique table would be created for monuments/sites (e.g. Cashels, crannogs, unenclosed site, souterrains). A range of separate tables would also be created for the morphological features (e.g. enclosing features like Banks and ditches), structures including buildings, Town defences, Kilns, Mills and agricultural features (field systems etc.). Discrete tables would be created for activities including iron/metalworking and burial practices as well as artefacts (domestic, agricultural and items of adornment etc.). Further tables collecting data about the shape, quantity, type and size of these monuments, structures, artefacts and activities could be created within these discrete tables of information. These discrete tables would contain further detailed information about early medieval excavated monuments, structures, artefacts and activities. They could provide information about the number of excavation licenses that contain monuments, structures, artefacts and activities.

21

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 2: Designing the EMAP Database

Locational and License­specific details Another issue of the database relates to the presentation and organization of locational and ‘license’ specific details. Fields within the Site and License table were created to contain information about locational and license specific detail including the name of the archaeological community, the year(s), the report writer, the excavation bulletin and the scheme or project the archaeological excavation was undertaken along. These last few examples with the exception of the excavations bulletin number all contained drop down lists. Data gathering soon revealed that licenses may contain more than one report writer, excavation bulletin number, year and even company while sites maybe located in more than one townland or even barony. All the necessary evidence was collected within the fields through using a semi­colon to distinguish between sets of different data (e.g. Forthill; Ballycarry). The use of the semi­colon did not affect the accuracy of the data and wild card querying (e.g. *Forthill*) could establish accurate information about this locational and license­specific details. It is evident however that discrete tables linked to the site table will have to be created for these fields in EMAP Stage2. This will not involve re­typing all this information as Microsoft Excel enables one to translate rows of data that are systematically sub­divided by symbols into columns of data. These columns can then be used to create tables of information. Further tables concerning details about archaeological companies and schemes/projects could then be linked to the primary table. This would provide an improved data model that could deal with the complexity of the archaeological evidence. Archaeological Bibliography A memo field was created at the bottom of the site form to list relevant archaeological publications for the site in question and source quoted information if used within the archaeological synopsis. It is not possible however to currently create an archive of archaeological publications within the database as it only exists as a field within the site form. It is envisaged that a discrete table linked to the site form will be created for an archaeological bibliography of titles. Separate tables for the author, the publication year and the archaeological subject (e.g. Settlement, ecclesiastical, burial) will be linked to this table and will enable one to search for publications by title, year, author or subject. A small bibliography is currently available on the EMAP web page that has been broken into a number of themes including settlement, industry, buildings, ecclesiastical archaeology etc. http://www.ucd.ie/archaeology/research/emap/documents/EMAP_Bibliography_Oct_2007.pdf It is hoped that this bibliography will eventually develop into a major archive of early medieval excavation publications that can be accessed on the EMAP database.

22

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

Chapter 3. The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

Introduction
There is a range of questions that need to be clearly established involving the background to, the practice of, and the character of early medieval­ related excavations over time. It is well known that archaeological excavations have increased dramatically in Ireland in recent years. Major infrastructural schemes, urban and rural development­led projects and new planning legislation have all transformed the sheer number and character of excavations undertaken annually. They have also dramatically altered the shape, face and make­up of the Irish archaeological organisations dealing with these recent spectacular changes. Furthermore and perhaps most importantly, they have radically changed the character of archaeological evidence recovered in recent years. These developments have yet to be fully worked out to understand their implications and potential in transforming our knowledge of past societies in Ireland. EMAP Stage 1 sought to examine some of these key developments through a rapid assessment of the excavated evidence available principally on the online excavations bulletin (1970­2002). The EMAP database includes data on 1,397 sites at the present, containing information about excavations on, and near, early medieval or potentially early medieval sites, monuments and structures. A total of 1,968 excavation licenses were used for excavating those 1,397 sites. Most ‘sites’ typically contain only one excavation license, a good example being an excavation of an isolated ironworking site discovered along a road scheme. It is also unlikely that further excavation will be undertaken at such sites. However, there is always the potential that a number of different excavation licenses may be undertaken on a large monument such as a ringfort or ecclesiastical site. An extreme example is Clonmacnoise, Co. Offaly where over 27 excavation licenses were issued for that ‘site’ from 1970­2002. Key research questions of this chapter’s assessment of the character of early medieval excavations in Ireland include those aiming to establish: ! ! ! ! ! ! What is the approximate number of annual excavations from 1970­2002 that concern early medieval­related material? What is the distribution of these excavations and excavated sites across the country? Who has been responsible for these excavations (i.e. Universities, government and commercial sectors) and how have patterns changed over time? What is the approximate number of excavation types (e.g. Testing, rescue, research) and how has the character of these excavation types changed over time? How significant is the early medieval archaeological evidence recovered from these excavation types and how has patterns changed over time? Why have excavations been undertaken and what have been the impacts of different infrastructural and development schemes and projects?

Early Medieval Excavations 1970­2002
Early Medieval Excavations Annually 1970­2002 Under Irish system of licensing, a site excavation can often continue from one year to the next. This was particularly the case in the 1970’s and 1980’s when excavations, often research­based, may have been undertaken at the same site over a number of seasons. To describe an extreme example, the same excavation license was used for excavations at

23

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

Knowth, Co. Meath for 32 years from 1970­2002. In more recent years, new excavation licenses tend to be issued more frequently. As excavation licenses can continue from one year to the next, it is then evident that the number of excavations licenses (a total of 1,968 on early medieval sites) is likely to be less than the number of excavations undertaken annually. Table 1 and Figure 1 below describe the amount of excavations undertaken annually from 1970­2002, not the number of excavation licenses issued from 1970­2002, which dealt with early medieval or potential early medieval archaeological evidence. It was felt that examining the amount of excavations undertaken annually rather than the amount of excavations licenses issued each year would better demonstrates the increase in excavation activity from 1970­2002. The graphics illustrate in particular the huge increase in excavations undertaken annually, particularly from 1993/1994 onwards. The exponential increase in archaeological excavations in the late 20th century/early 21st century can also be clearly seen. No data is currently available on excavations carried out 2003­2007, but there is no reason to suppose that the increase rate has changed. Table 1: Early Medieval Excavations Annually 1970­2002 Year 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 Total 14 18 19 19 16 18 14 15 16 17 18 22 24 26 19 25 28 Year 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Total 22 31 38 55 51 66 73 74 83 105 131 172 239 253 286 385

­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­

24

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

Excavations Annually 1970-2002
450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0
19 70 19 72 19 74 19 76 19 78 19 80 19 82 19 84 19 86 19 88 19 90 19 92 19 94 19 96 19 98 20 00 20 02

Number of Excavations

Year

Figure 1: Early Medieval Excavations Annually 1970­2002 Excavated Sites per County The database contained entries for 1,397 sites. Table 2 and Figure 2 illustrate the results of where these excavations took place. The highest number of sites was found to be in Dublin, followed closely by Cork. It is clear that the counties of Meath, Louth and Dublin county also have a high proportion of the excavations, undoubtedly because of their proximity to Dublin city today, with all its development pressures. To this area, we could perhaps add Co. Kildare that has also witnessed a large amount of excavations in recent years near or on early medieval sites. It is instructive to note that relatively few excavations on or near early medieval sites have been undertaken across the rest of Leinster with the exception perhaps of Westmeath. Elsewhere, Antrim has been the principal focus in the northeast, while relatively few excavations have been undertaken in the northwest and west while parts of Munster, particularly Kerry and areas of Cork have received some attention between 1970­ 2002.

25

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

Table 2: Early Medieval Excavated Sites Per County 1970­2002 County Antrim Armagh Carlow Cavan Clare Cork Derry Donegal Down Dublin Fermanagh Galway Kerry Kildare Kilkenny Laois Exc. Site 64 17 5 15 61 117 18 28 39 132 14 66 96 74 26 11 County Leitrim Limerick Longford Louth Mayo Meath Monaghan Offaly Roscommon Sligo Tipperary Tyrone Waterford Westmeath Wexford Wicklow Exc. Site 10 61 7 68 53 90 11 25 34 49 53 19 36 46 29 23

­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­

Excavated Sites Per County 1970-2002
Wicklow Wexford Westmeath Waterford Tyrone Tipperary Sligo Roscommon Offaly Monaghan Meath Mayo Louth Longford Limerick Leitrim Laois Kilkenny Kildare Kerry Galway Fermanagh Dublin Down Donegal Derry Cork Clare Cavan Carlow Armagh Antrim

C ounty

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Excavated Sites

Figure 2: Early Medieval Excavated Sites Per County 1970­2002
26

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

Annual Excavations per County These geographical results can be analysed further. It is possible to study the amount of excavations being undertaken annually at different sites across the country to further analyse the factors behind the changing distribution of excavations across the island. As excavations can continue from year to year, the figures are greater again for the amount of excavation licenses issued for each county. Table 3 illustrates the results. Table 3: Early Medieval Excavations Annually Per County 1970­2002

27

1970

1971

1972

1973

1974

1975

1976

1977

1978

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

Year
Total 84 45 8 17 4 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 3 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 1 0 1 1 1 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 3 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 2 2 0 1 0 0 1 2 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 0 1 0 1 2 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 2 1 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 2 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 7 0 0 0 0 1 0 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 4 1 1 0 3 1 0 1 0 0 1 5 0 2 0 0 1 0 4 5 0 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 1 1 0 3 0 2 1 2 1 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 2 5 5 0 4 1 0 2 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 2 2 6 0 5 2 1 2 0 3 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 3 1 1 0 1 2 2 2 0 5 2 4 0 6 3 2 1 0 0 0 4 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 2 1 2 4 0 6 1 1 0 2 0 8 4 6 0 4 1 3 3 1 0 2 2 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 2 3 3 1 2 2 7 6 7 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 3 4 5 3 2 5 5 8 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 8 1 2 3 3 1 1 2 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 2 4 8 9 1 1 0 0 1 1 3 1 2 1 5 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 1 2 1 1 0 1 5 3 6 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 4 4 6 4 16 5 6 2 1 1 3 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 2 1 0 1 2 3 3 2 3 2 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 3 2 3 3 1 1 1 1 2 3 4 4 4 6 5 5 6 4 15 12 30 35 158 37 46 60 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 2 5 3 7 12 18 18 20 99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 3 4 3 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 3 1 2 0 0 1 1 1 3 2 1 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 1 3 1 4 3 2 1 1 1 0 2 1 4 3 2 3 3 2 0 2 2 0 1 2 3 2 3 2 5 1 0 0 1 4 0 3 2 3 4 3 5 4 7 3 4

2

4

0

2

0

0

0

0

1

1

0

0

2

0

0

0

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

1

2

2

2

10 11 16 14 12 22 15 15 30 30 22 41 297 1 8 4 2 1 16 14 11 14 96 16 15 21 26 169 7 1 3 0 6 0 9 4 5 0 4 2 3 2 0 1 0 2 2 8 2 1 0 7 0 3 9 6 0 6 3 3 9 0 7 1 5 2 14 18 14 16 41 149 6 3 0 8 2 7 1 0 4 3 1 7 2 7 6 1 4 44 20 14 12 11 17 25 102 1 0 0 3 9 13 21 12 11 19 115 6 10 6 14 13 79 11 19 11 15 35 186 5 7 4 5 5 0 7 2 6 5 3 6 7 7 1 10 6 13 3 12 9 3 0 4 3 3 3 8 1 3 9 6 7 9 0 9 7 16 77 52 13 69 11 13 79 1 9 0 5 33 60 12 14 67 7 5 8 7 49 41

0

0

0

0

1

0

10 10 9

1

3

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

2

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

2

0

1

2

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

28

0

0

0

0

0

0

Y e a r i mAntrim g h Armagh o w Carlow a n Cavan r e Clare r k Cork r y Derry a l Donegal w n Down i n Dublin g h Fermanag ah y Galway r y Kerry r e Kildare n y Kilkenny i s Laois i mLeitrim c k Limerick r d Longford t h Louth y o Mayo t h Meath a n Monagha l n y Offaly o n Roscomm g on o Sligo r y Tipperary n e Tyrone r d Waterford t h Westmeat r h d Wexford o w Wicklow a l Total

0

0

14 18 19 19 16 18 14 15 16 17 18 22 25 26 19 25 28 22 31 38 55 51 66 73 74 83 105 131 172 239 253 286 385 2393

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

The Character and Scale of Excavations in the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland Different jurisdictions on the island of Ireland have traditionally approached archaeology in different ways; whether it has been archaeological survey, museums collections or excavation. EMAP statistics indicate that the Northern Ireland Historic Monuments Branch was at the forefront of rescue and research excavations in the 1970’s and 1980’s, many of which proved to be very significant. EMAP also shows that there has been a sizeable increase in excavations in the Republic of Ireland in recent years due to new protective legislation and the ‘Celtic Tiger’ phenomenon. The table and graph below comparatively illustrates the difference in the amount of excavations undertaken annually in two counties in the Republic of Ireland (Donegal and Clare) and two counties (Tyrone and Antrim) in Northern Ireland. They reveal that the amount of excavations being undertaken at or near early medieval or potential early medieval sites has remained generally consistent across Northern Ireland from 1970­2002, while excavations in both urban and rural areas in counties like Clare and Donegal within the Republic have increased dramatically in recent years.

Year 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

Antrim 2 4 4 3 3 2 0 2 2 0 1 2 3 2 3 2 5 1 0 0 1 4 0 3 2 3 4 3 5 4

Tyrone 1 2 1 2 2 1 0 1 1 1 5 2 3 1 1 2 2 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

Clare 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 2 5 3 7 12

Donegal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 4 4 6

29

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

2000 2001 2002 Total (County)

7 3 4 84

1 1 0 33

18 18 20 99

4 16 5 46

Table 4: Comparative Analysis of Excavations Annually 1970­2002 in counties in the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland

Excavations Annually in R.O.I. and N.I. 1970-2002
40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0
1970

Excations Per County

Donegal Clare Tryone Antrim

1972

1974

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

Year
Figure 3: Comparative Analysis of Excavations Annually 1970­2002 in counties in the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland

Elsewhere, the amount of excavations in recent years in eastern counties like Kildare, Louth, Meath and Dublin is unparalleled across the island. This fact is of particular importance when we compare the geographical size of these counties, in particular Louth or Dublin, to that from large western and Northern counties like Tipperary, Galway, Mayo, Roscommon, Tyrone or even Antrim who have fewer excavations in comparison to their size. The rate of excavations undertaken annually by Archaeological Organisations in Ireland The excavations undertaken annually by different governmental, academic and commercial organizations were next established. The figures clearly reveal that the rate of excavations undertaken by both university and governmental companies remained relatively constant throughout the period. It also clearly illustrates the huge increase in excavations undertaken annually by commercial companies. The number of excavations undertaken annually by the Universities amounted to 245 with those by government and commercial organizations numbering 535 and 1597 respectively. There were 15 excavations whose affiliated company could not be established and they were excluded from this graph. The figures for the universities included that of the Archaeological Services Unit in UCC.

2002
30

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Total

University 6 4 5 6 6 6 3 4 1 3 4 10 8 5 5 3 4 6 4 7 8 7 9 11 13 7 8 14 11 14 9 15 19 245

­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­

Government 8 14 14 13 10 12 11 11 15 13 13 9 14 20 12 19 17 13 16 19 31 25 28 31 22 19 16 19 19 11 11 13 17 535

­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­

Commercial 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 3 2 1 2 3 7 3 11 12 15 19 28 29 38 57 81 96 141 213 230 256 348 1597

Table 5: Excavations Annually Per Archaeological Institution 1970­2002

31

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

Excavations Annually Per Institution 1970-2002
450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0

Number of Excavations

Commercial Government University

University Excavations and associated Excavation Licenses The EMAP database then reviewed the number of excavation licenses that were issued to university, governmental and commercial organizations. It established that in 1970­2002, there were 20 excavations undertaken by staff from a range of universities including those of Glasgow, Birmingham, Stockholm, York, Manchester and Cambridge from Britain, Cornell University, Ithaca (New York), City University of New York (CUNY), University of California (Berkeley) and University of Pennsylvania. Excavations by Irish Universities included five excavations by University of Ulster and its associated Center for Maritime Archaeology at 2 sites, one excavation undertaken by Leo Swan then of St. Patrick’s College, Drumcondra at Corbetstown in Westmeath and one excavation by Prof. Terry Barry of Trinity College Dublin at Dunbeg Promontory Fort, Co. Kerry. Staff at Queen’s University Belfast conducted 19 excavations at 17 sites. The Dept. of Archaeology at University College Galway (then UCG, now NUIG) undertook 7 excavations at 7 sites. The Dept. of Archaeology (now UCD School of Archaeology) at University College Dublin (UCD;) undertook 10 excavations at 9 sites. The UCD­ based and National Monuments service­funded Irish Archaeological Wetland Unit (IAWU), also conducted 8 excavations at 8 early medieval wetland archaeology sites. The Dept. of Archaeology at University College Cork (UCC) accounted for the largest number of excavations; totaling 33 excavations at 31 sites (most of these undertaken by the staff of the Archaeological Services Unit, then based in UCC, amounting to 49 excavations at 46 sites).

19 70 19 72 19 74 19 76 19 78 19 80 19 82 19 84 19 86 19 88 19 90 19 92 19 94 19 96 19 98 20 00 20 02

Year

Figure 4: Excavations Annually Per Archaeological Institution 1970­2002

32

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

University University College Cork University College Dublin University College Galway Queen's University Belfast University of Ulster St. Patrick's College Drumcondra Trinity College Dublin British & European Universities American Universities Total

Excavation Licenses 82 18 7 19 5 1 1 13 7 145

Sites 77 17 7 17 3 1 1 13 7 135

Table 6: Excavation Licenses and Sites Excavated Per University unit 1970­2002 The EMAP survey revealed that approximately 135 sites containing early medieval and potential early medieval evidence has been excavated by archaeologists in the university sector, of which 145 excavation licenses were issued for this purpose. The number of ‘seasons’ of excavations undertaken annually by the University sector amounted to 245 indicating that a large number of these excavations licenses were issued for long­term research projects, as was the case at Knowth, Co. Meath or Lisleagh ringfort, Co. Cork. State­funded Excavations and associated Excavation Licenses EMAP established that 331 sites were excavated by state or governmental organizations, with a total of 361 excavation licenses were issued for this purpose. The Northern Ireland Historic Monuments Branch appears to have undertaken a particularly high number of excavations at early medieval sites, particularly in the 1970’s and 1980’s. Many of these were subsequently published in UJA and other journals. Government Organisation Urban Archaeological Survey of Ireland OPW National Monuments and Historic Properties, Dúchas OPW and Dúchas FÁS Schemes N. Ireland Historic Monuments Branch Environment & Heritage Service, Belfast Cork Corporation Dublin Corporation Galway Corporation Waterford Corporation Wexford Corporation Discovery Programme Fermanagh County Museum National Museum of Ireland Ulster Museum Kerry County Museum Total Exc. License 1 91 32 7 98 14 8 5 2 17 1 8 1 34 13 6 338 Sites 1 109 33 7 86 12 7 4 1 13 1 8 1 34 10 6 333

Table 7: Excavation Licenses and Sites Excavated Per Government Body 1970­2002 The number of excavations undertaken annually by different government bodies amounted to 535 from 1970­2002. The number of excavation licenses issued was however 338 for the same time frame that also indicates that a sizeable number of these excavations were undertaken over a number of years.

33

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

Commercial Excavations and associated Excavation Licenses However, as is well known (see Fig. 4 above), the great majority of the archaeological excavations undertaken on or near potential early medieval sites or monuments in 1970­2002, were carried out by commercial archaeological companies and consultancies. Beginning in the early 1990s, both urban development and rural infrastructural development begain in earnest, as the Irish economy began to be transformed. Archaeological companies were being established (although some, such as Valerie J. Keeley Ltd, Margaret Gowen & Co Ltd and Archaeological Development Services were companies already operating at the time) and these began to carry out more and more excavations as part of mitigation of archaeological disturbance as required by the planning process. By the late 1990s, these developments were in full flood, codes of practice were being established with the NRA, Bord Gáis and other state agencies and a growing number of commercial archaeological companies and individuals were active in the field. By 2002, Irish archaeological practice had been utterly transformed. The table below comprises the number of excavation licenses in ascending order associated with different commercial archaeological companies from 1970­2002. In a number of rare cases, two companies appear to have been associated with the same excavation license and in these cases, a number was added to both companies. The figures below therefore do not reflect then an accurate number of excavation licenses issued but the number of excavation licenses associated with different companies. Table 8: Excavation Licenses and Sites Excavated Per Commercial Company 1970­2002
Associated Excavation Licenses in EMAP Database (1970­2002) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 5 5 8 9 14 17 18 19 22 24

Commercial Archaeological Company Achill Archaeological Summer School AOC Archaeology Group Archaeological Diving Company Archaeology Underwater Ltd. Carlingford Lough Heritage Trust CFA Archaeology, East Lothian Dagda Archaeological Projects Dublin Archaeological Research Team GeoArc Neil O’Flanagan Rathmichael Historical Society Roscrea Archaeological Survey Team South Eastern Archaeology Underwater Archaeological Unit, Dúchas ArchCor IUART ArchaeoGrafix GAC Ltd. Waterford Archaeological Excavations Dublin Corporation Stafford McLoughlin Archaeology Discovery Programme John Channing Environment & Heritage Service, Belfast Dominic Delany Archaeological Projects Judith Carroll Archaeological Consultancy Ltd. Arch­Tech

34

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

Moore Archaeological and Environmental Services Northern Archaeological Consultancy CRDS Mary Henry Archaeological Services IAC Aegis Archaeology Sheila Lane North West Archaeological Services Archaeological Services Unit, Oranmore Eachtra Valerie J Keeley ADS ACS Margaret Gowen Freelance Total

24 24 28 34 36 37 44 45 51 86 88 140 141 200 319 1515

The principal single archaeological companies responsible for excavations of early medieval sites are: ! Margaret Gowen (200 sites) ! ACS (141 sites) ! ADS (140 sites) ! Valerie J Keeley Ltd (88 sites) ! Eachtra (86 sites) Undoubtedly, these company’s archives and expert archaeologists comprise potentially the greatest resource for research and publication on early medieval archaeology. However, it is interesting that ‘Freelance’ excavations (i.e. completed by site directors not explicitly linked with an institution or company) were in fact responsible for the most excavations undertaken. These excavations typically involved testing near or on an archaeological monument and rarely revealed any early medieval archaeology of any significance. The total number of excavation licenses associated with different commercial companies then amounted to 1,466. The total number of excavations undertaken annually by commercial companies was approximately 1,597. The comparison of both figures indicates that excavation licenses issued to commercial archaeological companies tended to be only used for one year typically. The provisional EMAP survey then identified that ! 145 excavation licenses (7%) associated with Universities ! 336 excavation licenses (17%) associated with government bodies ! 1515 excavation licenses (75%) associated with commercial companies. ! Unidentified (1%) These numbers total 1,947 and refer to the number of excavation licenses associated with different university, government and commercial bodies. The body responsible for a further 15 excavation licenses could also not be established.

Excavation Type
There are 1,397 defined sites and 1,968 excavation licenses from 1970­2002 within the EMAP database. The table and graph illustrate the excavation types.

35

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

Table 9: Issued Excavation License Types 1970­2002 Exc. Type Conservation Monitoring Non Excavation Rescue Research Testing Uncertain Total Number 106 394 19 526 78 836 9 1968 Percent 5 20 1 27 4 43 0 100

Early Medieval Excavation License Types 1970-2002

9, 0% 106, 5% 394, 20% 836, 43% 19, 1% Conservation Monitoring Non Excavation Rescue Research 78, 4% 526, 27% Testing Uncertain

Figure 5: Issued Excavation License Types 1970­2002 As was the case with the Heritage Council’s unpublished excavations survey, testing was found to be the dominant type of excavation. Rescue and monitoring type excavations followed it. The excavation bulletin reports typically provided the information for the type of excavation that was undertaken. It is evident then that there is undoubtedly a small error in the actual amount of excavation types. Recently Archaeology.ie has been launched with the expectation to eventually put up online excavation reports. These reports contain information about the type of excavation that was undertaken at sites. EMAP should, at a later stage in the project, be able to establish more figures for the number of different excavation types that were undertaken on and near early medieval monuments and structures. Excavation Types Annually It was decided to establish the amount of different excavation types undertaken annually from 1970­2002. As excavation licenses can continue from year to year, these figures revealed the amount of the excavations types undertaken annually and not the number of issued excavation

36

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

license types. The figures then total more than the 1,968 excavation licenses whose types are listed and graphically represented immediately above.

Table 10: Excavation Types Annually 1970­2002
Yea r 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Conservation 3 1 4 3 2 2 0 2 1 0 0 0 3 2 1 3 6 2 4 9 10 6 8 8 4 8 9 8 8 11 7 8 14 Monitoring 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 4 4 4 7 5 9 10 25 33 67 62 85 115 Rescue 5 12 11 12 9 10 10 10 10 12 6 11 11 13 9 13 16 13 20 7 25 17 20 22 19 10 21 25 28 42 45 59 87 Testing 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 1 1 2 0 3 2 3 0 0 2 7 9 15 20 25 31 38 56 60 92 110 129 128 162 Research 6 5 4 4 5 5 3 3 3 4 7 8 9 7 7 6 6 7 4 8 7 5 11 10 14 16 9 12 9 8 7 3 5 Non Excavation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 1 1 1 2 0 1 2 1 3 3 2 Uncertain 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

37

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

Early Medieval Excavation Types Annually 1970-2002
450 400

Uncertain Non Excavation Research Testing Rescue Monitoring Conservation

Excavation Type

350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0

Non­destructive methods like geophysical survey or underwater diving for survey purposes (a licensed activity) which received excavation licenses were listed under the Non Excavation heading. An excavation whose status was unclear was listed under the heading ‘Uncertain’. In the 1970s, the results reveal that both research and conservation work were very significant causes of excavation, along with rescue excavations. These excavations were generally undertaken by governmental bodies like the OPW in the Republic of Ireland; the Northern Ireland Historic Monuments Branch; the National Museum of Ireland and the Ulster Museum and by the university sector typically as long­term research projects. There was no tradition of testing or monitoring during this period as legislation did not demand these forms of excavation. When rescue excavations tended to occur, they were usually undertaken by government bodies, typically in advance of a farm improvement initiative that had supported by EEC agricultural funding. Farm improvement schemes were particularly responsible for the large number of excavations on ringforts across the island but with an unusually high number in the North of Ireland. Conservation projects equally tended to be undertaken by governmental organizations and were often ran as FAS employment schemes on ecclesiastical sites in particular. By the early 1990s, testing, monitoring and rescue excavations tended to increase in number ­ both due to the Valetta Convention on the Protection of the Archaeological Heritage (1992) and the surge in development­led projects. Testing excavation became the dominant form of excavation by 1994 reflecting the impact of stricter legislation. The surge has remained constant throughout the 1990’s and 2001/2002 with Testing, Monitoring and Rescue excavations constituting the vast majority of excavations today. The number of conservation and research projects has increased very slightly in recent years with the latter perhaps reflecting the emerging role of new centres for archaeology such as the Centre for Maritime Archaeology at the University of Ulster at Coleraine (UUC). Research excavations constituted 25­40% of excavations undertaken annually in the 1970’s (See Graph Below) with the figures reflecting the fact that these types of excavations tended to be undertaken on a seasonal basis over a number of years. Research excavations amounted to 9 out of 172 excavations undertaken in 1998 that worked out as 5.2%. In 2002, research excavations constituted only 5/385 or 1.3 % of excavations undertaken during that particular year. In other words, the proportion of excavations carried out for archaeological research has fallen from 5.2% in 1998

19 70 19 72 19 74 19 76 19 78 19 80 19 82 19 84 19 86 19 88 19 90 19 92 19 94 19 96 19 98 20 00 20 02

Year

Figure 6: Excavation Types Annually 1970­2002

38

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

to 1.3% in 2002. These figures do not suggest any decrease in research excavations undertaken annually but simply reflect the disproportionate amount of excavations undertaken in advance of development­led projects in more recent years.

Excavation Type Percentages Annually 1970-2002
2002 2000 1998 1996 1994 1992 1990 1988

Year 1986
1984 1982 1980 1978 1976 1974 1972 1970 Conservation Monitoring Rescue Testing Research Non Excavation Uncertain

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Excavation Type Percentages
Figure 7: Excavation Type Percentages Annually 1970­2002

39

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

Excavation Types per County The type of excavations undertaken in different counties across the island varies. It is evident that there have been fewer testing or monitoring excavations in Northern Ireland, perhaps reflecting the application of different planning legislation. In contrast these counties have had a high percentage of rescue excavations. Table 8 and Figures 9 and 10 illustrate the results. Table 11: Excavation Types Per County 1970­2002
County Antrim Armagh Carlow Cavan Clare Cork Derry Donegal Down Dublin Fermanagh Galway Kerry Kildare Kilkenny Laois Leitrim Limerick Longford Louth Mayo Meath Monaghan Offaly Roscommon Sligo Tipperary Tyrone Waterford Westmeath Wexford Wicklow Total (Exc. Type) Conservation 6 0 1 0 7 9 3 0 3 6 1 14 11 6 2 2 0 3 0 1 5 5 0 1 5 1 5 1 4 1 1 2 106 Monitoring 9 3 3 9 19 26 4 12 8 40 3 15 29 22 12 3 6 23 0 23 10 24 3 12 7 14 18 1 7 13 5 11 394 Rescue 34 13 0 1 18 28 13 3 28 79 5 13 19 27 10 1 0 26 2 24 9 53 0 20 2 14 25 7 25 16 5 6 526 Testing 14 8 4 7 39 62 9 23 10 116 3 35 44 71 13 7 8 24 3 60 40 42 12 23 28 28 15 2 14 22 32 17 835 Research 5 1 0 0 2 8 3 1 5 2 2 4 13 2 1 1 0 3 2 0 3 3 0 0 4 2 3 4 0 3 0 1 78 Non Excavation 2 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 19 Uncertain 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 0 1 0 0 10 Total (County) 71 31 8 17 85 134 32 39 55 243 15 82 116 129 38 14 14 80 9 108 67 127 15 58 48 59 67 20 50 57 43 37 1968

40

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

Excavation Types Per County 1970-2002
Wicklow Wexford Westmeath Waterford Tyrone Tipperary Sligo Roscommon Offaly Monaghan Meath Mayo Louth Longford Limerick Leitrim Laois Kilkenny Kildare Kerry Galway Fermanagh Dublin Down Donegal Derry Cork Clare Cavan Carlow Armagh Antrim Conservation Monitoring Rescue Testing Research Non Excavation Uncertain

County

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Excavation Types Per County

Figure 8: Excavation Types Per County 1970­2002

41

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

Excavation Type Percentages Per County 1970-2002
Wicklow Wexford Westmeath Waterford Tyrone Tipperary Sligo Roscommon Offaly Monaghan Meath Mayo Louth Longford Limerick Leitrim Laois Kilkenny Kildare Kerry Galway Fermanagh Dublin Down Donegal Derry Cork Clare Cavan Carlow Armagh Antrim

County

Conservation Monitoring Rescue Testing Research Non Excavation Uncertain

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Excavation Type Percentage Per County

Figure 9: Excavation Type Percentages Per County 1970­2002

Significance of Sites
The criteria concerning how a site was described in terms of its archaeological significance is outlined in the methodology. A total of 44% of the excavated sites near or on early medieval monuments and structures were designated as of “no early medieval archaeological significance”. Testing and monitoring excavations are the principal excavation types that are proving to produce a result of “no archaeological significance”. A high proportion of sites (14%) were classified as ‘Uncertain’. These sites are of archaeological significance but it is often not clear if the archaeology dates to the early medieval period. Typical site examples include undated ironworking or kilns sites that could conceivably date to between the Iron Age and the Post­Medieval periods. It is interesting and important then, that only 19% of the sites within the database could be considered as significant or highly significant. In a sense, this is encouraging as it shows that the ‘crisis’ in Irish archaeology viz. the non­publication of excavations is not as serious as suspected, and that a well­structured programme of research and publication could easily make a very significant contribution.

42

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

Significance Uncertain No Significance General Significant Highly Significant Total

Number 190 606 325 202 74 1,397

Percent 14% 44% 23% 14% 5% 100%

Table 12: Early Medieval Significance of EMAP Sites 1970­2002

Early Medieval Significance of EMAP Sites 1970-2002

74, 5% 202, 14%

190, 14%

Uncertain No Significance 325, 23% 606, 44% General Significant Highly Significant

Figure 10: Early Medieval Significance of EMAP Sites 1970­2002

43

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

Excavations Annually and Sites of Different Significance Sites were graded in terms of Significance as described above. Excavation information was contained within the excavation ‘form’ which itself was embedded inside the site ‘form’. The excavations were not graded into categories of significance. A tick box was simply created to describe whether the excavation was of significance or not. In retrospect, it would have been useful to have been able to grade excavation licenses in terms of their archaeological significance and thus establish the amount of excavations of varying significance annually. What this database can tell is the amount of excavations of some form of significance or no archaeological significance at all as well as the amount of excavations annually occurring on ‘Sites’ of different significance. The figures and graphs below contain information about the amount of excavations being undertaken on ‘Sites’ of different Significance annually.
Year Uncertain 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Total 0 0 2 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 5 8 3 2 0 1 3 1 3 3 7 5 1 7 5 4 14 9 21 28 35 43 73 287 No Significance 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 2 8 9 15 9 19 32 35 49 73 100 120 148 188 815 General 4 11 6 10 5 3 2 4 7 6 1 1 7 10 4 9 7 7 4 18 14 17 20 24 14 16 24 31 41 56 44 44 48 519 Significant 5 2 3 2 2 6 3 5 3 5 5 6 10 9 7 9 10 8 10 7 16 12 21 20 20 20 23 30 20 33 38 35 52 457 Highly Significant 4 5 8 5 8 9 6 6 5 6 7 7 5 5 8 6 7 5 12 8 10 8 9 13 16 11 9 12 17 22 16 16 24 315 Total 14 18 19 19 16 18 14 15 16 17 18 22 25 26 19 25 28 22 31 38 55 51 66 73 74 83 105 131 172 239 253 286 385 2393

Table 13: Excavations Annually on Sites of Different Significance

44

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

Excavations Annually on Sites of Different Significance
450

Significance of Excavations

400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0

Highly Significant Significant General No Significance Uncertain

Table 13 and Figure 11 show that a large proportion of excavations in the 1970’s and 1980’s were being undertaken on Sites of “High archaeological significance”. Long term research excavation projects at Clogher, Co. Tyrone; Knowth, Co. Meath; Deer Park Farms, Co. Antrim; Lisleagh, Co. Cork; Iniscealtra, Co. Tipperary and Kilpatrick, Co. Westmeath revealed vast quantities of archaeological evidence that transformed people’s understandings of early medieval Ireland in this period. These projects were also complemented by important rescue excavations undertaken both in advance of farm improvement schemes and urban redevelopment projects in the major cities. Important excavations were undertaken on rural ringforts like Tully, Seacash, Ballyhenry, Dunsilly and Ballywee, Co.Antrim, Ballylessant, Crossnacreevy, Gransha and Rathmullan Lower, Co. Down, Big Glebe, Bowling Green, Co. Tipperary, Dunbell Big 6, Co. Kilkenny, Sluggary, Co. Limerick, Simonstown, Co. Meath, Millockstown, Co. Westmeath and Lisduggan North, Co. Cork. Important urban redevelopment projects in the medieval cores of cities in the 1970’s and 1980’s also had the effect of revealing significant archaeological evidence in the Hiberno­Norse towns of Dublin and Waterford in particular as well as at ecclesiastical sites such as Armagh and Downpatrick, Co. Down. Excavations tended then to be research­driven and located on important archaeologically sensitive areas with the consequence that there were few excavations of no significance in this period. The advent of stricter legislation protecting the archaeological heritage and the Celtic Tiger economic boom had the effect of shifting this relationship from one being formerly of a large amount of excavations being undertaken annually on significant sites towards a disproportionate number of excavations revealing no archaeological evidence on or near early medieval sites in the 1990’s. These figures are illustrated in the percentage graph in Figure 12 that reveals how excavations on significant sites constituted between 25­50% of total excavations annually in the 1970’s. This percentage gradually declined to 25/385 excavations (6.5%) in 2002 although in fact the number of excavations on significant sites was far greater in 2002 than any year in the 1970’s. The graph also illustrates the growth in excavations at sites described as ‘No Significance’ from 1990 onwards. Excavations at No Significance Sites constituted 188/385 or 49% of the total excavations in 2002. As is well known, there is then a

19 70 19 72 19 74 19 76 19 78 19 80 19 82 19 84 19 86 19 88 19 90 19 92 19 94 19 96 19 98 20 00 20 02

Year

Figure 11: Excavations Annually on Sites of Different Significance

45

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

strong relationship between the growth of testing and monitoring as forms of archaeological excavations and the increase in the number of excavations at or near site that are revealing no archaeological evidence. This is an issue that should perhaps be debated by professional archaeology in Ireland.

Percentages Of Excavations Annually on Sites of Different Significance
2002 2000 1998 1996 1994 1992 1990 1988

Year 1986
1984 1982 1980 1978 1976 1974 1972 1970 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Uncertain No Significance General Significant Highly Significant

Percentages of Excavations Annually
Figure 12: Percentages of Excavations Annually on Sites of Different Significance

46

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

Significance of Sites per County The 1397 defined sites in the different counties were next analyzed in terms of their significance. Table 14 and Figures 13 and 14 illustrate the results. Table 14: Early Medieval Significance of Excavated Sites
County Antrim Armagh Carlow Cavan Clare Cork Derry Donegal Down Dublin Fermanagh Galway Kerry Kildare Kilkenny Laois Leitrim Limerick Longford Louth Mayo Meath Monaghan Offaly Roscommon Sligo Tipperary Tyrone Waterford Westmeath Wexford Wicklow Total (Significance) Uncertain 8 0 1 0 13 13 0 3 3 21 0 11 8 14 5 1 0 19 0 4 7 15 1 3 2 5 12 5 3 4 4 7 192 No Significance 9 2 4 13 30 59 4 19 8 25 5 35 53 40 12 7 10 27 3 33 29 32 9 10 22 26 17 0 10 24 18 11 606 General 26 11 0 2 10 25 10 4 19 36 4 9 15 10 6 0 0 8 3 16 11 17 1 9 6 13 14 8 11 12 3 4 323 Significant 19 3 0 0 6 18 3 1 5 31 5 9 16 8 3 3 0 6 0 12 6 16 0 2 3 4 8 4 9 2 3 1 206 Highly Significant 2 1 0 0 2 2 1 1 4 19 0 2 4 2 0 0 0 1 1 3 0 10 0 1 1 1 2 2 3 4 1 0 70 Total (County) 64 17 5 15 61 117 18 28 39 132 14 66 96 74 26 11 10 61 7 68 53 90 11 25 34 49 53 19 36 46 29 23 1397

47

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

Significance of Excavated Sites Per County 1970-2002
Wicklow Wexford Westmeath Waterford Tyrone Tipperary Sligo Roscommon Offaly Monaghan Meath Mayo Louth Longford Limerick Leitrim Laois Kilkenny Kildare Kerry Galway Fermanagh Dublin Down Donegal Derry Cork Clare Cavan Carlow Armagh Antrim

Uncertain No Significance General Significant Highly Significant

County

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Significance of Excavated Sites Per County

Figure 13: Early Medieval Significance of Excavated Sites Per County

Northern Counties like Antrim, Armagh, Derry, Down, Fermanagh and Tyrone as well as the Leinster counties of Dublin, Meath, Louth and Longford contained high percentages of sites described as ‘general’, ‘significant’ and ‘Highly Significant’. These counties in Northern Ireland have also relatively few ‘sites’ of No Significance. It has been noted above that the Northern Ireland Historic Monuments Branch was at the forefront of rescue and research excavations in the 1970’s and 1980’s, many of which proved to be very significant. It is clear that Northern Ireland undertook a disproportionate number of excavations in terms of its geographical size in this period. In more recent years however, this ratio has shifted dramatically as the amount of excavations annually within the majority of the counties from the Republic has continued to surpass that of the six counties. It is instructive to note that counties across the west and northwest region of Ireland like Cavan, Leitrim, Donegal, Monaghan, Roscommon, Galway and Mayo have a high proportion of No significance sites. These counties have witnessed dramatic increases in the amount of excavations being undertaken annually (See Table Below) and it is very likely that these excavations of No Significance are related to tighter legislation concerning development, particularly in rural contexts in recent years.

48

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

Significance Percentages of Excavated Sites Per County
Wicklow Wexford Westmeath Waterford Tyrone Tipperary Sligo Roscommon Offaly Monaghan Meath Mayo Louth Longford Limerick Leitrim Laois Kilkenny Kildare Kerry Galway Fermanagh Dublin Down Donegal Derry Cork Clare Cavan Carlow Armagh Antrim

County

Uncertain No Significance General Significant Highly Significant

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Significance Percentages

Figure 14: Significance Percentages of Excavated Sites Per County

Schemes and Infrastructural Projects
The above graphs have illustrated the changing character and scale of excavations across the island from 1970­2002. To further comprehend the changing distribution and character of excavations across the island, it was necessary to consider the role of development­led schemes and projects within these trends. There are currently 1397 sites and 1968 accompanying excavation licenses within the database. A total of 1643 or 83% of licenses issued for excavations on or near early medieval sites or structures from 1970­2002 were in advance of infrastructural, development and rural schemes/projects.
Exc. No. 43 18 502 83 551 82 4 243 42 23 52 License Percentage 2% 1% 26% 4% 28% 4% 0% 12% 2.00% 1% 3%

Scheme/Project Farm Improvement Peat Production Development Sewerage & Water Supply Residential Development Gas Scheme Tram & Rail Road Scheme Drainage/Dredging Scheme Electrical Quarry/Mine/Landfill

Total Exc. Licenses

1643

83%

49

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

Other Excavation Reasons Cemetery Extension Coastal Erosion Golf Course Unidentified Service Pipeline Uncertain None 19 20 14 8 51 213 1% 1% 1.00% 0% 3.00% 11%

Total Exc. Licenses
Total Exc. Licenses

325
1,968

17%
100%

Table 15: Excavations along Schemes and Projects 1970­2002

Excavations along Schemes and Projects 1970-2002 600
Number of Excavations
Development Drainage/Dredging Electrical Farm Improvement Gas Scheme Peat Production Quarry/Mine/Landfill Residential Development Road Scheme Tram & Rail Sewerage & Water

500 400 300 200 100 0
Scheme or Project

Figure 15: Excavations along Schemes and Projects 1970­2002

Residential developments were responsible for 551 (28%) of the total excavations within the database. It was followed by 502 (26%) on quarries/mines/landfills of total excavations. These together constitute 54% of total excavations within the database. 1,643 excavations were issued in advance of schemes or projects. The remaining 325 excavation licenses were issued for a number of different reasons. The heading None referred to those which were issued for conservation or research purposes as well as other miscellaneous forms of excavation which were not part of a development scheme or any of the headings listed below. It constituted 213 or 11% of total excavations. Significance of Sites in which excavations were undertaken along Schemes/Projects The database, as described above, graded excavated ‘sites’ in terms of their early medieval archaeological significance. The criteria used to interpret the significance of a site are outlined

50

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

in the methodology. The individual excavation licenses were not graded in terms of their archaeological significance. At this stage of the project, the EMAP database can only appraise the ‘significance’ of excavated sites in which excavation licenses were issued for different schemes and Projects.
Total (Scheme/ Project) 43 18 502 83 551 82 4 243 42 23 52 1643

Scheme/Project Farm Improvement Peat Production Development Sewerage & Supply Residential Development Gas Scheme Tram & Rail Road Scheme Drainage/Dredging Scheme Electrical Quarry/Mine/Landfill Total (Significance) Water

Uncertain 1 0 52 20 39 42 0 59 9 5 10 237

No Significance 5 0 183 40 404 11 1 41 13 14 11 723

General 19 12 108 18 58 7 3 74 13 2 16 330

Significant 14 6 96 4 40 11 0 47 7 2 10 237

Highly Significant 4 0 63 1 10 11 0 22 0 0 5 116

Table 16: Significance of Sites excavated along Schemes and Projects

Significance of Excavated Sites along Schemes and Projects
Tram & Rail Sewerage/Water Road Scheme Residential Development Quarry/Mine/Landfill

County

Uncertain No Significance General Significant Highly Significant

Peat Production Gas Scheme Farm Improvement Electrical Drainage/Dredging Development

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Significance of Sites

Figure 16: Significance of Sites excavated along Schemes and Projects

51

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

Some interesting patterns do emerge from the data gathered. It is instructive to note that excavations in advance of residential developments had a tendency to be described as Sites of ‘No archaeological Significance’. It was found that these excavations were usually undertaken near an early medieval monument (e.g. ringfort) in advance of the construction of a dwelling house. Excavations in advance of large commercial/infrastructural developments and road schemes tended to reveal a higher proportion of important, highly important and significant sites. This was likely due to the scale of excavations undertaken along these projects. It was also likely due to the fact that excavations tended to be undertaken on early medieval monuments or areas with the intention of complete excavation in contrast to testing excavations being undertaken near an early medieval monument to comply with planning legislation for an isolated dwelling. Both farm improvement schemes and excavations in advance of quarry/mining or landfill activities also contained a higher proportion of sites of importance. These excavations were typically undertaken in the 1970’s and 1980’s through EEC funded grants. It is also instructive to note that sites excavated along road and Gas schemes projects contained a higher proportion of sites described at this stage as ‘Uncertain’. These sites typically took the form of ironworking hearths or agricultural features whose radiocarbon dates were still pending when submitted to the excavation bulletin reports. Excavations Types along Schemes/Projects These characteristics of the archaeological excavations undertaken along the different schemes or projects supports the trends outlined above.
Scheme/Project Farm Improvement Peat Production Development Sewerage & Water Supply Residential Development Gas Scheme Tram & Rail Road Scheme Drainage/Dredging Scheme Electrical Quarry/Mine/Landfill Total (Excavation Type) Conservation 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 Monitoring 0 0 86 36 160 24 2 41 14 11 7 381 Non Excavation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 10 Rescue 37 18 138 14 41 51 2 113 9 5 35 463 Research 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Testing 6 0 276 33 349 7 0 89 9 6 9 784 Uncertain 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Total 43 18 502 83 551 82 4 243 42 23 52 1643

Table 17: Excavation Types along Schemes and Projects

52

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

Excavation Types along Schemes and Projects 1970-2002
Quarry/Mine/Landfill Electrical Drainage/Dredging Uncertain Non Excavation Rescue Monitoring Testing Conservation Research

Schemes and Projects

Road Scheme Tram & Rail Gas Scheme Resident Development Sewerage/Water Development Peat Production Farm Scheme

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Excavation Types

Figure 17: Excavation Types along Schemes and Projects Farm Improvement schemes, as mentioned above, were particularly influential in the 1970s and 1980s when the EEC agricultural grants were readily available. With the advent of CAP and the large Butter and Cereal Mountains in Brussels, EU agricultural policy shifted from maximisation to diversification. The archaeological heritage also secured important protection in this period at the EU Valletta Convention 1992 whose acts were subsequently ratified by Ireland in 1997. These developments have ensured that few farm improvement schemes date to this later period under study. It is interesting to note that excavations in advance of farm improvement schemes have tended to be rescue in form. This was due to the fact that testing excavations were not a legislative requirement in the 1970’s and 1980’s. It was also the case that these excavations tended to be undertaken on early medieval rural sites with the intention of their complete destruction. As noted previously, the vast majority of rescue excavations in advance of farm improvement schemes were undertaken in Northern Ireland in the 1970’s and 1980’s. It is clear that testing and monitoring licenses comprise a higher proportion of excavations in advance of residential developments. These excavations comprise a major proportion of excavations undertaken over the last few years and as discussed above, have a tendency to reveal no archaeology of any significance. In most cases, they reflect planning legislation for the increased construction of single houses in the Irish countryside in recent years. A minority dealt with the construction of housing estates; a type of excavation which contains a higher probability of rescue excavations of early medieval significance. Rescue licenses however comprise a higher percentage of excavations of recent road schemes, development projects and quarrying/mining or landfill activities highlighting the different character, scope and function of these excavations. These excavations were typically undertaken over a large area of land with the intention of complete excavation if any archaeology of any significance was uncovered.

53

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

The changing character of early medieval excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002
It is therefore very clear that the character of early medieval excavations has been transformed in recent years due both to stronger legislative protection of the archaeological heritage and the consequent emergence of development­led archaeology. The database confirmed, what is already well known, about a dramatic shift in the massive growth in the number of excavations undertaken annually from the early 1990’s due to development­led projects and schemes. It also illustrated the well­known shift from excavations undertaken by state and university bodies in the 1970/80’s towards one in which the commercial archaeological sector is predominant by the 1990’s. It also confirmed a dramatic transformation in the character of early medieval excavations from one in which research and rescue excavations were dominant towards one in which testing/monitoring excavations prevailed from the 1990’s. It was found that this shift in the character of the excavations due to tighter planning legislation had the effect of dramatically increasing the number of archaeological excavations of no significance particularly within the Republic of Ireland. The review also revealed some interesting information about the extent and character of excavations across the island from 1970­2002. It revealed that a high proportion of the excavations were undertaken in the counties of Louth, Meath, Kildare and particularly Dublin reflecting the effects of development­led archaeology within the greater Dublin area. Other areas that have seen relatively high numbers of early medieval excavations include the southwestern counties of Cork, Kerry, Limerick and Clare as well as Antrim in Northern Ireland. Elsewhere excavations have been generally fewer in number. The review also revealed subtle differences and variations in the character and number of excavations between those undertaken within the Republic of Ireland and those in Northern Ireland. It revealed that the Northern Ireland Historic Monuments Branch was at the forefront of many significant rescue and research excavations in the 1970’s and 1980’s. It is evident that in more recent years excavations undertaken at or near early medieval or potential early medieval sites has remained generally consistent across Northern Ireland from 1970­2002 while excavations in both urban and rural counties within the Republic have increased dramatically. This might both reflect the Celtic Tiger Phenomenon in the Republic and different planning legislation in both jurisdictions concerning testing and monitoring excavations. It is obvious that this change in the scope, type and location of excavations has transformed the character of early medieval material being revealed. The next section will analyse and discuss the character of this early medieval excavated evidence across the island.

What early medieval sites were excavated 1970­2002? A summary of main findings
There are a total of 1,397 sites in the EMAP database comprising both excavations on and near early medieval sites, monuments and structures. There are 1,996 excavation licenses that are embedded inside these site ‘forms’ that contain data about excavated monuments, structures and artefacts. These sites and license are described in total in Appendix 1. Site Categories Two category fields were constructed in the ‘Site’ form as discussed in the methodology. A ‘Category’ field grouped together excavations on early medieval monuments and structures into broader descriptions. An Environs of Site Category was also constructed which grouped together excavations near early medieval monuments and structures into the same broader descriptions. The category descriptions include: ! ! Settlement Enclosure Settlement Landscape

54

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

Settlement/Cemetery Unenclosed Ecclesiastical Cemetery/Burial Agriculture Industrial Routeway Viking/Hiberno­Norse Viking/Hiberno­Norse Viking/Hiberno­Norse Viking/Hiberno­Norse Viking/Hiberno­Norse Miscellaneous

Dublin Waterford Cork Limerick Wexford

Excavated Site Categories There were 871 sites recorded in the excavated ‘site’ category field. A total of 26% of excavated sites can be described as ‘settlement enclosures’ (e.g. ringforts, cashels, enclosures). A total of 25% or 218 of all excavated sites were found to be ecclesiastical sites. The actual number of ecclesiastical sites is actually greater (see below) as this figure excludes those from within the Viking/Hiberno­Norse towns as well as those excavations in which an ecclesiastical site was only found to represent one phase or one area of the total excavated ‘site’. Excavations at the Viking towns constituted 10% of the total excavated sites. A site was described as a ‘Settlement landscape’ when the ‘site’ was comprised of a number of different monuments spatially or chronologically. This type of excavated EMAP site constituted 8% of the total sites within the database.

Site Category Agricultural Cemetery/Burial Ecclesiastical Industrial Miscellaneous Routeway Settlement Enclosure Settlement Landscape Settlement/Cemetery Unenclosed Viking/Hiberno­Norse Town Total (Excavated Site Categories)

Count Of Category 43 49 218 69 24 19 224 67 7 65 86 871

Percent 5% 5.5% 25% 8% 2.5% 2% 26% 8% 1% 7% 10% 100%

Table 18: EMAP Excavated Site Categories

55

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

Excavated Early Medieval Site Categories
Viking Town Unenclosed Settlement/Cemetery

Excavated Site Categories

Settlement Landscape Settlement Enclosure Routeway Miscellaneous Industrial Ecclesiastical Cemetery/Burial Agricultural

0

50

100

150

200

250

Number of Sites

Figure 18: EMAP Excavated Site Categories

Excavations environs of Site Category The Environs of Site category was designed to collect information about excavations near protected SMR monuments. This field was particularly concerned with excavations near rural settlement sites like ringforts or cashels, rural ecclesiastical sites like monasteries or churches and wetland sites in the form of crannogs. Excavations did not tend to be undertaken near isolated industrial and agricultural sites, as theses are not generally protected SMR monuments. Excavations that were undertaken near a number of settlement and ecclesiastical sites were grouped under the term settlement landscape. It was found that 573/1,397 or 41% of excavated sites were undertaken near early medieval monuments and structures. Theses excavations typically revealed nothing and were undertaken under testing licenses principally near an early medieval protected monument like a ringfort or ecclesiastical site. The table below illustrates that the vast majority were undertaken near ‘settlement enclosure’ and ecclesiastical ‘sites.

56

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

Environs of Category Count Of Environs of Category Cemetery/Burial 1 Ecclesiastical 250 Miscellaneous 5 Settlement Enclosure 266 Settlement Landscape 28 Unenclosed 23 Total 573 Table 19: Excavation near Site Categories 1970­2002

Excavations near Early Medieval Site Categories

44% 0% 4% 5% 1%

Cemetery/Burial Ecclesiastical Miscellaneous Settlement Enclosure Settlement Landscape
46%

Unenclosed

Figure 19: Excavations near Site Categories 1970­2002 The EMAP database also contains 871 excavated early medieval or potentially early medieval ‘sites’ that took the form of monuments, structures and entire landscapes. It also, as discussed above, contains 573 ‘sites’ that were undertaken near early medieval monuments and structures. These numbers totalled 1444 sites. As there are only 1399 sites within the database, the overlap of 47 sites comprised excavations both on and near early medieval or potentially early medieval monuments and structures. Excavated Sites, Monuments and Structures The EMAP Database comprises 871 sites that contain early medieval or potential early medieval archaeological evidence. It was decided at this initial stage of the project, to contain information about excavated monuments, structures and artefacts within a multi­column field within the individual excavation licenses associated with the site (See Methodology). It is evident that a ringfort, souterrain or unenclosed habitation site could be excavated within the single site. Like the data provided by the Unpublished Excavations Summary (2001), the survey provides information about the amount of instances a specific artefact/site type was excavated. The figures then do not give accurate information about the absolute number of EMAP ‘sites’.

57

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 3: The Character of Early Medieval Excavations in Ireland, 1970­2002

The following chapters comprise descriptions and analysis of the excavated monuments, structures and artefacts recorded in the EMAP database. They also engage in broader discussions of topics concerning early medieval settlement, industry, agriculture, the Vikings in Ireland and the early medieval church. These discussion sections review the themes of early medieval ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Rural Settlement (Enclosed and Unenclosed Sites A.D. 400­1170) Viking/Hiberno­Norse Settlement Early Medieval Buildings Early Medieval Church Early Medieval Burial Early Medieval Agriculture and Landscape Early Medieval Ironworking Early Medieval Pottery Production

58

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

Chapter 4. Early Medieval dwellings, settlements and landscapes
Introduction
Archaeological, historical and palaeoenvironmental evidence all indicates that the early medieval Irish landscape was intensively settled, appropriated and managed. It was a well­populated landscape, with numerous settlements and dwellings, roadways and fields scattered through a land that was by now largely cleared of woodlands. Early medieval agriculture was organized and intensive, involving both livestock management and crop cultivation, with a seasonal rhythm of labour and toil in the fields. To get an image of how that landscape might once have appeared, we can look today at places like Ballykinvarga, in the Burren, Co. Clare, where an early medieval stone cashel is surrounded today by fields and trackways, probably of early medieval date. In recent years, similar early medieval settlement landscapes have been excavated elsewhere in Ireland, particularly in advance of large roadway developments. There has been a shift in the questions being asked of these settlement landscapes. Traditional approaches to early medieval ringfort studies, such as those done by Ó Ríordáin, O’Kelly and others at sites like Garranes, Garryduff and others emphasised the investigation of internal lay­ out of sites, the types of enclosing defences, the location and form of structures and most importantly the types of objects recovered. Traditionally, archaeologists used ringforts as a general means of reconstructing the crafts, technology and economy of early medieval Ireland, being taken to be representative of all forms of dwelling activity. More recent studies, particularly those by Matthew Stout and more recently by Thomas Kerr, have concentrated on role of ringforts within their social and economic landscapes, tracing social hierarchy and ranking in variations in morphology and distribution. However, even these studies continue to focus on one type of settlement. It is true to say, that in recent years particularly with the large­scale roadway developments, early medieval archaeology has been re­invigorated by a renewed interest in the settlement landscape (and the more diverse forms of evidence for enclosed and unenclosed settlements that they have brought), but also by the discovery of types of archaeological features testifying to the intensity of land­use – such as fields, pits, kilns, mills, ironworking sites and other features. Before we rush to categorise this evidence, there should at least be a period of reflection on the new social, ideological and chronological questions that we can now start to pose.

Early medieval rural settlement A.D. 400­1170
Ireland was an essentially rural country throughout the early medieval period, with dispersed rural farmsteads the main settlement form. The archaeological record for early medieval rural settlement is dominated by enclosed settlement sites such as ringforts, cashels, promontory forts, settlement/cemetery sites and non­circular shaped enclosures though there is emerging evidence for unenclosed sites in the form of isolated souterrains, unenclosed settlements, coastal occupation sites and cave dwellings. This chapter will appraise the evidence for both enclosed and unenclosed settlement during this period. It will explore the origins and chronology of the different monument to understand continuity and change in settlement and social organization during the early medieval period. Enclosed settlement sites will be first examined and will be followed by the unenclosed evidence. Areas of potential research will finally be outlined.

59

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

Excavated Rural Settlement Sites 1970­2002 Ringforts and enclosures remain the dominant settlement type in the excavated archaeological record. There is also a growing corpus of evidence for settlement/cemetery sites and unenclosed sites. Table 20 and Figure 20 illustrate the results.
Excavated Rural Settlement Type Hillfort Promontory Fort Cashel Crannog Enclosure Non­circular Shaped Enclosure Settlement/Cemetery Site Ringfort Raised/Platform Ringfort Souterrain Unenclosed Habitation Coastal Habitation Cave Longport EMAP Sites 3 3 16 14 53 16 16 146 23 97 32 5 2 1 Total 3 3 16 17 65 18 16 154 23 140 33 5 2 1

Table 20: Excavated Rural Settlements 1970­2002

Excavated Rural Settlement Types
Longport Cave Coastal Habitation Unenclosed Habitation

Total Type EMAP Site

Rural Settlement Types

Souterrain Raised/Platform Ringfort Ringfort Settlement/Cemetery Site Non-circular Enclosure Enclosure Crannog Cashel Promontory Fort Hillfort

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Quantity (Settlement Type & EMAP Sites)

Figure 20: Excavated Rural Settlement Types

60

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

Early medieval cashels
Background Early medieval cashels (from the old Irish caisel) are the stone­walled equivalents of earthen banked and ditched ringforts and are generally viewed as representing the homesteads of the free social classes as recorded in the 7th/8th century law tracts in early medieval Ireland. Upon archaeological excavation, they have generally been dated to the second half of the first millennium A.D. The majority are located in western Ireland where stone was abundant as a resource. Generally, cashels appear to have had a smaller diameter that earthen ringforts, typically measuring 15­25m in diameter. The typically cited examples of high status cashels include the Grianan of Aileach, Co. Donegal and Cahercommaun, Co. Clare, although these sites are quite unusual. Excavations at early medieval cashels have a long history of research. Hencken (1938) undertook a significant excavation at a cashel at Cahercommaun, Co. Clare. Further work was undertaken at an early medieval stone fort or cashel at Leacanabuaile, Co. Kerry and at two sites at Carraig Aille, Co. Limerick (Ó Ríordáin & Foy 1941; Ó Ríordáin 1949). These excavations established that cashels were indeed an early medieval monument. EMAP Results The EMAP survey has found that 16 Cashels were excavated from 1970­2002. They were excavated in the counties of Clare, Cork, Down, Donegal, Fermanagh, Galway, Kerry and Mayo. Table 21 lists these cashels and their archaeological significance.

NAME Carn Kildreenagh, Loher Ryan Rinnaraw Ballyegan Cathair Fionnúrach, Ballynavenoor Barnaderg North Carrowdotia Cahergal Cathair BallyCarnlabban Kilcashel Cahirvagliair, Cappeen West Barrees Valley Ballyhannan South Carrowdotia (AR27) Dún Eoghanachta, Eoghanacht, Inishmore Mor,

County Fermanagh Kerry Down Donegal Kerry Kerry Galway Clare Kerry Clare Mayo Cork Cork Clare Clare

EMAP Class Cashel Cashel & Souterrain Cashel Cashel Cashel & Souterrain Cashel & Souterrain Cashel Cashel Cashel Cashel Cashel Cashel Early Medieval Landscape Cashel Cashel Settlement

Monument Cashel Cashel Cashel Cashel Cashel Cashel Cashel Cashel Cashel Cashel Cashel Cashel Cashel Cashel Cashel

Significance General Significant No significance Significant Significant Significant No significance General Significant General General General Significant No significance No significance

Galway

Cashel

Cashel

Significant

Table 21: Excavated Cashels 1970­2002 Seven cashels were excavated which revealed significant archaeological evidence. They comprise the sites of Barrees, Co. Cork (William O’Brien 2002, Excavations Bulletin­ 02E0914), Rinnaraw, Co. Donegal (Thomas Fanning 1987­92, Excavations Bulletin), Loher (Brendan O’Flaherty 1982­85, Excavations Bulletin­ E840), Cathair Fionnúrach (Erin Gibbons 1994, Excavations Bulletin­ 94E005), Cahergal (Manning 1986, 1990 & 1991, Excavations Bulletin) and

61

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

Ballyegan (Martin Byrne 1991, Excavations Bulletin) in Co. Kerry and Dún Eoghanachta, Co. Galway (Claire Cotter, 1995, Excavations Bulletin­ 95E0136). These sites typically revealed evidence for some domestic, agricultural and personal items of adornment, metal/ironworking. Excavations also revealed evidence for a stone clochan at Cahergal, three stone­buildings at Dún Eoghanachta on the Aran Islands, a potential Viking­Age rectangular stone house at Rinnaraw, three buildings at Ballyegan and four stone and two post­and­wattle buildings at Kildreenagh, Loher. Souterrains were also a feature of Loher and Ballyegan. A corn­drying kiln was excavated at Ballegan while quern stone stones were a frequent discovery on several sites. Associated field systems were also found as illustrated at Ballyegan. Archaeological excavations at four of these sites revealed little archaeology of any significant ­ though this does not prove that they were not important in the early medieval period. A further five sites revealed only limited early medieval archaeological evidence on excavation. The fort at Cahirvagliair was undoubtedly though a significant settlement site in the early medieval period. It consists of a large inner bank surrounded by a small ditch, a small bank and a large outer ditch. The internal diameter from the two crests of the small inner measures 42m while the total external diameter amounts to 75m. The inner bank was originally stone faced on both sides and measures up to 5m in width. The outermost ditch measured 7m across the top and 2.5m in depth. The entrance passage was 7.70m in length and c. 2m wide. The walls consisted of dry built roughly coursed large stone. The objective of the excavation was to restore the stone walled entrance and entranceway (Manning 1987­88). Limited archaeological evidence in the form of scraps of iron, animal bone and perforated disc were found although the focus of the excavation was the focus of the excavation was on the restoration of the stone built enclosing wall and passage­way. These Cashels can be dated to the second half of the first millennium A.D and are broadly contemporary with the use of ringforts in early medieval Ireland. Some sites like Rinnaraw revealed evidence from the 7th­12th century A.D. suggesting that some may have continued to be used until or after the arrival of the Anglo­Normans.

Early medieval ringforts
Background Ringforts or raths have been the focus of much archaeological attention and excavation since the first half of the 20th century. Ubiquitously recorded on the early editions of the O.S. maps and locally acknowledged as ‘fairy forts’, they were recognised since the origins of Irish archaeology as relict features of a long forgotten chapter of the Irish landscape. It was not until excavations by Ó Ríordáin at places like Garranes (1942), Ballycatteen Fort (1943) and Letterkeen, Co. Mayo (1952) that they were recognised as the homesteads of people during the years of Ireland’s ‘Saints and Scholars’. These homesteads somewhere and sometime became known as ringforts or the Irish term rath.

Definition Ó Ríordáin’s first publication of his Antiquities of the Irish Countryside in 1942 described the ringfort ‘in its simplest form as a space most frequently circular, surrounded by a bank and fosse or simply by a rampart of stone”. When Edwards (1990) wrote her ‘archaeology of early medieval Ireland’, she described raths as generally circular but that examples of oval and rectilinear sites were also known. Circularity was then not an essential characteristic feature of ringforts. More recently, Kinsella (2007a, 2) examining the debate surrounding non­circular enclosures, has noted that circularity emerged as a defining feature of Stout’s (1997) interpretation of the monument in his major publication The Irish Ringfort’. In fact, there is emerging evidence from excavations that a range of enclosed raths are known, variously circular, oval even squarish and rectilinear.

62

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

Ringforts can be defined as generally small circular enclosures, enclosed within a single earthen bank and ditch, or stonewall. Most ringforts are simple univallate enclosures, with a bank and ditch, occasionally with a slight counter­scarp bank on the outside. Larger, more complex sites (bivallate and trivallate) sites are also known, and as we shall see, imply a social hierarchy, as more energy and labour would have been invested in their construction. In terms of size, ringforts typically measure between 15­35m in diameter, with most examples measuring about 30m in diameter. However, there are broad variations and some ringforts range in diameter between 20­44m. The banks and ditches of ringforts also vary in size. Most measure only tens of cm in depth, while some large sites like those at Garranes measured up to 4m in depth. EMAP and Ringforts Excavated 1970­2002 It is interesting that few recent ringfort studies have actually engaged with the excavated archaeological evidence from these sites, as opposed to the landscape archaeological evidence of form and distribution. This EMAP review will not focus on this evidence. The EMAP survey has established that 180 ringforts were excavated within 169 EMAP defined sites between 1970­2002. They were discovered within 27 counties in Ireland. The most ringforts excavated were in Antrim (26) followed by Cork (22). Others notable areas include Kerry, Tipperary and Limerick in Munster, Down and Tyrone in Ulster, Mayo over in Connacht and Westmeath, Dublin, Louth, Meath and Kildare in North Leinster. The excavated ringfort sites from 1970­2002 are listed in Appendix 2. A long tradition of the excavation of ringforts has seen a large number being excavated in the 1950/60’s and early 1970’s in the northeast by a number of archaeologists including A.E.P. Collins, C. Warhurst and David Waterman for the Northern Ireland Historic Monuments Branch. By this stage Proudfoot (1961, 94) felt confident enough to describe these sites as spaces most frequently circular that were surrounded by a bank and fosse or simply by a rampart of stone. He also stated that the enclosed spaces of raths or cashels were generally circular although “oval or rectilinear” examples are also found. It was not long until variants of ringforts were also proved to date to the early medieval period. Excavations at a whole number of raised mounds in advance of farm improvement schemes in the 1960’s and 1970’s at places like Tully (Alan Harper 1970, Excavations Bulletin), Ballylessant, Co. Down (A.E.P. Collins 1970, Excavations Bulletin), Ballygortgarve, Co. Antrim (Chris Lynn 1971, Excavations Bulletin), Crossnacreevy, Co. Down (Alan Harper 1971, Excavations Bulletin), Gransha, Co. Down (Chris Lynn 1972 7 1980­84, Excavations Bulletin; Lynn 1985), Big Glebe, Co. Derry (A. Bratt and Chris Lynn 1976, Excavations Bulletin) and Rathmullan, Co. Down (Chris Lynn 1977­79, Excavations Bulletin; Lynn 1982) were not long in establishing that other settlement types were also built during the early medieval period. Large flat­topped mound raised above the ground were termed platform ringforts while those artificially heightened flat­ topped examples that contained an encircling perimeter were described as raised ringforts. Excavations in the 1980s continued apace and revealed significant platform ringforts like Deer Parks Farms (Lynn 1985) and ringforts like Lisleagh 1 (Monk 1980­84, Excavations Bulletin­ E218). Excavations in recent years have revealed a further number of other important ringforts sites. Examples include Aghadegnan, Co. Longford (Judith Carroll 1991, Excavations Bulletin­ 91E0055), Killanully, Co. Cork (Charles Mount 1992, Excavations Bulletin, Meadowbank, Jordanstown, Co. Antrim (Eoin Halpin & Norman Crothers 1995, Excavations Bulletin), Carrowkeel, Co. Mayo (Suzanne Zajac 2002, Excavations Bulletin­ 02E0598) and most recently Leggetsrath West, Co. Kilkenny (Anne Marie Lennon 2005, 43­61). County Armagh Cavan Cork Quantity 5 2 22 County Longford Louth Mayo Quantity 1 7 6

­ ­ ­

63

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

Derry Donegal Down Dublin Fermanagh Galway Kerry Kildare Kilkenny Leitrim Limerick

4 1 10 8 4 3 12 8 3 1 8

­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­

Meath Offaly Roscommon Antrim Sligo Tipperary Tyrone Westmeath Wexford Wicklow

5 1 3 26 5 8 8 6 1 1

Table 22: Excavated Ringforts Per County 1970­2002

Excavated Ringforts 1970-2002
Wicklow Wexford Westm eath Tyrone Tipperary Sligo Roscomm on Offaly Meath Mayo Louth Longford Lim erick Leitrim Kilkenny Kildare Kerry Galw ay Fermanagh Dublin Dow n Donegal Derry Cork Cavan Arm agh Antrim

County

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Excavated Ringfort

Figure 21: Excavated Ringforts Per County 1970­2002

Archaeological Significance of Excavated ringforts (incl. Raised and Platform) EMAP survey has assessed these sites in terms of their significance grading. A total of 86/169 sites, or 51% of excavated ringforts were graded as ‘general’ in terms of significance. These excavations typically uncovered a limited quantity of artefacts and associated early medieval material. Sites of uncertain or no significance amounted to 18% of the total number of excavated features described as ringforts in the bulletin reports. 23% of sites were described as significant. Excavations on these sites typically revealed ringforts of some status with evidence

64

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

for industrial activity and settlement evidence. 8% of sites, which contained ringforts, were described as highly significant.
Significance of Ringfort No Significance Uncertain General Significant Highly Significant Total Quantity 21 9 86 40 13 169 Percentage 12.5 5.5 51 23 8 100

Table 23: Archaeological Significance of Excavated Ringforts Interpreting the archaeology of early medieval ringforts

Origins and chronology The origins and chronology of ringforts has long been a subject of debate. Formerly, Seamus Caulfield and other suggested that ringforts were ultimately of Iron Age origins. Caulfied suggested ringforts may have developed in the Iron Age and that the expansion of the monument across the island coincided with the political upheavals of the 4/5th century A.D when the Uí Néill influence spread northwards and eastwards (cited in Edwards 1990, 17). This is also a model more recently adopted by Darren Limbert. The view that the ringfort may also have an Iron Age origins has also been supported recently by Limbert (1996). He (1996, 243) has sought to explain the hiatus in settlement activity in the Iron Age by suggesting that ringforts may have first been constructed in this period and cited the recent excavation of a potential Iron Age ringfort containing three round houses at Lislackagh, Co. Mayo (Gerry Walsh 1992, Excavations Bulletin­ 92E0152) to bolster his case. However, at this stage it has to be said that there is little good evidence for their use in the late Iron Age, although enclosed dwellings are known from the Bronze Age and Late Neolithic. By the 1980s, in rejecting these arguments, archaeologists like Chris Lynn and Harold Mytum suggested that ringforts were almost entirely of early medieval date and were introduced into Ireland through contacts with Roman Britain in the early centuries AD (where rounds are known in the south­west and Wales). Mytum also suggesting that ringforts were occupied by upper echelons of society, used for only a generation before being abandoned. Ringforts were not contemporary.
However, Stout’s (1997) study of ringforts found that radiocarbon dates generally supported their use between the early seventh century until the late ninth centuries AD. Stout (1997) carried out a careful analysis of c14 dates, dendrochronological dates and artefact evidence from Irish ringforts. He proposed that the vast majority of Irish ringforts were constructed and occupied over a relatively brief 300 year period, between 540 – 884 AD, or between the late 6th and 9th century AD (and certainly not into prehistory). Furthermore, detailed appraisal of occupation evidence from most ringforts indicated that many were used over at least 2­3 hundred years. The implications of both sets of evidence are that ringforts were contemporary. Supported by the presence of approximately 45,000 extant or non­extant ringforts in the Irish landscape, he developed a model which explicitly linked the distribution of different morphological forms of ringforts with the spatial patterning of a hierarchical society unequivocally expressed in the seventh and eighth century historical tracts. The idea that the ringfort represented a new form of monument which emerged in the 6/7th century A.D. was supported by McCormick (1995) who argued that ringforts were intimately related to the development of a cattle­based dairying economy in this period and indeed that their primary role was for the protection of livestock particularly from night time cattle raids. Agriculture, economy and the construction of the defended enclosed ringfort were then intimately related and as seen as vital ingredients in the organization of a unique hierarchical society between the 7th and 9t centuries. Another problem with the chronology of ringforts is that they appear to go out of use by the 10th century. Between c.1000­1200, we have little evidence for the forms of rural settlement.

65

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

Evidence suggests that they were replaced with some other settlement form; historians propose that this involved nucleated settlement around lordly sites – although no clear evidence for this has yet emerged. Recently, Kerr (2007) has developed this notion that monument form can be used as an indicator for the economy of the later period. He has noted that platform ringforts have a tendency to date to the mid eighth­ mid tenth centuries A.D. which is slightly later than the dates proposed by Stout (1997) for the traditional univallate ringfort. Kerr has argued that the construction of platform ringforts may attest to the increasing importance of an arable­ orientated economy in the later part of early medieval period. The decline in the use of traditional ringforts is then seen as a product of the development of an arable­orientated economy in the later early medieval period. The idea remains quite interesting though it is still debatable if this evidence can be used to indicate a transformation in the economy of the early medieval period across the island. However, ringforts are now generally considered to be an early medieval settlement type, dated to the 7th to 9th century AD. This should mean that many are contemporary, and that we can use this to reconstruct the settlement landscape. Finally, it has been suggested that the density of ringforts in Gaelic controlled areas in the medieval period can be used as evidence to support the idea that they continued to be re­used at this late stage Barrett & Graham (1975). It is evident however that this theory remains controversial and has yet to be properly demonstrated. The only possible site that could be used to support this view was excavated by Rynne (1963) at Thady’s Fort, Co. Clare. A house dating to A.D. 1600 was excavated inside a ringfort type monument which Rynne suggested was contemporary with the building, a view since challenged by Edwards (1990, 19). The evidence for later medieval reoccupation or construction of ringforts is gaining strength with more recent studies in the west of Ireland.

Morphology and form It is now broadly accepted that ringforts were enclosed domestic dwellings, not military fortifications, so the bank or wall was not intended as a defensive feature. Ringfort entrances are usually poorly defended, fences are not always found on top of the banks and the ditches were usually left to silt up. At Seacash, Co, Antrim, palaeobotanical studies indicate that the ditch quickly became filled with nettles, shrubs and bushes. The lack of effort in maintaining banks and ditches raises the first evidence for social status. In most cases, it seems likely that the importance of the bank was that it defined a domestic space, by enclosing it – it did not seek to defend it. In fact, the main aspect of the bank was the building of it, and on high­status sites, large banks and ditches were intended to signal the wealth or status of the owner. Ringfort entrances typically face towards the east or southeast, being usually simple gaps in banks and ditches. At some sites, entrances can be more complex, with cobbled pathways, substantial wooden gates, towers, etc. However, generally entrances are simple, undefended features.
Ringforts were constructed in a range of sizes and forms. This was usually accomplished by the design of the main defining element ­ the enclosing banks. These vary in size, shape and number. While most ringforts are simple enclosures, there are also numerous sites with more than one bank – examples such as Garranes, Co. Cork, Rathra, Co. Roscommon or the trivallate fort at Rathealy, Co. Kilkenny. In regional studies, it has been shown that about 20% of ringforts were multivallate – indicating an emerging pattern. These multivallate ringforts (two banks ­ bivallate and three banks ­ trivallate) are more complex sites, with a series of banks and ditches enclosing the dwelling space. However, despite this use of banks, multivallate ringforts frequently have the same enclosed space as univallate forts. The use of multivallate banks seems then not to be about size of internal settlement space, but about the scale and impressiveness of the defences. The banks are being used to signal wealth and status. It is likely that many of these multivallate ringforts are ‘royal sites’ or at least lordly sites. The early Irish law tract Crith Gablach tells us that the king or lord would have derived authority from his ability to marshal a large labour force, of hereditary serfs and vassals, and also tenant farmers. The larger the banks and ditches, the more labour has to be invested in their construction, and consequently, the higher the status of the lord.

66

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

In a similar way, the construction of large raised raths may also have been a symbol of authority. Some ringforts are actually large flat­topped mounds, known as raised raths, such as at Rathmullan, Big Glebe and Deer Park Farms. It has also been suggested that by the 10th century, some of these sites are being constructed as lordly dwellings – with the lord’s residence literally raised above the landscape. Thus, some raised raths were deliberate constructions, possibly for reasons of status and prestige. Raised raths may also be the result of occupation over long periods of time, as internal surfaces became waterlogged and the inhabitants attempted to raise the surface above the water table. This occurred at Deer Park Farms, Co. Antrim, where waterlogging caused inhabitants to build up the site. However, by far and away, the commonest type of ringfort is the simple univallate enclosure.

Social and economic function The interpretation of ringforts has shifted across the years. However, since at least the 1950s, they have tended to be interpreted as domestic farmsteads of reasonably prosperous farmers. The structural and artefactual evidence emphasises their use as dwellings for self­sufficient groups, with crafts and industry practiced on a small­scale basis, economy overwhelmingly dominated by agriculture, and few weapons indicating their lack of a military function
Intriguingly, there is also a hint that some ringforts were not used as dwellings, but as temporary enclosures for cattle, as has been suggested by Finbar McCormick. In recent years, many ringforts being excavated during rescue projects are producing less structures and artefacts than might be expected. In earlier investigations, sites like Garryduff II, Co. Cork produced no evidence for settlement at all. The question of whether raths were used as cattle enclosures has yet to be confirmed. At Deer Park Farms, palaeoecological analyses produced lice from cattle, sheep and pigs, also beetles from dung suggesting that cattle were certainly kept within enclosures – was it more like a farmyard? However, there is abundant evidence from numerous other examples for long­term occupation. Thus Deer Park Farms was occupied between 7th and the 10th century AD, and produced evidence for houses, workshops, middens, etc, etc.

Distribution and siting The Archaeological Survey of Ireland and the surveys of the Environment and Heritage Service now indicate that there were at least 45,000 ringforts in Ireland. They were widely distributed across Ireland, indicating the widespread settlement of the island.
Ringforts are most densely found in north Connacht (Sligo and Roscommon), and in north Munster (Clare and Limerick) – less dense in midlands (where ecclesiastical sites are common). Ringforts are typically found in hilly terrain, in the drumlins of the northwest, in rolling topography. They tend to avoid low­lying, level lands. They only avoid uplands above 335m (mountains); they also avoid bogs and low­lying riverine wetlands. In terms of local terrain, ringforts are typically sited with farming, travel and status in mind. Ringforts are usually found on good quality soils, suitable for agriculture. They avoid heavy lowland clays (difficult to plough), in preference for sands and gravels. A prominent siting also gave ringfort dwellers a good view over the landscape, for safety and access to neighbours. Ringforts were primarily rural dispersed dwellings of farming communities. Ringforts also tend to be found in dense clusters. It has been suggested that ringforts were clustered together to provide defence in depth, with views between ringforts providing safety and mutual defence. Although individual sites did not have a panoramic view, being oriented in one direction, the location of forts meant that some ringforts could have had a view of as many as 17 other forts. In fact, ringforts have to be seen within a settlement system. Most studies have shown that within local distributions there tends to be a range of different types in terms of size, morphology and siting, ranging from large multivallate enclosures in prominent locations, to larger raised raths and well defended forts in strategic locations, to smaller univallate forts either clustered around the large sites or located in isolated places.

67

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

The archaeological evidence suggests that ringforts tend to be grouped together, and that within these groups, insignificant looking forts, the simple, small univallate forts, tend to be clustered around the most spectacular multivallate examples. Is this evidence for a social hierarchy? Clearly, the morphology, distribution and siting of ringforts has potential to provide us with a good deal of information on early Irish society. But can we move towards a more sophisticated understanding of the organisation of the settlement landscape?

Stout’s normative models of ringfort morphology and social hierarchies In recent years, Matthew Stout’s (1997) studies of morphology and distribution of ringforts in southwest midlands, have done exactly that, and have enabled a potentially fascinating insight into society in early medieval Ireland. Stout looked at 300 ringforts in two baronies in the southwest midlands (Tipperary/Offaly), using the multi­variate classification system known as cluster analysis, to define ringfort groupings. These groupings or statistical clusters, are based on differences in ringfort morphology and distribution. The clusters of forts correspond closely with descriptions of forts in early Irish law tracts, where lords and farmers were described as having forts of particular size and layout.
Stout investigated ringforts by looking at certain variables which included internal diameter; overall diameter; number of banks; number of fosses; slope index (distance between 31m contours, 100ft); altitude; ringforts within 0.7km; ringforts within 3.5km; ringforts within 7.3km; distance to nearest ecclesiastical site. He identified six ‘clusters’ or statistical types of fort. ! ! ! ! ! ! Cluster 1, small univallate forts, at distance from ecclesiastical sites – low­status sites Cluster 2, smaller univallate forts, closer to ecclesiastical sites – also low status sites Cluster 3, bivallate forts, large overall diameter, low internal diameter, possible ‘royal sites’, found in association with low­status sites Cluster 4, large univallate forts, low altitude, near boundaries, strategic forts? Cluster 5, univallate forts, low density, medium social status Cluster 6, univallate forts, on level ground, medium social status

Stout interpreted these clusters in the following way. The Cluster 3 bivallate forts were high­ status or royal sites; the Cluster 4 forts were strategic or military in nature, while the other forts range from low­status to medium­status sites. Stout used this distribution and clustering of ringforts to propose a model for how the early medieval landscape may have been structured. ! Large, multivallate ringforts (cluster 3)(multiple banks, small enclosed areas, prominent siting with good views and close to road) tend to be in a central location within townlands. This type of site would seem to be central to settlement system, and correspond closely to descriptions of forts of lords and kings. These bivallate forts may have been the dwellings of the typical aire forgill or lord. Small, simple ringforts tend to be found in close proximity to high­status sites. These are poorly defended, with a small internal area. These forts may have been the settlements of the ocaire – sons of nobility or landless farmers who rented land from the lord. Large well­defended, univallate ringforts (cluster 4) are located in strategically significant places such as near barony or townland boundaries. These may have been the settlements of the aire deso – a lower grade of lord, whose forts may have had an inter­territorial military function. Community’s cattle or wealth could have gathered into these places at times of danger. There are also univallate ringforts with internal diameters of av. 30m, situated on good agricultural land, but in less strategic locations. They tend to be situated at some distance from the lord’s sites. These may have been the dwellings of boaire – lowest

!

!

!

68

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

grade of free farmers, whose families owned their own land outright, but rented cattle from the lord. Their farms may be similar to modern townland boundaries. The distribution and siting of ringforts also tends to be influenced by other factors. Proximity to a routeway seems to have been of significance. Ringforts also tend to have a distribution that is complementary to ecclesiastical sites, such as churches and monasteries. However, ecclesiastical sites tend to be found near routeways, rivers, bog islands and borders, suggesting their role in the political landscape. Stout’s model has suggested that large multivallate ringforts, potentially representing the forts or dwellings of the aire forgill who were military­type lords, were located in a centrally prominent location within the political unit or túath. He also suggested that large well­defended ringforts situated in strategic military positions along political borders might represent a lower class of nobleman known as the aire deso. Medium status univallate ringforts situated on good agricultural land, in less prominent positions at some distance from the lords multivallate settlement, may represent the lowest independent farmer known as the Boaire. Smaller low status ringforts, located in close proximity to lordly ringforts, could represent the homesteads of the semi­free ocaire, who undoubtedly constituted the majority of the population (Stout 1997; O’Sullivan & Downey, 2007, 32). Stout (1997) applied this model in the southwest midlands of Ireland where ringforts were relatively well present. However, it has been noted by many archaeologists including O’Sullivan and Downey (2007, 35) most recently that the density of ringforts is relatively low in most of Leinster, northwest Ulster and the western extremities of Donegal, Mayo, Galway, Kerry and Cork. Stout’s normative model is attractive because it explains differences in ringfort morphology and siting on the basis of social organisation and interprets the settlement landscape on the basis of interaction between different social groups. However, there are some problems with the model. The model fits well with the southwest midlands, Roscommon, but not with other parts of Ireland, such as Co. Clare. It is also true that the model must assume contemporaneity of sites, if sites were not occupied at the same time, different processes could have lead to these distributions. The model therefore deliberately ignores the very real evidence that the occupation of ringforts over a few generations (i.e. 250 years) could lead to radical reworking of banks and ditches and that no one period is representative of the lives and social experience of the ringfort’s inhabitants across time. But the model is useful; it certainly presents archaeologists with a challenge to test.

The Cultural Biographies of ringforts However, while ringforts can be interpreted as having a principal phase of occupation from A.D. 600­900, we yet have little understanding about the longevity of use at individual monuments and how different sites were transformed and re­modelled over this period of time. It is undoubtedly the case that the households and social groups that inhabited ringforts experienced a waxing and waning of fortune, family history, prosperity and difficulty so we should expect their settlements to change across time. The social and ideological aspects of change are what create the cultural biographies of such settlements.
The excavated evidence from the majority of ringforts is limited in nature and supports Monk’s (1995) assertion that most ringforts were occupied for only one or two centuries. Mytum (1992, 123) has also claimed that the banks of most ringforts were not substantial and usually only constructed once. He also has observed that only four of 16 excavated ringforts from Co. Antrim revealed evidence for more than one phase of enclosure bank while 12 of 21 sites from Co. Down and all nine excavated ringforts at Cush, Co. Limerick showed similar results (Kinsella 2007a, 3). While the majority of ringforts appear to have been only constructed once, with perhaps some limited morphological additions, some sites clearly display evidence for multi­ phase activity. At more recently discovered early medieval enclosures, such as at Roestown and Castlefarm, Co. Meath there is a strong sense of dynamic change being the norm, rather than stability across centuries.

69

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

It has been observed by Limbert (1996, 278) that a large number of ringforts have been found to have evidence for pre­enclosure activity. He has cited evidence for multi­phase activity at a number of raised ringfort sites at Glenarm, Dunsilly and Big Glebe. A charcoal spread beneath a stone at Big Glebe returned a date of c.260 B.C. while prehistoric phases were also found at Glenarm, Co. Antrim. Excavations at a highly significant ringfort at Lisleagh 1 from 1981­85 (Monk 1995­ E218) revealed extensive settlement and industrial evidence as well as imported E­ware dating the site from the early 7th century to the late 9th/early 10th centuries. Evidence for pre­ringfort activity was also revealed in the form of hearths, stake­hole alignments, artefacts, pottery and stone, possibly dating to the Bronze Age. The first ringfort was then constructed in the early medieval period and was 38 meters in diameter. The ringfort was levelled and soon replaced by a bivallate ringfort 63 m in diameter with a crowning palisade. A number of ringforts however also appear to have been built on preceding Iron Age and Bronze Age funerary and settlement sites though it has not been clearly established if there was continuity of settlement between the ringfort and the Iron Age occupation or if the location of the ringfort at this site was simply coincidental. The most obvious example was at Clogher Demesne (Warner 1988) where a ringfort which later succeeded a prehistoric hillfort. A Late Bronze Age hillfort at Mooghaun, Co. Clare also saw the construction of two cashels and associated house sites on its ramparts in the early medieval period. Excavations at Carrowkeel, Co. Mayo (Susanne Zajac 2002, Excavations Bulletin­ 02E0598) revealed the presence of a ditched enclosure that preceded a ringfort. The fill of the ditch contained charcoal inclusions. A series of cylindrical pits were also uncovered in the north and east quadrants of the enclosure. Several shards of coarse­ware were found in one pit. The date of the feature was not mentioned but could possibly be prehistoric. Excavations at Carraigaline Middle, Co. Cork revealed an enclosure measuring approximately 37.5m by 31m, whose ditch had been truncated by a later ringfort ditch (Sherlock 2001, Excavations Bulletin­ 01E1148). Post­holes, pits, cremation burials and possible funerary pyres lay to the north and northwest of the ditches and indicate both early medieval and prehistoric activity. No date was provided for the earlier enclosure pre­dating the ringfort. Excavations at Cloongownagh, Co. Roscommon in advance of the N4 Rockingham­Cortober Road Project (Deirdre Murphy 1998, Excavations Bulletin) revealed evidence for an unenclosed Iron Age settlement dating to the 1­4th centuries A.D. The site was then enclosed and developed into a ringfort before it was completely backfilled by the 10th century A.D. A small fulacht fiadh dating to the fourth century A.D. was discovered close by near a boggy area. Excavations at a growing number of ringforts are also revealing evidence for multi­phase activity dating to the early medieval period. A good example of a possible early unenclosed settlement being later enclosed by a ringfort was found at Ballykennedy, Co. Antrim (Brannon 1980). Here, a substantial pre­ringfort phase of probably circular structures was later replaced by a ringfort (45m in diameter) with occupation centred on a house platform. A small penannular brooch, dated to the 9th century, was also discovered and may represent evidence for the commencement of the phase of the ringfort. Good examples of ringforts being re­used and re­designed in the early medieval period can be found at a number of sites. At Millockstown, Co. Louth, (See Cemetery/Settlement Section), lintel cemeteries were found to date to a slightly later period of construction than a ringfort. Excavations at Ninch, Co. Meath, revealed a complicated site history that saw a trivallate ringfort being succeeded by an unenclosed settlement of circular buildings before a large number of enclosures and a lintel cemetery came into use. The final phase of the site’s history consisted of the construction of a number of large sub­rectangular enclosures dating to the 10th/11th century A.D. (Eogan & Reid 2000 7 2001, Excavations Bulletin­ 98E0501). A more recent example includes Dowdstown 2, Co. Meath, in which a circular ringfort was re­modifed and expanded into a larger D­shaped enclosure (Jonathan Kinsella pers comm.). Excavations at Lougboy, Co. Kilkenny (Keeley 1998, Excavations Bulletin­ 98E0219) revealed a small cemetery interred within both the southeast quadrant and fosse of an early ringfort. Another ringfort was situated close by. An example of a possible ringfort being superseded by a

70

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

definite ecclesiastical site can be found at Moyne, Co. Mayo. Manning (1987) observed that a faint circle (40m in diameter) in the northern half of the large ecclesiastical enclosure (135 x 125m) may represent possible evidence for a preceding ringfort. Many other examples of ringforts appear to have had their defences remodelled or had extra banks added over a period of time. Excavations at a ringfort with associated souterrain at Whiterath, Co. Louth in advance of the M1 Dunleer­Dundalk Motorway revealed that the double­banked enclosures were constructed over two separate phases (Cóilín Ó'Drisceoil 1999, Excavations Bulletin­ 99E0485). The outer enclosure was 41m in diameter. It had evidence for ironworking and was evidently a place of some status. A number of ringforts finally display evidence for being converted into later Anglo­Norman mottes in the late 12th century A.D. O’Kelly (1962) has noted how a ringfort at Beal Boru was later remodelled by the Anglo­Normans around A.D. 1200. Beal Boru was a defended settlement that is historically recorded as being destroyed by Toirdelbach Ua Conchobair in A.D. 1116 (O’Keeffe 2000, 21) supporting the idea that this ringfort site continued to be used at a late stage in the early medieval period. Excavations at Dunsilly, Co. Antrim (Tom McNeill 1974 & 1975, Excavations Bulletin) evidence for a pre­ringfort phase, a ringfort phase a phase in which the ringfort was converted into a motte. The pre­ringfort phase revealed a palisade trench, annular gullies, three external hearths and a stone revetted oval house platform. The motte appears to have been constructed on a simple traditional form of ringfort. Excavations at Rathmullan Lower, Co. Down revealed an important high status settlement that dated from the 6/7th century A.D, based on E­ware pottery, until the 12th century when the motte was constructed. It appears to have originally been an unenclosed settlement before an enclosed raised ringfort, with associated settlement, was constructed. The mound was further raised when the motte was constructed. Excavations at Antrim, Co. Antrim focused on a ringfort, 21m in diameter that also had later been converted into a motte (J. McSparron 1998, Excavations Bulletin) while limited testing was undertaken on a ringfort that had been converted into a motte along the Killybegs Road, Antrim (J. McSparron 1998, Excavations Bulletin). The small number of excavated ringforts in comparison to the approximate number of surveyed sites (c.45,000) illustrates why we should be wary of making definite judgements about the chronological and morphological developments of ringforts over time. However, the above example does suggest that many high status examples in particular, many of which were raised ringforts, had complicated site origins and histories. Seeds of Doubt: Non­circular enclosures In 2001, excavations uncovered a plectrum­shaped early medieval enclosure with an associated enclosure at Newtown (A & E), Co. Limerick (Avril Hayes 2001, Excavations Bulletin­ 00E0853); Coyne & Collins 2003, 17; Coyne 2005). The centre of the plectrum­shaped enclosure contained a figure of eight building as well as a small number of beads, knives and domestic items. Radiocarbon determinations found that the site was principally in use from the 8­11th centuries A.D. Coyne & Collins (2003) and Coyne (2005) have suggested that this plectrum­shaped enclosure may represent one example of a distinct settlement type in early medieval Ireland. It was noted that these type of sites “have been present but hidden in the archaeological record, as in the absence of a clearly defined typology, they have been labelled either ‘ringfort’ or, more frustratingly, ‘enclosure’ (Coyne & Collins 2003, 18). It was observed by Coyne and Collins (2003) that two other examples of plectrum shaped enclosures at Lahinch, Co. Clare and Tralee, Co. Kerry were located, like Newtown, on the summit of low hills. Although it was noted that few definite examples of plectrum­shaped enclosures were known, it was suggested tentatively that these ‘high­status’ sites had a tendency to be located on hilltops while ringforts generally favoured a mid­slope location (Coyne & Collins 2003, 19). It was also observed that apparently similar sites had been excavated at Killickaweeny, Co. Kildare and Balriggan, Co. Louth and that recent analysis of aerial photographs had uncovered a large number of roughly plectrum shaped enclosures that did not conform to a circular shape. The debate about a new settlement type distinct to that of Stout’s circular ringforts had begun.

71

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

An appraisal of the evidence Further examples of plectrum and non­circular enclosures were not long emerging. Archaeologists were now conscious that a distinct settlement type may have existed in early medieval Ireland. Development­led excavations were revealing a number of sites that archaeologist were now interpreting as potential non­circular settlement sites. Kinsella (2007a) has listed a total of these 15 non­circular enclosures. Nine are mentioned in the table below and the remainder are discussed in the ‘settlement/cemetery section. The other sites have been recovered from a review of the sites described in the excavation bulletin reports as ‘enclosures’. The sites described below are likely to represent the tip of the iceberg of non­circular sites as it is very likely, as (Coyne & Collins 2003) have pointed out, that these sites were often labelled as ‘ringforts’ or ‘enclosures’ in the past. A thorough review of the sites described as ringforts (above) then is likely to find that some could be brought into this potential category. This is not surprising as the non­circularity of the ringfort/rath was not a major issue for archaeologists like Proudfoot and Edwards in the past and, most likely, the people who constructed and resided within them throughout the early medieval period – who probably conceived these as “raths” rather than our ringfort term.
Table 24 below illustrates the range of shapes and contexts in which ‘enclosure’ sites have been excavated in recent years mostly. Plectrum­shaped, D­shaped, quadrangular shaped, square­ shaped and rectangular shaped enclosures have been excavated, some of which were associated with other conjoined enclosures.

Examples of Non Circular Shaped Enclosures Name Sluggary Newtown Lusk Rosepark, Balrothery Cahircalla More Ballycasey Beg Ballyconneely Roestown Gortatlea Ballynqe Ballynacarriga Killickaweeny Conva Curraheen 1 Ballywee Ballycasey More Dowdstown Castlefarm Corrstown Balgatheran 1 Sheephouse Derry Louth Louth County Limerick Limerick Dublin Dublin Clare Clare Clare Meath Kerry Antrim Cork Kildare Cork Cork Antrim Clare Meath Report Writer Elizabeth Shee Avril Hayes A. Giacometti Christine Baker; Carroll Kate Taylor Anne Carey Thaddeus Breen O'Hara forthcoming Michael Connolly Chris Lynn Daniel Noonan Fintan Walsh Martin Doody Edward Danaher Chris Lynn Deirdre Murphy O’Neill Cagney forthcoming O'Connell forthcoming Malachy Conway Robert Chapple Declan Moore & Tara 2002 2005/2006 2005/2006 2002/2003 2000 2000/2001 Judith 1999/2000 2005 1999/2000 2000 2005/2006 2000 1973 2001 2002 1992 2001/2002 1974/1980­ 84 Multivallate site (irregular form) D­Shaped enclosure N/A Sub­rectangular Oval and later Sub­rectangular enclosure N/A Quadrangular Square with rectangular enclosure Sub­Oval/Heart­Shaped with enclosure Bivallate enclosure with rectangular enclosure Conjoined enclosures Conjoined enclosures Sub­rectangular & 2 conjoined rectangular enclosures Rectangular field system attached to enclosure Annexe attached to outer enclosure 'Enclosure' 'Enclosure' 'Enclosure' Year 1973 1974 2001 Shape & Polygonal Plectrum­Shaped Sub­Square/D­shaped

Table 24: Examples of Non­Circular Shaped Enclosures

72

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

It is clear that our definition of a ringfort is at the heart of how we view and understand these non­circular shaped sites. If we understand, like Stout (1997), that circularity is a crucial characteristic of the Irish ringfort, then we may be speaking of a new settlement type. However, if we understand that ringforts/raths can have a number of different shapes, then there is no need to create a different early medieval settlement type classified as the non­ circular enclosure. Other factors that need to be considered are dating and chronology, size, multi­phase activity, landscape context and associated material­culture; a number of themes have been examined in a preliminary unpublished report by Jonathan Kinsella (2007a). Kinsella’s (2007a) unpublished report for ACS, carried out as research for the M3 archaeological programme, is one the few studies to examine this research question and his findings play an important part in this discussion. He has appraised both ringforts/raths and non­circular enclosures in terms of their dating and chronological sequence, size, landscape and topography and material­culture.

Chronology and Occupation It has been suggested that the great majority of sites date to the later half of the second millennium A.D. conforming to Stout’s dating scheme for ringforts (Kinsella 2007a). A number of sites including Killickaweeny (Clarke & Carlin forthcoming) and Ballycasey More (Deirdre Murphy & Tara O’Neill, 2001, Excavations Bulletin­ 01E002601E0026) have been found, through radiocarbon dating, to have been in use between the 7/8th­10th centuries. The vast majority of the other sites including Cahircalla More (Kinsella 2007a), Ballyconneely (Thaddeus Breen, 2000, Excavations Bulletin­ 00E0284), Sheephouse (Declan Moore 2000, Excavations Bulletin­ 00E0810) and potentially Ballynqe, Co. Antrim (Chris Lynn 1973, Excavations Bulletin) appear to date similarly to the second half of the first millennium A.D. based on material­culture evidence.
A small number of sites like Roestown, Castlefarm (Kinsella 2007a) and Balgatheran 1 (Robert Chapple 2000, Excavations Bulletin­ 00E0477) appear to have been re­used in the later medieval period while it appears that the ditches at Newtown (Coyne & Collins 2003) may not have been completely in filled until the thirteenth century. Radiocarbon dates from a small number of other non­circular settlement sites at Ballynacarriga, Co. Cork (Danile Noonan 2001, Excavations Bulletin­ 01E0224) found that the site was occupied approximately from the early 5th­early 11th century A.D. Like ‘Settlement/Cemetery’ sites, the main enclosure was found to be one of the earliest features on the site. Excavations at Conva, Co. Cork (Martin. Doody 1992, Excavations Bulletin) revealed a bivallate site with an associated rectangular enclosure which was dated by the director to the Late Iron Age/early Christian period. This overall provisional dating evidence tends to suggest that the majority of non­circular sites were constructed within a similar chronological time­frame as the ringfort dated by Stout to c. 600­900 A.D, but that a certain number (Roestown, Castlefarm, Raystown, Laytown and Ballynacarriga were used into the 10th and 11th century AD.

The Cultural Biographies of Non­Circular Enclosures The majority of non­circular enclosures have revealed evidence for multi­phase activity. Excavations at Killickaweeny, Co. Kildare revealed two phases of occupation. The first involved the construction of a primary enclosure. Another enclosure was later added to the site and was used for possibly containing livestock (Walsh & Carlin forthcoming). Excavations at a site at Ballynacarriga, Co. Cork also found that a rectangular enclosure situated on the slopes of a gentle hill was a later extension of a square enclosure located in the valley floor. Evidence for a rectangular house succeeding a round house was also discovered within the interior of the main square enclosure. (Daniel Noonan 2001, Excavations Bulletin­ 01E0224). Evidence for phases in the development of the enclosures were also discovered at other enclosures with associated enclosures/annexes at Ballycasey More, Dowdstown and Castlefarm (O’Connell 2006). Roestown also revealed evidence for multi­phase occupational activity between approximately the 6th and 11th centuries while a small rectangular enclosure to the east of the settlement was used during the 13th century (O’Hara 2007). Excavations finally at Rosepark, Balrothery revealed a high status multi­ditched site of a number of different phases which the excavator

73

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

noted did ‘not fall into any known category’ Judith Carroll 1999 & 2000, Excavations Bulletin­ 99E0155). It consisted of a complex of curvilinear and linear ditches of unknown parallel. The evidence from the archaeology that included E­ware, souterrains and milling activity also suggests that the site was used for a long period of time. The site at Newtown was found to have only one principal phase of occupation. Other sites including Ballynqe contained no evidence for phases of activity within the excavation reports although this cannot exclude them having existed. Finally no data was also available for a number of sites including Cahircalla More, Co. Clare. (Kinsella 2007a). One striking feature of the review of the evidence is that many ‘non­circular’ sites described have evidence for associated enclosures that were added to the settlement during the early medieval period. This may be indicative of upward social mobility, as settlements expanded in size, so rather than the enclosure shape representing a different settlement type, their remodelling was the outcome of various and changing social, domestic, industrial and agricultural needs. The presence of souterrains at a large number of these sites including Roestown, Ballynacarriga, Ballywee, Gortatlea and Rosepark is another interesting feature. The overall evidence suggests that the majority of identified non­circular enclosures appear to contain a number of phases of activity that principally date to the second half of the first millennium A.D. It would then make them contemporary with ringforts, which as discussed previously, have also tended to revealed evidence for a number of phases of activity not just over one generation but over a few centuries in the second half of the first millennium A.D.

Size Kinsella (2007a) has also examined the size of these non­circular enclosures in comparision to ringforts. He has found that the majority are generally larger than ringforts/raths. Sites like Killickaweeny (90m by 70m), Ballyconneely (70 by 32m), Balgatheran 1 (c. 70m) and Castlefarm (90m by 70m inner; outer­ 120m by 100m (Kinsella 2007a) in particular all contained enclosures a lot larger than typical ringforts. Sites at the lower scale included Newtown (max width 50m) while the D­shaped enclosure at Cahircalla More, Co. Clare was quite small measuring only 38m wide (Hull & Taylor 2005). Topography The topographical location of the non­circular enclosures is another criteria that needs to be examined to establish if these indeed represent a new site type. Coyne and Collins (2003, 18 & 19) have noted that plectrum shaped enclosures at Lahinch, Co. Clare and Tralee, Co. Kerry were located on the summits of hills. This view was challenged by Walsh and Delaney (2004) who argued that the shape of the enclosure at Newtown was the result of topographical constraints. Other sites such as Ballynacarriga, Co. Cork were located along a valley floor as well as the slopes of a gentle hill while the multivallate settlement at Rosepark was situated principally on a hill­slope. Kinsella’s (2007a) survey has also found that non­circular enclosures displayed a considerable amount of variation in their location with a number including Roestown, Killickaweeny, Co. Kildare and Ballycasey More, Co. Clare being found in proximity to bog or marsh land which would undoubtedly have affected the topographical layout of the enclosures. Topography then must also be considered as a factor when establishing if builders deliberately sough to create different site type based on pre­conceived ideas of shape. Material Culture and Status Kinsella (2007a, 15) has noted that the quantity and quality of material­culture at his surveyed non­circular enclosures varied upon excavation. He has noted that some sites like Roestown revealed a wide range of personal items indicative of a high status site with contacts beyond the shores of Ireland. Evidence for small­scale ferrous and non­ferrous metalworking was also recovered indicating limited specialized activities on site. Castlefarm was probably a high status site, as indicated by the discovery of brooches, pins and a shield boss. At Killickaweeny, the inhabitants were engaged in both iron­working and domestic and agricultural activities. Both appear to have been settlements of some status with contemporary industrial and agricultural activity as also found at another enclosure site at Balgatheran 1, Co. Louth. The multi­phase concentric enclosure at Rosepark, Balrothery was also likely to have been the site of a high

74

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

status settlement. It revealed evidence for kilns, souterrains and a wide range of personal and domestic items, E­ware pottery and glass­beads. Excavations at a non­circular enclosures site at Ballyconneely, Co. Clare discovered a wide range of personal and domestic items indicative of a people of some status as well as milling and other agricultural evidence. It is evident however that not all non­circular enclosure sites produced the range and quantity of high status items as well as agricultural and industrial evidence recovered on the above sites. Excavations at the two adjacent non­circular enclosures at Ballynacarriga, Co. Cork have revealed evidence for souterrains as well as structural, industrial and milling evidence yet in terms of personal and domestic items indicative of status was quite poor. Sites like Dowdstown, Co. Meath, Newtown, Co. Limerick (Coyne & Collins 2003; Coyne 2006), Lusk, Co. Dublin (Giacometti 2006), and Cahircalla More, Co. Clare (Hull & Taylor 2005), have produced very few artefacts, both personal and functional and high status in nature (Kinsella 2007a, 17). Like Ballynacarriga however, these sites have produced agricultural, industrial and structural evidence to indicate the homesteads of a relatively prosperous farm – although Newtown is an unusual site and its function remains difficult to interpret. Excavations at a polygonal shaped enclosure at Sluggary (Elizabeth Shee 1973 & 1974, Excavations Bulletin) have also revealed a wattle structure, a stone­lined hearth, a number of nails, iron knives, slag, furnace bottoms, bronze­ring headed pin, bone comb and clay moulds suggestive of non­ferrous metalworking were found along this internal bank that might indicate a farmer of modest means. Other sites such as Gortatlea, Co. Kerry (Michael Connolly 2000, Excavations Bulletin­ 00E0660) and Ballynqe (Chris Lynn 1973, Excavations Bulletin) revealed limited archaeological evidence, perhaps indicating that some non­circular sites may have also been the dwelling places of the lower free classes of men.

A new settlement type or not? The archaeology from the majority of non­circular enclosures suggests that these were the sites of relatively wealthy people in the second half of the first millennium A.D. Many of them have revealed a number of phases of activity that testify to their expansion during the period. The evidence for a new form of settlement type is still tentative. What then is the evidence for a new settlement type!
Kinsella (2007a) has demonstrated that no correlation can be made between non­circular sites and hilltop summit locations as Coyne and Collins (2003) has suggested. He has also demonstrated that topography is likely to have had an important role in the shape of these enclosures. A review of the evidence also suggests that the longevity of sites and their remodelling, including additional annexes, was the result of a variety of factors involving the changing needs and requirements of the occupants over time. Kinsella (2007, 18) has then suggested that non­circular enclosures sites discussed above ‘do not represent a new early medieval settlement type but that they mirror the range and hierarchical evidence for raths, from the homes of low status farmers to the dwelling places of wealthy farmers and lords’ (Kinsella 2007, 1). It could be finally concluded that the archaeological term ‘ringfort’ is misleading as it fails to adequately take into account those non­circular enclosures that are now, and have previously been, discovered in the archaeological record. Instead, as archaeologists have tended to do, the more neutral term of “rath” should be employed to convey information about early medieval enclosed settlement sites that come in a variety of shapes and forms.

Other early medieval enclosures
The survey identified approximately a further 70 ‘enclosures’ from 53 other EMAP defined sites. These sites were described as ‘enclosures’ by the authors of the excavations bulletin reports. The morphology of many of these sites could not be established so it was not possible to describe these sites as raths, cashels, non­circular shaped or other forms of enclosure. Many of them were excavated beside ringfort sites and could have been associated with these places as fields, lanes or other features, while others were revealed during large­scale development

75

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

projects that created open spaces that enable archaeologists to see beyond the boundaries of individual ringforts or raths. We will need to reassess how we define a ringfort/rath as well as non­circular shaped enclosures to help address the growing complexity of the early medieval settlement enclosure dataset.

The excavated evidence for the social status of early medieval ringforts
Early medieval society was stratified and unequal and an array of old Irish terms indicate that existence of various social classes, ranging from kings and nobles, to prosperous free farmers, to low­status commoners, to the unfree and dependent labours. Early medieval archaeology can be used to some extent to identify the social status and role of the inhabitants of settlements. Ringforts of low status social groups The early medieval material culture recovered from most univallate ringforts tends to be sparse and restricted to basic utilitarian objects such as iron knives, needles, nails and occasional evidence for slag is often recovered as well as rotary querns, hone stones, flint and chert debitage, spindle whorls and needles. Personal and dress items are generally restricted to copper­alloy and iron ringed pins, glass beads and bracelets, lignite bracelets and bone combs and pins. Kinsella (2005) has suggested that some of these ringforts may have served as the occupation places of the semi­free and impoverished. He has observed that many ringforts at Inchigaggin, Co. Cork, Lackan, Boho, Co. Fermanagh and Ballykennedy, Co. Antrim shared similar characteristics in that they were all small univallate enclosures, they were located in bogland, that was unsuitable for agriculture, and, finally, that each produced a meagre collection of artefacts’. A total of 86 ringforts were excavated from 1970­2002 that typically only revealed very small quantities of occasional domestic/agricultural or bodily functional items, animal bone and iron slag. A limited amount of souterrain ware was recovered from ringforts in the northeast of Ireland as well as occasional gullies and features which could be suggestive of possible structures (See Appendix for list). It is likely that some of these sites may indeed represent high status settlements where only partial excavation has taken place. It is also likely that many others may have been used for the corralling of animals principally. Examples of these sites may include a ringfort 33m in diameter at Magheraboy (Frank Ryan 2001, Excavations Bulletin­ 01E1063). The site was excavated in advance of the Sligo Inner Relief Road and revealed nothing except a small sub oval feature, measuring 1.08m by 0.6m by 0.2m in depth, which contained heated stones, flecks of charcoal and fragments of burnt bone. Excavations were undertaken at a univallate ringfort measuring 30m in diameter at Shewis, Co. Armagh (Brannon 1980). One shard of souterrain ware and a small number of scattered post­holes were discovered at the site. The site did not appear to have been occupied for any great period and the excavator suggested that it may represent an animal enclosure like that excavated at Garryduff I, Co. Cork by O’Kelly (1962). It is also possible that a number of excavated sites like Croom East (E. Shee 1974) that revealed a number of domestic artefacts, some slag and postholes may also represent ringforts for the lowly status. Other potential sites include a univallate ringfort at Drumbroneth, Co. Down which contained a single phase of activity that contained souterrain ware and small number of items. Pre­ringfort activity in the form of gullies was also revealed though there function is unclear (Brannon 1980) Excavations at Deerfin Lower, Co. Antrim (A. Bratt 1975) also revealed a site that was originally a cashel and then was converted into an earthen fort. A wooden structure, a number of industrial hearths, ring­headed pins and domestic items were recovered. It is also possible that the quadrangular shaped enclosure at Ballynqe that revealed only a limited number of souterrain­ware shards (Chris Lynn 1973, Excavations Bulletin) might belong to this type of settlement. There are likely to be many more examples which appear to represent evidence for animal corrals and ringforts of lowly status. They all have a number of

76

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

characteristics in common including evidence for a relative short period of occupation as well as material­culture of lowly quality and quantity. Ringforts of ordinary farmers A further 40 ringfort sites were excavated which could be described as ‘significant’ in terms of excavated material. Items of personal adornment as well as domestic/agricultural functional artefacts were more prevalent at these sites. Approximately 50% of these sites also contained evidence for hearths/furnaces and industrial artefacts used for iron and metal production. Over 50% of these sites revealed evidence for post and wattle, sod­walled and stone buildings while souterrains were found in a number of places. Souterrain ware pottery was also a frequent occurrence at many of these sites while a small number of ringforts revealed evidence for corn­ drying kilns and gatehouses. Metalled/cobbled or paves surfaces were finally another archaeological feature revealed at these sites. Important sites in this category include Dunsilly, Co. Antrim (MacNeil, Tom 1974 & 1975, Excavations Bulletin), Lisnagun, Co. Cork (O’Sullivan, Jerry 1987, 1988 & 1989, Excavations Bulletin; O’Sullivan et al. 1998) and Dunbell Big 5 & 6, Co. Kilkenny (Cassidy, Beth, 1990, Excavations Bulletin­ E571)­ (See Appendix for List). It is also possible that some of the non­circular shaped enclosures at Lusk and Cahircalla More were of this status but in the absence of published material it is hard to establish. These sites could represent the homes of the lower social grades of freemen described in the seventh and eighth century historical sources. Kinsella (2007a) has suggested that Lisnagun, Co. Cork may typify this class of farmer of limited wealth. The univallate enclosure at Lisnagun had a diameter of 35m and enclosed a central round house, outbuildings and three souterrains. The quantity of domestic/agricultural and personal times as well as animal bone was limited leading the excavator to suggest that Lisnagun was typical of the majority of univallate raths. It is possible then that many of these sites represent the homesteads of ocaire and boaire farmers. The evidence from the polygonal shape enclosure at Sluggary (Shee 1973 & 1974, Excavations Bulletin) might also indicate a farmer of modest means. Ringforts of nobility and prosperous farmers The law­tracts describe the bóaire as a prosperous farmer. It also contains information about a hierarchy of noblemen and lords where the aire déso was situated at the bottom with the aire forgill at the summit of this hierarchy (Kelly 1988; 1997;Kinsella 2007a). Kinsella (2007a, 10) has examined the material­culture evidence for these wealthy groups of people. He has suggested that the artefacts, discovered at these sites are often similar to those from the ócaire and semi­free settlements but tend to occur in greater quantities and varieties. He has noted that finds, indicative of status, such as brooches and decorated ringed pins are usually found at these sites. Items also indicative of foreign contacts or suggestive of gift exchange, possibly related to free client relationships, are represented by the presence of imported pottery such as B and E wares. Some copper­alloy and/or glass working can also be uncovered (Kinsella 2007, 10). He has further suggested that these sites tend to be occupied for a longer period of time than the ringforts of lesser status. Some obvious candidates can be suggested for the homesteads of the nobility and prosperous farmers. Kinsella (2007a, 11) has suggested that a number of raised ringforts such as Gransha, Co. Down and Deer Parks Farms, Co. Antrim should be considered as part of this category. Both sites revealed extensive settlement evidence, high status metalworking, and evidence for widespread agricultural and industrial activities dating from the sixth to tenth centuries A.D. Imported E­ware pottery, typically datable to the sixth to seventh century AD, was also recovered from Gransha. Other raised and platform ringfort examples include Big Glebe, Co. Derry (Bratt, A & Lynn, Chris 1976, Excavations Bulletin) and Rathmullan Lower, Co. Down (Lynn 1982). Other candidates may also include Aghadegnan, Co. Louth (Judith Carroll 1991, Excavations Bulletin­ 91E0055), Inch & Ballyrenan, Co. Down (Ciara MacManus 1997, Excavations Bulletin), Glebe, Site 43 in Tully, Co Dublin (Seaver 2000 & 2001, Excavations Bulletin­ 00E0758) and the recently excavated site at Leggetsrath West, Co. Kilkenny (Lennon 2006).

77

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

It could be suggested that excavations at Cashels like Kildreenagh, Loher (Brendan O'Flaherty 1980­84, 1985, Excavations Bulletin), Ballyegan (Martin Byrne 1991, Excavations Bulletin), Rinnarraw (Thomas Fanning 1987­92, Excavations Bulletin) and Cathair Fionnúrach, Ballynavenoor (Erin Gibbons 1994, Excavations Bulletin­ 94E005) point to the settlements of relatively wealthy Bóaire farmers. The site at Ballynavenoor also revealed evidence for B and E ware pottery that could indicate potential contacts and trading activities. Evidence for field systems, souterrains, kilns, ferrous and non­ferrous metalworking and E­ware was recovered at Roestown indicating a site of potential lordly status. The multivallate enclosure at Rosepark, Balrothery is likely to be of similar high­status as it displayed a similar set of archaeological evidence. Early medieval royal sites Early medieval royal sites are well known, including Lagore crannog (Hencken 1950), Knowth (Eogan, 1974; 1977) and Clogher, Co. Tyrone (Warner 1988). Excavations at Knowth, Co. Meath were undertaken by George Eogan as part of the passage tomb excavations from the late 1960’s to the early 1990’s under the license E70. Similarly, Richard Warner conducted extensive excavations at Clogher, Co. Tyrone from 1969 to the mid 1980’s. This site revealed evidence for a ringfort that later succeeded a prehistoric hillfort. Extensive evidence for high status metalworking, foreign imported pottery, glass working and industrial and agricultural evidence and settlement activity were uncovered at the site. Like Knowth, this site appears to have been understood as an important place within the regional landscape. It is perhaps this association with the past that enriched the political importance of this site through the early medieval period. The range of activities and the quantity of archaeological evidence far exceeds that of found at the homesteads of the wealthy farmers and noblemen.

Early medieval settlement/cemetery sites
Introduction There is a growing body of evidence for EMAP has termed “settlement/cemetery sites”, often non­circular shaped, and which are found to have no known historical origins. A descriptive list of ‘settlement/cemetery sites are listed in appendix 3. To properly understand the importance of these sites, we first need to reassess how we have interpreted burial evidence within the early medieval archaeological record previously. It was once believed that the presence of an enclosure containing early medieval burials was indicative of an ecclesiastical site. It could not be construed that settlement/cemetery sites could have existed during the years of Ireland’s ‘Saints and Scholars’. Sites that revealed evidence for formal east­west burials including Millockstown, Co. Louth (Manning 1986) were interpreted as ecclesiastical sites. Swan (1983) was the first archaeologist to establish a set of criteria used to identify the presence of an ecclesiastical site. It was evident that the growing number of settlement/cemetery sites with no known ecclesiastical place­name, historical or archaeological associations did not easily conform to Swan’s (1983) criteria for identifying an ecclesiastical site. The choices were now clear, either Swan’s criteria used to identify ecclesiastical sites needed to be revised or we were now dealing with a new set of early medieval burial evidence. The first substantial historical evidence for early medieval burial grounds external to ecclesiastical cemeteries was mooted by O’Brien (1992). She suggested that the majority of people were be buried outside ecclesiastical grounds, in ancestral burial­grounds known as ferta, until the late 7th and early 8th centuries A.D. when, thereafter, Church legislation required that people were to be in consecrated ground. While it is recognized that these sites may have served as the burial places of communities, who continued to remain outside the realms of ecclesiastical influence, there is still very little known about their origins, enclosure shape, chronology and phasing, function(s) and variety of 78

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

form. Did all enclosed ‘settlement/cemeteries’ have the same origin and function(s) and what was the relationship of these sites to ringforts/raths and non­circular enclosures. What then is the defining characteristic of these ‘settlement/cemetery’ sites which distinguishes them from other potential ‘site types’ like ringforts/raths and non­circular shaped enclosures? It is felt that a possible answer to the last question may lie in the association of many of these ‘settlement/cemetery’ sites with Iron Age and other prehistoric funerary monuments. It is becoming apparent that the vast majority of these sites emerged from Late Iron Age funerary sites that appear to have provided continued ancestral burial foci for the local populace. Yet the developmental sequence of such sites after the 5/6th centuries A.D. varies dramatically in their scale of burial and settlement and their longevity of use. It is clear that many of these Late Iron Age/early medieval transitional sites (See Burial Section) developed into cemeteries with/without accompanying settlement evidence and continued to be used up to the 12th century and beyond. Others however appear to have only been used for a short period of time as attested by the limited settlement and burial evidence uncovered at these sites. It is not clear why some continued to remain focal points of burial and settlement activity while other disappeared from use. In fact, the best explanation may be the ‘messiness’ of life, the way that people buried their dead according to the experiences and histories of their communities rather than some rigid archaeological categories. The public impression of these sites today is that of the image of a bustling agricultural complex as at Raystown, Co. Meath, yet a cursory review of the evidence has highlighted the diversity and complexity of this archaeological evidence which dates from the 5th century onwards (See Burial Section). It is not yet clear whether these early medieval cemeteries with/without settlement evidence of varying quality, quantity and chronologies of use can justifiably constitute a single site type which dealt principally with a form of burial interment external to ecclesiastical sites! Can Raystown, a potentially specialized milling centre with associated burial and settlement evidence, be compared for instance to the settlement evidence uncovered on other cemetery sites such as Coldwinters, Co. Dublin, or is it justifiable to associate Mount Offaly, Cabinteely with its 1,553 burials those at a non­circular shaped enclosure at Corbally, Co. Kildare which contained only 8. Did all these sites enjoy the same principal function, that of secular burial outside ecclesiastical contexts, or did others develop different agricultural, industrial or commercial functions serving as a location for the oenach or market? Finally, were these the burial sites of local families (familial) or did they have a communal function for the whole local populace. It is only early days in establishing some understanding about what was happening at these different sites so the ideas described below are provisional and were written with the principal intention of provoking debate and discussion over this new exciting research problem in early medieval Irish archaeology. Enclosure size and morphology The size of ‘settlement/cemetery’ enclosures ranges from 40­100 m in diameter. The average diameter of these sites range from 50­70m making them approximately similar in size to many non­circular shaped enclosures. Examples of such ‘settlement/cemetery’ sites with similar diameters include Gallanstown, Co. Dublin, Augherskea, Co. Westmeath, Treenbaun, Co. Galway, Corbally, Co. Kildare, Raystown, Co. Meath, Marlinstown, Co. Westmeath, Parknahown, Co. Laois and Castlefarm, Co. Meath. A number of sites appear to have constructed larger enclosures during the early medieval period as attested by a massive cashel wall at Lismore/Bushfields, Co. Laois (75m x 93m), Millockstown, Co. Meath (100m x 40m), Mount Offaly, Cabinteely, Co. Dublin (95m x 75m), the large cashel wall (80m approx.) at Faughart Lower, Co. Louth and the second massive enclosure at Castlefarm, Co. Meath (120m x 100m). The enclosures, like non­circular shaped sites, also appear to have been quite irregular in form and were often influenced by the topography of the landscape as at Marlinstown where it was located along a natural shelf of land.

79

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

Ecclesiastical sites in contrast typically measure on average c.90­120m and contain one enclosing element (Swan 1983, 274) though they are examples present that measure from 140­ 400m in size. The average size of these enclosure sizes is then a good deal less than that on ecclesiastical sites. The majority of ringforts have a diameter of 30m. Bivallate and multivallate examples comprise only a small percentage of the number of ringforts and tend to enclose a space of approximately 35m in diameter on average although larger examples are known (Kinsella 2007a). It therefore also appears that the enclosed space of cemetery/settlement sites are on average slightly greater than that of the typical ringfort in the Irish landscape. In terms of enclosing size, the closest parallels with non­circular shaped settlements, with no burial evidence, are Killickaweeny, Co. Kildare and Ballyconneely, Co. Clare. The origins of the enclosed cemetery and settlement Burial practices in the transitional Iron Age/early medieval period (fifth to seventh centuries) were quite diverse in form and landscape context (See Burial Section). Ring­ditches, standing stones, other prehistoric funerary monuments and low mounds appear to have provided the focal points of burials for an often small number of potentially high status individuals. Many of these sites appear to have not been used for burial purposes after this period undoubtedly due to different religious and political changes happening across Ireland in this period. Examples of transitional burial sites at ring­ditches which only appear to have been used for a short period of time in this period include Templepatrick, Co. Antrim, Mell 2, Co. Meath, Claristown, Co. Meath or Greenhills, Co. Kildare. In most cases 5­7th century A.D. burials beside Standing Stones, with exception of Millockstown do not appear to have developed into enclosed cemeteries and settlement sites. ‘Mound Burial’s also largely appear to have been a distinct phenomenon of the 5­7th centuries A.D. There is a growing body of evidence however to suggest that many prehistoric funerary monuments and ancestral places continued to remain foci for burial and subsequent settlement activity in the early medieval period. Excavations at Westereave and Colp West (see Burial Section) revealed ring­ditches that became the focal point of early medieval unenclosed cemeteries that continued to be used into the 8/9th century A.D. A review of the evidence also suggests that the enclosed ‘settlement/cemetery’ site type had their origins in the late Iron Age. It has been noted that many sites, including Castlefarm, are situated near ring­ditches. Ring­ ditches at Raystown, Corbally and Coldwinters also appear to have developed as the focal points for enclosed cemetery and settlement sites (See Burial Section). Other sites such as Gneevebeg, Co. Westmeath and Cherrywood, Dublin were located adjacent to significant Bronze Age cemetery sites while Knoxspark was adjacent to two cairns. Johnstown 1 also appears to represent a unique example where an enclosed ‘settlement/cemetery’ site emerged around transitional Iron Age/early medieval burials inside a low mound. While ring­ditches appear to have provided the focal point at many sites, others like Faughart Lower, Cherrywood, Parknahown and Balriggan appear to have witnessed the construction of early enclosures dating to approximately the 4­6th centuries A.D. Phase 1 at Millockstown is likely to date to the same period and is represented by an enclosure measuring 60m in diameter which was in turn succeeded by a ringfort and cemetery site. They therefore appear to have been built around the same time in which ring­ditches, standing stones and low mounds were the location places for various burials. Some enclosures appear to have been deliberately located beside or around ring­ditches or standing stones while in other cases like Aughserskea and Gracedieu, no prehistoric monument, to the knowledge of the writer, was located near or within these sites. A continuing strong local attachment to ancestral places within the landscape is however likely to be responsible for the location of many of these enclosures beside or within Late Iron Age and prehistoric funerary monuments. It is then evident that burial rites and forms were fluid and variable from the 5­7/8th century A.D. when pagan tendencies continued to remain strong while the authority of the church was beginning to make itself felt. Enclosed settlement and cemeteries appear to have evolved from this maelstrom of burial practices and represent the continuing importance of ancestral burial

80

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

places in the early medieval period. Enclosed settlement/cemetery sites appear to have evolved from different religious contexts in this period. In many cases, an early enclosure, often associated with prehistoric monuments appears to have been built which then provided the foci for burial and often­later settlement. In other cases, enclosed settlement/cemetery sites evolved from prehistoric funerary monuments, mounds and ring­ditches. It is not yet clear whether all enclosed cemeteries and settlements, which evolved from enclosures, ring­ditches, burial­mounds or other prehistoric monuments, had the same particular origins or should be considered as part of the one site type. However, all these enclosed settlement/cemetery sites appear to share one common denominator; that being that they are generally associated with early funerary monuments and appear to have emerged in the Late Iron Age period. Chronology Enclosed settlement/cemetery sites then appear to have emerged in the Late Iron Age principally through the construction of an early enclosure or the re­use of a ring­ditch in which a later larger enclosure was built around. It is still early days in understanding how long many of these sites remained in use, when they flourished and what factors influenced their decline! A review of the transitional Iron Age/early medieval burial evidence (See Burial Section) has suggested that most of these sites fell out of use by the 7th century A.D. during the growth of the cult of relics. Unenclosed cemeteries, with no associated settlement evidence, like Westereave and Colp West also evolved from ring­ditches and continued to provide a foci for burial until approximately the 8th century A.D. Other early medieval unenclosed cemeteries, with no settlement evidence, and historical associations with ecclesiastical sites have been discovered at Kilshane, Co. Dublin, Ardnagross, Co. Westmeath and Betaghstown, Co. Meath (See Burial Section) appear to date roughly from the 5/6th centuries­9th centuries A.D. although a further example at Mount Gamble continued to be used till the 12th century A.D. Many of these unenclosed cemeteries are likely to have originated in the transitional period (5­7th centuries A.D) though their relationship with enclosed settlement/cemetery sites have yet to be established. It is still not clear whether unenclosed cemetery sites like Westereave or Mount Gamble should be considered as part of the same phenomenon as ‘settlement/cemetery’s sites or if the apparent lack of enclosures and settlement evidence can be used to justify making a distinction between both. Enclosed settlement/cemetery sites appear to have had a broadly similar chronology to that of many of these unenclosed cemetery sites. The dating provided so far from enclosed cemetery and settlement sites suggest that they were also largely occupied between the 5/6th­ 9/10th century A.D. though a number of sites remained in use until the 11/12th century and even beyond. The length of occupation varies. Johnstown 1 for example was dated between the 4­ 16th century A.D. while most of the other significant cemetery and settlement sites like Faughart Lower, Millockstown, Corbally, Mount Offaly and Raystown tend to date from around the 4/5th­ 10/11th century. Some of the less significant sites were found to have an even shorter lifespan as illustrated at Cherrywood where an early 6/7th century cemetery appears to have given way to a subsequent Viking settlement. A number of sites, including Johnstown 1 and Gneevebeg, also appear to have been re­used as cillin sites in the post medieval period indicating that the sites continued to be understood as sacred places within the landscape. It is likely that different local religious, political and economic factors affected and influenced the subsequent biographical development of settlement/cemetery sites which first evolved in the Late Iron Age period. The Relationship between the Cemetery and Settlement It is often presumed that because these sites contain both settlement and cemetery evidence that both activities are then contemporary with each other. Yet the amount of burial and settlement evidence uncovered at many of these sites makes it likely that these activities took place either intermittently or at different times during the early medieval period. Johnstown 1 revealed burial evidence from the 4­16th century A.D. while Mount Gamble and Faughart Lower also revealed extensive cemeteries that are likely to have been used throughout the early

81

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

medieval period. Burial however appears to only represent one phase or part of a history of some of these ‘cemetery/settlement sites. A number of the sites including Marlinstown, Balriggan, Corkagh Demesne, Gallanstown, Cherrywood, Corbally and Coldwinters have revealed often a lot less than fifty burials at each site. While this could be due to the fact that only parts of the site were excavated, it could also suggest that burial was very intermittent or only represented one phase of these enclosures histories. On the other hand, radiocarbon dates will be needed to clarify this in all cases. At both Raystown and Castlefarm indicates burial across the chronologies of the sites. It could be suggested that the main period of burial at some of these cemetery/settlements took place approximately from the 6­9th century A.D. O’Brien (2003, 67) has suggested that lintel type burial became an important form of burial from the 7/8th century A.D. She has noted that a lintel cemetery excavated during Phase 3 at Millockstown returned dates of A.D. 660­960 Cal. (Manning 1986, 135­81). She has also noted that lintel burials were excavated during Phase 6 at Mount Offaly as well as seventh­tenth century contexts at the ecclesiastical site of Moyne, Co. Mayo and Reask, Co. Kerry. Similarly excavations at Ninch have revealed a large number of lintel burials which appears to have succeeded a ringfort and which date to roughly the same period while lintelled burials have been dated to the final phase of the cemetery at Balriggan. It is likely then that a number of these sites with a complex phasing of settlement and burial evidence saw cemeteries being constructed during the latter history of these sites. While sites like Ninch and Millockstown do appear to have had early origins, burial does not appear to have been undertaken until around the 7/8th century A.D. Ear­muffs and pillow stones have also been recovered at a number of sites including Mount Offaly and Cherrywood while one single example was found at Lismore/Bushfields and a number were recovered at the unenclosed cemetery at Kilshane, Co. Dublin. O’Brien (1993, 98) has suggested that those recovered from Kilshane attest to 7th century Anglo­Saxon influences at the site. Ear­muffs however can date from all periods of the early medieval period as attested at Mount Offaly where all phases of the cemetery revealed evidence for them. 76% of the 38 burials at Cherrywood contained ear­muffs. The cemetery was contained within an enclosure 43m in diameter and was dated by O’Neill (1999, Excavations Bulletin) to approximately the 6/7th century A.D. The earliest burials at Faughart Lower were inserted into an area 15 m by 15 m in diameter and contained a large number of stone lined and capped long cist burials. The later burials were however all interred within simple unprotected burials. Like the simple­unlined graves excavated from beneath the burial mound at Johnstown 1 or the burials interred within the ring­ditches at Corbally and Raystown, these stone­lined examples are likely to be early in date. There is then great variation in the extent and longevity of burial at these settlement/cemeteries. Some sites like Cherrywood appear to be early in date and have only been used for a short period of time (6/7th centuries). Cemeteries containing lintelled cemeteries at a number of sites may date principally to the 7­10th century however while burial­ grounds at a few sites including Mount Offaly and Johnstown were used throughout the early medieval period. It appears that a cemetery succeeded a phase of earlier settlement at a number of sites including Millockstown, Ninch and Faughart Lower while periods of settlement succeeded earlier cemeteries at Ninch and Cherrywood. The phase of milling at Raystown was largely dated to the 7­10th century while burial evidence had a longer period of use dating from the 5­10th century A.D. suggesting that agricultural activity increased in importance in the latter history of the site. Souterrains are also a feature of the later phases of a number of sites including Mount Offaly, Ninch, Millockstown, Raystown and Faughart Lower suggesting further evidence for settlement activity in the 9/10/11th centuries A.D. It is clear then that a detailed examination of the chronologies of the individual sites will be required to fully understand how each site developed over time and when did different forms of settlement and burial activity take place. It is also evident that we need to appreciate the complexity and diversity in the chronology and character of these sites which we have dubbed settlement/cemetery sites.

82

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

Form and extent of settlement The length of occupation and the extent of settlement and burial evidence can be used as indicators for the possible roles that these cemetery/settlements played within early medieval society. Some sites like Raystown, Corbally, Faughart Lower have revealed vast quantities of evidence for associated settlement and agricultural activities. Excavations at Corbally revealed extensive agricultural evidence comprising a large number of undated figure of eight corn­ drying kilns, enclosures, field systems, industrial activity, butchered animal bone and barley and oats indicative of malting. It is possible that some of these kilns could be late Iron Age in date. Excavations at Raystown revealed a stone­built corn­drying kiln, animal corrals, eight horizontal mills and six corn drying kilns. The milling activity was found to date to between 653 A.D. and 1170 A.D. Two souterrains were constructed at the end of the sites use. Milling evidence was revealed at a number of sites including Mount Offaly, Millockstown, Gneevebeg, Parkhnahown, Lismore/Bushfields while butchered bone has been recovered in the ditches of all. Nine wells were excavated at Castlefarm. Metalworking evidence is a feature of all sites but was particularly prevalent at Lismore/Bushfields, Marlinstown, Johnstown and Balriggan. Dye extraction evidence was recovered from Faughart Lower while massive quantities of souterrain ware as well as imported E and B ware pottery has been recovered from Faughart Lower, Ninch, Johnstown 1, Balriggan, Mount Offaly and Balriggan. High status items of personal adornment are also a feature of these sites. The Extent of Burial Evidence The number of burials excavated at these different cemetery/settlement sites differs quite remarkably supporting the idea that they played different roles within the local community over time. Excavations at Mount Offaly have revealed 1,553 burials dating from 5/6th century­11/12th century A.D. Johnstown 1 contained c.400 burials dating from the 4th­16th century A.D. Faughart Lower revealed 872 burials dating from the 5/6th century to c.11th century A.D. and Parknahown contained a burial site of c.600 skeletons that was used for a number of centuries from c.5th century. A whole number of sites including Gracedieu (65 burials), Augherskea (187 burials), Knoxspark (185), Millockstown (57), Ninch (150 burials, Raystown (133 burials), Gneevebeg (135 burials) and Lismore/Bushfields (80) have revealed approximately between 50­ 200 burials. It is clear, from a number of excavations, that only part of the site was investigated so these figures could be greater. A plethora of sites including Caherabbey Lower, Murphystown, Rathmiles, Coldwinters, Corkagh Demesne, Gallanstown, Harristown, Corbally, Marlinstown, Castlefarm and Cherrywood have revealed between 8­40 burials at each site though again the total figures could be actually greater. It can be suggested then that sites like Mount Offaly, Faughart Lower and Parknahown contained communal cemeteries used by the local population for a number of centuries. It is also likely that cemeteries at a number of sites containing a moderate number of burials (60­200 so far) that could have been used as the burial­place of small communities for a period of time during the early medieval period. The burial­grounds at Ninch and Millockstown appear for instance to have been in use from around the 7­10th centuries A.D. Finally, a whole number of sites contained limited burial evidence that may suggest that they were familial in function or used for a short period of time. A number of these sites like Cherrywood (6/7th century­37 inhumations) may have only been used for a limited period of time while evidence at significant settlement centres like Corbally (8 burials so far) and Castlefarm (11) might suggest that they represent ad hoc internments carried out at principally secular settlement sites. Functions Ó Carragáin (2003, 149) has noted that the swearing of oaths and other legal activities were undertaken at cemeteries in the early medieval period over the remains of the dead and has suggested that the saint’s grave in ecclesiastical sites appropriated the legal functions of the ancestral burial grounds over time. Nevertheless, it is quite clear that these ancestral burial­ grounds may have continued to have provided a focal point for legal activity as well as serving as potential fairs or assemblies (Oenacha) at a number of the larger examples including Raystown and Corbally. Some of these sites like Raystown, situated along the border of the 83

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

Southern Uí Néill in Meath and the Uí Dunlainge (Laigin Provincial Kings) in Kildare were located along contested political boundaries and may have indeed been used for trade and commerce in this period. It is possible that these sites were generally understood and perceived as being the locations of ancestral burial­places in which a whole range of social, economic and political activities were preformed in close proximity to these sites (Kinsella 2007a, 29). It is possible then that they could have been understood as neutral places outside the authority of the local church in which decisions could be reached between local people living within neighbouring ringforts/raths and non­circular enclosures. Metalworking appears to have been an important activity at many of these sites, such as Johnstown 1 suggesting that there may be some association between this activity and ancient cemeteries in this period. There seems to increasing archaeological evidence whereby industrial activities, ironworking for example, was conducted on/near this burial ground. It may be that early medieval people – living with death all the time – did not particular sense a need to separate the dead from the work of living like modern society does. On the other hand, it may have been that early medieval people saw ironworking as a dangerous, liminal and transformative process best kept to places at the edge of the settlement landscape. The magical and mythical qualities of the blacksmith are well known in early Irish literature and an otherworldly association between smiths and cemeteries may have been a factor. Agriculture appears to have been the primary function of a number of other sites. Many sites such as Raystown, Ninch and Balriggan, Corbally and Augherskea have revealed evidence for field systems, enclosure annexes, corn­drying kilns and mills suggesting that their function may instead have been primarily agricultural. It is still early days in establishing the various functions of different sites. What can be said at the moment is that all revealed burial evidence, the majority evolved from Late Iron Age contexts and many have displayed evidence for early medieval settlement, industry and agriculture of different quantities and qualities! Distribution The geographical distribution of cemetery/settlement sites is firmly based in northeast Leinster in the counties of Meath, Dublin and Louth. It could be suggested that this concentration provides evidence for regionality of settlement and burial practices across Ireland in the early medieval period. Large milling centres like Corbally, Co. Kildare and Raystown, Co. Meath might be used as evidence for the presence of significant agricultural estates within the eastern counties of Ireland. The concentration of significant settlement/cemetery sites in Meath, North Dublin and Louth might attest to the political and economic power of the Southern Uí Néill in the early medieval period. However, excavations along the M7/M8 and N6 have recently thrown up other significant sites in Counties Laois and Galway (See Gazzeterr). Like the majority of their counterparts in Meath, Louth and north Dublin, they were discovered along NRA road schemes supporting the idea that cemetery/settlement sites are likely to have an island­wide distribution.

Early medieval crannogs
Definition In terms of definition or categorisation as monument types, crannogs have traditionally been defined as artificial islets of stone, timber and soil, usually circular or oval in plan, enclosed within a wooden palisade (see O’Sullivan 1998, 2001, 2004; O’Sullivan, Sands and Kelly 2007; Fredengren 2001, 2002). However, recognising that modern archaeological classifications are more about the ordering of information in the present than the reality of life in the past, it is probably now useful to adopt, as Fredengren (2002) suggested, a broader definition of the term ‘crannog’ and consider those stone cairns without palisades, deliberately enhanced natural islands, as well as cairns, mounds and rock platforms situated along lakeshore edges (i.e. not necessarily surrounded by water). It is also the case that modern archaeological classifications and semantic debates on the topic ‘what is a crannog’ ignore the fact that we investigate a range of constructed island sites that have experienced a thousand years of building, 84

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

occupation, abandonment, erosion and conflation of deposits – resulting in rocky islets that look much the same as each other today (i.e. the archaeological monument we call ‘crannogs’). EMAP Survey and early medieval crannogs excavated 1970­2002 The EMAP survey established that 14 sites were excavated between 1970­2002. They were excavated within the counties of Longford, Mayo, Tyrone, Westmeath, Meath and Sligo. This included excavations of the early medieval crannog at Moynagh Lough, Co. Meath, with its houses, workshops, palisades and metalworking areas. The early medieval crannog at Sroove, Co. Sligo was significant in that it revealed that not all crannogs were of high social status. The early medieval crannog at Bofeenaun, Co. Mayo revealed evidence for a focus on ironworking on this remote island. In more recent years, the Discovery Programme’s lake settlement project has been investigating crannogs on Lough Kinale, Co. Longford, including the early medieval sites at Ballywillin, Derragh; following on from the National Museum of Ireland’s investigations of a crannog at Tonymore North.

Excavated Crannogs 1970­2002
NAME Ballywillin Lough Kinale Bofeenaun Cro­Inis Derragh, Lough Kinale French grove County Longford Year 2002 Report writer Christina Fredengren EMAP Class Crannog Monume nt Crannog Significance General Quantit y 1

Mayo Westmeath Longford

1992 1989 2002

Aonghus Moloney & Margaret Keane Robert Farrell Christina Fredengren

Crannog Crannog Crannog

Crannog Crannog Crannog

Significant General General

1 1 1

Mayo

1998

Conor McDermott

Crannog

Crannog

General

1

Island MacHugh, Baronscourt Lough Eskragh Moynagh Lough

Tyrone

1985/1 986

R. Ivens, D. Simpson & D. Brown

Crannog

Crannog

Significant

1

Tyrone Meath

1973 1980­ 1989/1 994/19 95/199 7 1984/1 985/19 86 2002 2001

Brian Williams John Bradley

Crannog Crannog

Crannog Crannog

General Highly Significant

3 1

Newtownlo w Rathroeen Lough Relough, Tullyleek Lough Robinstown I, Lough Ennell

Westmeath Mayo Tyrone

Cormac Bourke Richard Gillespie Liam McQuillan

Crannog Crannog Crannog

Crannog Crannog Crannog

Significant General General

1 1 1

Westmeath

1990/1 991/19 92

Niall Brady

Crannog

Crannog

Significant

2

85

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

Sroove

Sligo

1997/1 998/19 99 1987

Christina Fredengren

Crannog

Crannog

Highly Significant

1

Tonymore North, Lough Kinale

Longford

Eamonn Kelly Nessa O'Connor

&

Crannog

Crannog

General

1

Table 25: Excavated Crannogs 1970­2002

Origins and Chronology The origins and chronology of crannogs has largely been understood through the use of archaeological excavations, artefactual studies and latterly, radiocarbon and dendrochronological dating. In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, the use of crannogs in Ireland was usually seen as a long­lived phenomenon (dating back to prehistory) but with a particularly intensive phase of activity in the early medieval period. In the 1980s, emerging dendrochronological dates from crannogs in Ulster and Chris Lynn’s influential paper on ‘early crannogs’ led to the widespread view that crannogs, in the narrow definition of palisaded islets of stone, earth and timber, were only first constructed in the early medieval period. At the time, Lynn saw these early medieval crannogs as quite different from Bronze Age lake dwellings, which were seen to be lake­edge marshland enclosures rather than artificial islets. However, O’Sullivan also noted that this distinction between Bronze Age lake dwellings and early medieval crannogs was not always apparent in the archaeological evidence. However, Christina Fredengren’s, and other, recent studies have clearly confirmed that classic crannogs ­ small palisaded islets in open­water ­ were also being built in the Late Bronze Age, early Iron Age, the early Middle Ages and late medieval period. Indeed, recent archaeological discoveries also indicate that Mesolithic and Neolithic wetland occupation mounds – essentially small unpalisaded crannogs – were also built of stone, peat and wood and placed at the edges of midlands lakes such as at Moynagh Lough, Co. Meath; Lough Kinale, Co. Longford and at Clowanstown, Co. Meath. It is also clear that Late Bronze Age and early Iron Age palisaded islands that we more confidently term ‘crannogs’, were being built and used between the ninth and fourth centuries BC. Although there remains a substantial hiatus of evidence between the early Iron Age and the early medieval period (e.g. c. 300 BC­ AD 400), recent exciting discoveries on Coolure Demesne crannog, on Lough Derravaragh, Co. Westmeath have revealed a multi­period crannog on which an oak palisade was constructed at c.AD 402, in the Iron Age/early Christian transition (O’Sullivan, Sands and Kelly 2007). It is clear from a wide range of archaeological, artefactual and dendrochronological evidence that the most intensive phases of crannog building, occupation and abandonment were within the early medieval period, particularly between the sixth and the eleventh centuries AD. This has been confirmed by virtually every Irish crannog excavation (and some recent excavations in Scotland), by most scientific dating programmes and by the generally early medieval date of stray finds recovered from numerous crannogs across the north midlands, north and the northwest of this island. It is now also clear that crannogs were built or certainly re­occupied in the later Middle Ages, variously being used as Gaelic lordly sites, prisons, ammunition stores and as places to keep silver and gold plate. Some smaller late medieval crannog islets and platforms may have been peasant seasonal dwellings or refuges for the poor or hideouts for outlaws, some being used as late as the eighteenth century. However, this simple recitation of sequences or periods of intensity hardly begins to explore the dynamic histories of these monuments and their role in past societies.

86

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

Distribution The geographical distribution of Irish crannogs is now broadly understood. Since the pioneering crannog surveys of William Wakeman in the north­west, George Kinahan in the west, and Oliver Davies in south Ulster, the more recent work of the Archaeological Survey of Ireland in the Republic (conducted by National Monuments Section) and the county surveys (conducted by the Environment and Heritage Service) in Northern Ireland have established that there are at the very least, 1200 registered sites. However, this figure must be seen as a conservatively low estimate given the lack of dedicated archaeological surveys (crannogs can easily be obscured by wetland vegetation, reeds, carr woodland or by even shallow depths of water). Unsurprisingly, given the fact that they are by definition, lake dwellings, they tend to be found in those regions of Ireland where there are lakes. Crannogs are widely distributed across the midlands, northwest, west and north of Ireland. They are particularly concentrated in the drumlin lakes of Cavan, Monaghan, Leitrim and Roscommon and Fermanagh. Crannogs are more dispersed across the west and northeast, although concentrations can be identified, such as in Lough Conn, Lough Cullin and around Castlebar Lough, Co. Mayo. Crannogs are known in every county of Northern Ireland, in a belt stretching from Fermanagh, through south Tyrone and Armagh to mid­Down, with particular concentrations in Monaghan and Cavan. Other regions have smaller numbers widely dispersed, but a few crannogs have been identified in the south and east. Crannogs tend to be found on the smaller lakes, being infrequent or rare on large midland lakes of the River Shannon system (e.g. Lough Ree and Lough Derg), while there are also few on Lower Lough Erne and Lough Neagh. There are particular concentrations of crannogs on Lough Carra and Lough Conn, Co. Mayo, Lough Gara, Co. Sligo, Drumhallow Lough, Co. Roscommon and Lough Oughter, Co. Cavan. Smaller lakes can have either one crannog or a small group of them, such as on Lough Eyes and Drumgay Lough, Co. Fermanagh. On some larger lakes, such as Lough Derravaragh, Co. Westmeath and Lough Sheelin, Co. Cavan, they are distributed along the shoreline at regular intervals. Crannogs are situated in various different types of modern environment, both deep and shallow lake­waters, lakeshore and peatlands. A smaller number of crannogs have been found in rivers, estuaries and in coastal wetlands. Morphology and Construction Recent archaeological surveys indicate that crannogs vary widely in morphology and construction, ranging in size from relatively large sites 18­25m in diameter, to smaller mounds 8­10m in diameter. Crannogs of various sizes and types can be located in close proximity, suggesting variously, sequences of development or contemporaneity of usage. There appears to be both regional and local variations in construction, but most appear to have been built of layers of stone boulders, small to medium­sized cobble stones, branches and timber, lake­marl and other organic debris. Crannogs also produce evidence, from both archaeological survey and excavation, for a wide range of other structures, such as cairns, level upper platforms, houses, working spaces, middens, wooden revetments, palisades, and stone walls, defined entrances, jetties, pathways and stone causeways. Crannogs have also produced large assemblages of artefacts, both as a result of archaeological excavation and as discoveries made both accidentally or by design (e.g. treasure hunters in the 1980s). These material assemblages have included items of clothing (shoes, textiles), personal adornment (brooches, pins, rings), weaponry (swords, spearheads, axes, shields), domestic equipment (knives, chisels, axes). Social and Economic Function Traditionally, scholars have interpreted the social and economic ‘function’ of crannogs from what might be called a common­sense reading of what is deemed to be the essential properties of a crannog (i.e. high visibility, difficulty of access, laboriousness of construction, etc). Thence, they have often been seen as island strongholds or defensive refuges, providing a secure residence to be occupied at times of conflict and danger, and there is certainly plenty of early medieval (and later) historical evidence that many were attacked and burned during raids and warfare. Indeed, there are hints from the historical sources that some were aggressive island 87

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

fortresses situated on political boundaries. This location may also have been used to negotiate political treaties on islands that were between political territories. In any case, when these conflict and political oriented historical references are combined with the occasional archaeological evidence for weaponry and the impressive scale of their timber and roundwood palisades, then it is easy to see why scholars have often suggested a military or fortress role for them. Both archaeology and early Irish historical sources also suggest that at least some crannogs were high­status or even royal sites, used for feasting, as re­distribution centres for the patronage of crafts and industry, and the projection through their size and impressive architecture the social and ideological power and status of their owners. Early medieval crannogs such as Lagore, Co. Meath and Island MacHugh, Co. Tyrone certainly could be interpreted as the island residences of kings or nobles, perhaps being used as summer lodges, public assembly places and as places for recreation and the strengthening of social ties through feasting, drinking and gift giving. For similar social and economic reasons, early medieval crannogs have also been associated with the patronage and control of craft production (typically fine metalworking). For instance, Moynagh Lough, Co. Meath, a probable lordly crannog, particularly during its mid­eighth century occupation phase, was clearly a place where various specialist craft workers resided and worked, while Bofeenaun crannog, on Lough More, Co. Mayo appears to have been devoted to the processing of iron ore by specialist blacksmiths. The early medieval church was undoubtedly embroiled in the same social and economic relationships performed and expressed through architecture and material goods. Although, early medieval crannogs are usually only thought of as secular dwellings, given the significant role of the church in the early medieval settlement landscape, it is also likely that many were used by ecclesiastical communities. Indeed, some early medieval crannogs are situated suspiciously close to monasteries and churches and it is possible that the discoveries in recent decades of early medieval ecclesiastical metalwork (e.g. hand bells, crosses and book shrines) on some midlands crannogs that were occupied in proximity to actual church sites and monasteries) suggests their use as safe or restricted storage places for relics or perhaps even as island hermitages. On the other hand, it is clear from archaeological surveys that most crannogs were essentially small island or lakeshore dwellings, occupied at various times by different people, not necessarily of high social status. Recent archaeological excavations at Sroove, on Lough Gara, Co. Sligo have suggested that some small crannogs were the habitations of social groups or households who had little wealth or political power. In this and other archaeological surveys around Ireland, it has also been demonstrated that many crannogs were small islets situated in shallow water, quite unlike the classic image presented by the larger early medieval ‘royal sites’. Indeed, several crannogs have produced relatively modest material assemblages and could be interpreted as the island homesteads of the ‘middle classes’ or perhaps even the poor. These may have been essentially farmsteads, located close to grazing lands and arable fields, and used for the seasonal storage of plough implements, quern stones, grain and flour and other agricultural produce. They were certainly places, separated from the shoreline that would have been relatively safe from predatory vermin and wolves. In other words, different types of crannogs were built, used and occupied by various social classes in early medieval Ireland. Others may have been fishing or industrial platforms, used periodically, seasonally or for particular specific tasks. Finally, it should be allowed that some early medieval crannogs might not have been dwellings at all. Some may have been boundary or routeway markers, denoting the edges of political territories. Some may have been cairns or mounds – known in early medieval Ireland as fertae ­ to commemorate ancestral burials, battles, persons or significant events, or even by­products of other activities (e.g. temporary heaps of building stone, field clearance cairns, etc). On the other hand, virtually every detailed site investigation of an Irish early medieval crannog has revealed at least some evidence for what might be called ‘dwelling activity’. In other words, while there are several traditional and useful explanations of the uses of early medieval crannogs, largely revolving around ideas of ‘island refuges’, the ‘social display

88

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

of power’ and of ‘island dwellings’, it is likely that depending on their size, location and history of use, different crannogs were used in different ways.

Early medieval promontory forts
Background Raftery (1994, 48) has suggested that there are approximately 250 promontory forts around the coastline of Ireland with the largest concentration in the west and east. Few of these have been excavated, but most that have been investigated have revealed some early medieval activity and settlement evidence. There is still some uncertainty about the origins and developmental histories of this site type as well as the character of early medieval settlement and activity at these sites. These sites are generally regarded as originating in the Iron Age or even earlier (Edwards 1990, 41). Important sites include Dubh Cathair on Inishmore, Co. Galway, Larrybane, Co. Antrim, Dalkey Island, Dunseverick, Co, Antrim, Dunluce, Co. Antrim and Dooneendermotmore, Co. Cork (Edwards 1990, 41). A further site at Drumanagh, Co. Dublin may have also witnessed some early medieval activity as a dome­headed bronze pin dated to the tenth and eleventh centuries A.D. was found amongst the Iron Age objects (O’Sullivan & Breen 2007, 111). EMAP survey and promontory forts excavated 1970­2002 The EMAP survey has revealed that excavations were undertaken on three promontory forts in the period 1970­2002. Excavations at Dunbeg promontory fort, Co. Kerry were undertaken in 1977 (Barry, 1981) and revealed a complicated defensive promontory whose earliest banks may date to the Late Bronze Age. One ditch was radiocarbon dated to A.D. 680­1020 indicating that a remodelled promontory fort was in use in the early medieval period. A large circular clochan situated inside the fort also produced a calibrated date of A.D. 870­1260. It is likely then that this promontory fort was remodelled and reused in the early medieval period. A promontory fort (or more accurately a cliff­top fort) at Dún Aonghusa, Inishmore, Co. Galway was excavated by Claire Cotter from 1992­94 (92E0102), as part of the Discovery Programme’s Western Stone Forts Project. This site also originated in the Middle to Late Bronze Age. However, the final phase of the site – and potentially the massive stone walls ­ was dated to the later first millennium A.D. The early medieval period certainly saw the inner wall reinforced and heightened. Some occupation levels were also found but do not appear to represent a major settlement. The burial of a child may date to this period (Clare Cotter 1992­ 92E0102). An inland promontory fort was excavated at Knoxspark, Co. Sligo by Charles Mount (1994­ 94E060). It is enclosed on three sides by the Ballysadare river and on the other by a silted marshy lake. The promontory fort was rectangular in shape and measured 23m north­south by 19m east­west. The bank was constructed with an external stone facing. The bank overlay the cemetery surface and cut into two burials that predated the enclosure. The cemetery was located around two adjacent cairns inside the promontory fort and contained a number of cremations as well as a large early medieval cemetery (with some evidence for occupation in the 8th­10th century AD). As the promontory fort bank appears to cut the cemetery, it is likely then to have been constructed sometime in the early medieval period or shortly after.

The social, economic and ideological role of early medieval promontory forts Early medieval promontory forts are typically defined by earthen banks and ditches or stone walls cutting off a headland or cliff top. It is known that some promontory forts were occupied in the Bronze Age and Iron Age. However, there is also good archaeological evidence for their occupation in the early medieval period, including the sites at Larrybane, Co. Antrim, Dunbeg, Co. Kerry and Dalkey Island, Co. Dublin. Indeed, Drumanagh, Co. Dublin, the promontory fort as mentioned above, may also have been occupied in the early medieval period, as amongst the

89

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

Iron Age objects recovered there was a dome­headed bronze pin dated to the tenth to eleventh century AD. Promontory forts have traditionally been interpreted as refuges or strongholds although this seems unlikely or at least over­simplistic and is probably largely based on our traditional perception of coastal sites as being ‘at the edge’. However, if we shift our perspective around to consider these promontory forts as places within seascapes, other interesting insights emerge. It is possible that some promontory forts were deliberately placed in prominent positions along coastlines and were intended to be seen from the sea, while they also provided their inhabitants with views across sailing routes. In particular, with the development of fleets and trading routes around the island, promontory forts established by local kingdoms could have both monitored and controlled aspects of sea traffic. At Dunseverick, Co. Antrim, there is an impressive promontory fort that is known to have been an early medieval royal site of the Dál Riada, an extended tribal grouping with strong maritime connections between northeast Ireland and southwest Scotland. There are annalistic references to both Dun Sobhairce itself and to the maritime fleets of the Dál Riada throughout the seventh and eighth centuries AD. Dunseverick is located on a headland on high clifftops. Although there would have been few landing places in the vicinity, it provides excellent views across the sea towards Rathlin Island and the southwest coast of Scotland in the distance. The tides, currents and winds along the north coast also mean that it was sited on a significant maritime routeway across the sea. In Adomnán’s seventh­century Vita Sancti Columbae (hereafter Life of Columba) there is a mention of a dangerous whirlpool at a place known as Coire Breccáin, off Rathlin Island, understood to be on the sea route between Ireland and Scotland. In Cormac’s Glossary, dated to c. AD 900, there is a description of this eponymous Breccán, a merchant of the Uí Néill who used to trade with fifty currachs between Ireland and Scotland and whose fleet was lost in these dangerous seas. The cliff­top also was fortified at later stages. It was used as a manorial centre by the earls of Ulster in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, and was taken from the O’Cahans by McDonnells in the sixteenth century (O’Sullivan and Breen 2007). At Dunbeg, Co. Kerry, a promontory fort is dramatically situated on a cliff top on the steeply sloping, south side of the Dingle Peninsula. The site was clearly occupied over several phases, perhaps as early as the Bronze Age. It is defined by four closely spaced banks and ditches, with a stone house and souterrain in the small, enclosed interior. Radiocarbon dates from the occupation deposits suggest that the site was inhabited from the ninth to the thirteenth century AD. Interestingly, most of the animal bone from the site was identified as cattle, sheep, pig, with small amounts of goose and cod. Dunbeg is placed at a location providing extensive views across Dingle Bay, and its inhabitants could have watched any coastal traffic moving around the Kerry coast. The site would also have been high visible to maritime travellers, dominating entry into the bay itself. That the Dingle Peninsula had long seen coastal traders from far flung ports can be seen by the fact that the early medieval monastic site of Reask at the end of the peninsula has produced imported E­ware pottery, probably brought by Gaulish wine­traders. Dunbeg promontory fort, occupied slightly later than that, also probably observed the sailing routes between Viking Cork and Limerick in the tenth and eleventh centuries AD (O’Sullivan and Breen 2007). In any case, despite their coastal location, these promontory forts often produce relatively little evidence for the exploitation of coastal resources. At Larrybane, Co. Antrim, an early medieval promontory fort was situated at the edge of good agricultural land and its economy was mostly devoted to sheep rearing in particular, as well as cattle herding. Here was some evidence for hearths and large amounts of souterrain ware. However, there were also bones of cormorant, shag, puffin, curlew and merlin, fish bones of cod, saithe, pollock, whiting and wrasse, along with limpets, winkles and oysters. The impression gained is of an essentially agricultural community, who occasionally may have trapped birds and collected eggs on the cliffs, and caught fish in the sea below. The presence of cod might also suggest that use of ocean­going craft fishing offshore (O’Sullivan and Breen 2007).

90

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

Early medieval souterrains
Background Souterrains are humanly­made underground or semi­subterranean passages and chambers. The great majority of souterrains are drystone­built although earth­cut and rock­cut examples are also known. Earth­cut souterrains have nearly all been discovered in the Cork region while rock­ cut souterrains are found in both in the Cork area as well as North Antrim. Wooden­lined souterrains are also known but less prevalent again (Clinton 2001, 2 & 5). Dry­stone built souterrains are found in clustered areas across the island and comprise over 95% of the known total (Clinton 2001, 37). It has been suggested that there are approximately 3,500 souterrain in Ireland (Clinton 2001, 33). Distribution The distribution of souterrains across the island is very uneven. Regions such as North Antrim, West Cork and parts of Kerry, South Galway and North Louth contain vast amount of souterrains. The northern counties of Leinster as well as eastern Galway, Mayo and Roscommon as well as areas of Kerry, Waterford and east Cork would fall into a middle ground. Souterrains are however nearly completely absent in the old Leinster region, central and northern Munster, great swathes of central and northwest Ulster as well as long the western coastal border (Clinton 2001, 34). Clinton (2000, 275) has noted that some political kingdoms like Leinster are completely devoid of souterrains. EMAP survey and souterrains excavated 1970­2002 The EMAP survey identified 97 sites that contained one or a number of souterrains. The character of these ‘sites’ was often defined by the size and scope of the excavation licenses. The total number of excavated souterrains however amounted to 140 souterrains excavated in the period 1970­2002. The vast majority of excavated souterrains were found within the counties of Louth, Meath, Kerry and Antrim followed by Cork and Down. This largely corresponds with known areas of souterrain density. Souterrains have been discovered in a whole range of contexts including open settlements, enclosed sites, ecclesiastical sites, promontory forts and medieval sites (Clinton 2001, 45). It has been long accepted that the discovery of an unassociated souterrain is indicative of an unenclosed settlement. Both research undertaken by Clinton and Gosling has illustrated variations in the numbers of isolated souterrains. Approximately 65­75% of ringforts in Co. Meath were found appear to have been unenclosed while only 13% of examples examined by Gosling in South Galway could be described as such (Clinton 2001, 45). It has been suggested by Buckley (1998­9, 64) that c. 60% of ringforts were associated with unenclosed settlements across the island (Clinton 2001, 46). It is evident however that only excavation can establish if enclosures were associated with this field monument in the early medieval period.

County Antrim Armagh Cork Derry Donegal Down Dublin Fermanagh Galway Kerry

EMAP Sites and Souterrains 13 1 8 5 2 7 1 1 1 13

91

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

Louth Mayo Meath Roscommon Sligo Tipperary Tyrone Westmeath Total EMAP Sites

18 3 15 2 1 2 1 3 97

Table 26 Excavated Souterrain Sites and Counties 1970­2002

Excavated Souterrain 'Sites' 1970-2002
Westmeath Tyrone Tipperary Sligo Roscommon Meath Mayo Louth Kerry Galway Fermanagh Dublin Down Donegal Derry Cork Armagh Antrim
0 5 10 15 20

County

Excavated Souterrain Sites

Figure 22: Excavated Souterrain Sites and Counties 1970­2002

The chronology of souterrains

Radiocarbon dating Clinton (2001, 89) has catalogued a number of scientific dates for souterrains. A wooden­lined souterrain at Coolcran, Co. Fermanagh (Williams 1985, 75) was dendrochronologically dated to A.D. 822±9. The backfill of a souterrain at Marshes Upper, Co. Louth (Mossop 2002, Excavations Bulletin­ 02E0008) returned a very early radiocarbon date of AD 405­690 in 2002. A sample from charcoal in an area of burning to the south of the souterrain at Slievemore, Achill, Co. Mayo returned a radiocarbon date of A.D. 650±80 (Theresa McDonald 1995, 1998 & 1999, Excavations Bulletin­ 91E0047). Cattle bone recovered in 2000 from the backfilled souterrain at Staad Abbey, Agharow, Co. Sligo yielded a date of AD 1010­1155 (UB­4575) (Jerry O'Sullivan & Catherine Dunne 2000 & 2001, Excavations Bulletin­ 00E0235).

92

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

A number of souterrains at other sites including at a ringfort at Raheenamadra, Co. Limerick (A.D. 649­938), a circular enclosure at Kill, Co. Kerry (A.D. 688­998­ Mary Cahill 1989, Excavations Bulletin), at a ringfort at Killanully, Co. Cork (A.D. 880­1260­ Mount 1995), a souterrain at Farrandreg, Co. Louth (A.D. 888­1027­ Murphy 1998, 269) and at a stone hut site with souterrain at Cool West, Valentia Island, Co. Kerry (A.D. 1305­1529­ O’Sullivan & Sheehan 1996, 398) suggest a wide time frame from the later first millennium into the second millennium A.D. Taking into account a number of early dated sites like Marshes Upper, it is still likely that souterrains were used and constructed principally ‘between the last quarter of the first millennium A.D. and the first quarter of the second millennium A.D as purposed by Clinton (2001, 92).

Souterrains and building form: An indicator of possible date It has been noted that souterrains tend to be associated with rectangular houses which might suggest a date towards the end of the early medieval period when this type of architecture starts to predominate (Edwards 1990, 46). Clinton (2001, 54) has noted similar occurrences at Ballywee, Co. Antrim (Lynn 1975, 4); Knowth, Co. Meath (Eogan 1986, 24; 1991, 120) and possibly Rathmullan, Co. Down (Lynn 1981­2, 65). However, Clinton (2001, 55­57) has found examples of circular houses associated with souterrains. Examples include Leacanabuaile, Co. Kerry; Loher, Co. Kerry; (O’Flaherty 1986, Excavations Bulletin), Raheenamadra, Co. Limerick (Stenberger 1966, 37); Underhill, Co. Cork (O’Kelly) Shee 1968, 40); Ballyjennings, Co. Mayo (Lavelle et al 1994, 41) and Downpatrick, Co. Down (Brannon 1988).
Excavations at Bray Head, Valentia, Co. Kerry led to the discovery of approximately 7 round houses and 5 rectangular stone built houses (Alan Hayden 1993, Excavations Bulletin­ 93E0121, 94E119, 97E278 & 01E0814; Claire Walsh 95E166, Excavations Bulletin). Charcoal from a hearth inside a circular hut (3.5m in diameter) was dated to the late 8/early 9th centuries A.D. One large, rectangular, drystone­walled house was radiocarbon dated previously dated to the later 9th to early 11th century. One souterrain was found to be associated with a circular building. A figure­of­eight building was excavated at a cashel site at Cathair Fionnúrach, Ballynavenoor, Co. Kerry (Erin Gibbons 1994­97, Excavations Bulletin­ 94E005). The smaller annexe of the figure of eight building was found to contain a souterrain entrance. Clinton (2001, 58) has concluded that there is good evidence to suggest that souterrains, particularly in southern Ireland, were associated with round buildings. Taking into account Lynn’s (1978) persuasive argument that rectangular houses succeeded circular buildings during around the 9th century A.D., it then appears, as he notes, that many souterrains in the south and west could slightly predate those in the north. Souterrains and Unenclosed Settlements The EMAP survey revealed that 97 sites were excavated from 1970­2002 that contained evidence for souterrains, amounting to 140 souterrains. The EMAP survey found that 45 of these sites comprised excavations where one or a number of souterrains were found with no associated settlement although they were often found in association with limited domestic artefacts and industrial, agricultural and occupation evidence. Agricultural evidence typically took the form of field banks, agricultural artefacts and very occasionally, corn drying kilns. The majority only revealed a souterrain with limited other archaeological evidence found during the excavation. Isolated souterrains found with limited evidence for occupation then constitute 45/97 examples or 46% of the excavated sites total. Excavations at Boolies Little revealed a souterrain that was constructed after an early medieval stone/slab­lined cemetery fell out of use (Sweetman 1982­ 83). The size and character of excavations at souterrain sites must also be understood as a factor when deciding if a souterrain associated with an enclosure or not. It is clear that limited excavation may have been undertaken at a number of these sites; thus leaving open the possibility that enclosures may still be present outside the excavated area.

93

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

NAME Spittle Quarter Bonfire Hill, Bishops Court Binders Cove, Finnis Randalstown Beaufort Sarsfieldstown Marshes Upper Ballynee, Spiddal Marshes Upper Ballymacpeake Upper Strandsend Ballyhealy Delvin Ballyginny Ballygalley 'The Deserted Village', Slievemore (Toir), Achill Island Ballyboley Balrenny Knock North Aghnaskeagh Graigue Garryntemple Gallarus Kill Farrandreg Eleven Ballyboes Kilcarn Drumilly Loughgall Knockmant Magheramenagh Cloughorr Castlemagner Carrownamaddy Mell 3 Demesne, Road,

County Down Down Down Meath Kerry Meath Louth Meath Louth Derry Kerry Westmeath Down Antrim Mayo

EMAP Class Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain

Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain

Significance General General General General General General Uncertain General General General General General General Significant General

Antrim Meath Mayo Louth Galway Tipperary Kerry Kerry Louth Donegal Meath Armagh Westmeath Derry Antrim Cork Donegal Louth

Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Early Medieval Settlement Landscape

Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain

General General No significance General General Uncertain General General General General General General General General General General General Significant

Dromiskin

Louth

Souterrain

Significant

Magheramenagh Kilcarn, Athlumney

Derry Meath

Souterrain Souterrain

Significant General

94

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

Marshes Upper

Louth

Sheepland Chapeltown Marshes Upper Farrandreg Markstown, Cullybackey Tullygarley Randalstown Smithstown Boolies Little

Mor,

Down Louth Louth Antrim Antrim Meath Meath Meath

Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Unenclosed Habitation Site Unenclosed Habitation Site Unenclosed Habitation Site Unenclosed Habitation Site Unenclosed Habitation Site Unenclosed Habitation Site Unenclosed Habitation Site Multi­Phase settlement

Souterrain

Highly Significant

Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain

General Significant General Significant General General Highly Significant Significant

Table 27: Excavated Unenclosed Souterrains 1970­2002 Souterrains and Ringforts A total of 23 ringforts were excavated from 1970­2002 that contained one or a number of souterrains. Four were raised or platform ringforts while the other 19 were traditional forms of ringforts found associated with souterrains. 6 of these sites could be described as highly significant in terms of archaeological material.
Name Deer Park Farms Big Glebe Rathmullan Lower Meadowsbank, Jordanstown Coolcran Castlegar Ballywee Ballymascanlan Cormeen Ballyhill Lower Emlagh West Turnarobert Haggardstown Haggardstown Killanully Killyliss 'Lisnagun', Darrary Lisleagh II Liscahane Lackan, Multyfarnham Leyland Road Industrial Estate Colp West Carrigaline Middle County Antrim Derry Down Down Fermanagh Mayo Antrim Louth Meath Antrim Kerry Antrim Louth Louth Cork Tyrone Cork Cork Cork Westmeath Antrim Meath Cork EMAP Class Raised Ringfort & Souterrain Raised Ringfort & Souterrain Raised Ringfort & Souterrain Raised Ringfort & Souterrain Raised Ringfort & Souterrain Ringfort & Souterrain Ringfort & Souterrain Ringfort & Souterrain Ringfort & Souterrain Ringfort & Souterrain Ringfort & Souterrain Ringfort & Souterrain Ringfort & Souterrain Ringfort & Souterrain Ringfort & Souterrain Ringfort & Souterrain Ringfort & Souterrain Ringfort & Souterrain Ringfort & Souterrain Ringfort & Souterrain Early Medeival Landscape Multi­Phase Settlement Multi­Phase settlement Settlement Monument Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Significance Highly Significant Highly Significant Highly Significant Highly Significant Highly Significant General Highly Significant General Significant Significant Significant Significant General General Significant Significant Significant Significant Significant General General Highly Singificant General

Table 28: Excavated Ringforts containing Souterrains 1970­2002

95

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

Souterrains and other enclosures A further 11 places revealed souterrains in other enclosure contexts. Some of these sites like Rosepark and Corrstown were significant settlement complexes. Both the souterrains at Nevinstown and Mullagharlin/Haggardstown were situated short distance from an enclosed site. This group can be broadly associated with the ringfort list.

NAME Ferganstown & Ballymackon Haggardstown Rosepark, Balrothery Gortatlea Corrstown, Hopefield Portrush Ballynacarriga 1 & 2 Farrandreg Knowth Road,

County Meath Louth Dublin Kerry Derry Cork Louth Meath

EMAP Class Enclosure Enclosure Non­Circular Shaped Enclosure Non­Circular Shaped Enclosures Non­Circular Shaped Enclosure Non­Circular Shaped Enclosure Enclosure Multi­Phase Settlement

Monument Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain

Significance Significant Significant Highly Significant General Highly Significant Highly Significant General Highly Significant

Bray Head, Valentia Nevinstown Mullagharlin & Haggardstown

Kerry Meath Louth

Multi­Phase Settlement Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Early Medieval Settlement Landscape

Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain

Highly Significant Significant Significant

Table 29: Other excavated enclosures containing Souterrains 1970­2002

96

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

Souterrains and cashels Three cashels were excavated from 1970­2002 that revealed evidence for souterrains and could all be described as sites of significance.
NAME Cathair Fionnúrach, Ballynavenoor Ballyegan Kildreenagh, Loher County Kerry Kerry Kerry EMAP Class Cashel & Souterrain Cashel & Souterrain Cashel & Souterrain Monument Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Significance Significant Significant Significant

Table 30: Excavated Cashels containing Souterrains 1970­2002

Souterrains and Promontory forts One promontory fort at Dunbeg was excavated from 1970­2002 that revealed evidence for a souterrain.
NAME Dunbeg Promontory Fort, Dingle County Kerry EMAP Class Promontory Fort Monument Souterrain Significance Highly Significant

Table 31: Excavated Promontory Forts containing Souterrains

Souterrains and Settlement/Cemetery Sites A further 3 sites, described as ‘settlement/cemeteries’, were found to contain souterrains upon excavation.

NAME Balriggan Ninch, Laytown Millockstown

County Louth Meath Louth

EMAP Class Cemetery & Settlement Site Multi­Phase settlement Multi­Phase settlement

Monum ent Souterrai n Souterrai n Souterrai n

Significance Highly Significant Highly Significant Highly Significant

Table 32: Excavated Settlement/Cemetery Sites containing Souterrains

Souterrains and Ecclesiastical Sites Souterrains have also been associated with ecclesiastical sites. Clinton (2001, 48, 49 & 50) has noted that souterrains have been discovered at a number of sites including Templebryan North, Co. Cork, Meelick, Co., Mayo (Raftery, Joseph 1967) and Kiltiernan East, Co. Galway (Westropp 1919, 178). The survey found that 11 ecclesiastical sites excavated between 1970­2002, revealed evidence for souterrains upon excavation. The most notable sites included the possible ecclesiastical site at Lackenavorna, Co. Tipperary, Downpatrick, Co. Down and Reask, Co. Kerry.

97

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

NAME Grange of Mallusk Turraloskin Moore Cemetery, Loughlackagh Templenadriney, Erris

County Antrim Antrim Roscommon Roscommon

EMAP Class Ecclesiastical Site Ecclesiastical Site Ecclesiastical Site Ecclesiastical Site

Monument Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain

Significance General General General Significant

Lackenavorna, Killederdadrum Kilmore St. Patrick, Downpatrick Ballybarrack An Raingiléis, church Reask Ballywiheen

Tipperary Cork Down Louth Kerry Sligo

Enclosed site Enclosed site Enclosed site Enclosed site Enclosed site

ecclesiastical ecclesiastical ecclesiastical ecclesiastical ecclesiastical

Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain Souterrain

Highly Significant General Highly Significant Significant General General Highly Significant

Staad Abbey, Agharow

Pilgrimage Hostel Multi­Phase Settlement

Table 33: Excavated Ecclesiastical Sites containing Souterrains 1970­2002

Associations with other sites A total of 97 defined ‘sites’ were found to contain or be located immediately adjacent to one or a number of excavated souterrains. ! ! 45 (47%) excavated sites revealed one or a number of adjacent souterrains with no associated early medieval enclosure. The breakdowns of the results of souterrains with enclosed sites are ringforts (23) sites, other enclosures (11), cashels (3), promontory forts (1) and settlement/cemeteries (3). These settlement enclosure sites then totalled 41 sites constituting 42% of excavated sites. 11 sites contained excavations of ecclesiastical complexes that also revealed excavated souterrains within or immediately outside the settlements. They constituted 11% of excavated sites. These figures give information about the contexts in which one or a number of souterrains were excavated within EMAP defined ‘sites’. They do not give the total number of excavated souterrains.
Site Category Unenclosed­ Souterrain(s) Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastical Total (Site Categories Quantity 45 41 11 97

!

Table 34: Excavated Souterrains (1970­2002) and Site Categories

98

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

Excavated Souterrain(s) and EMAP Site Categories (1970-2002)

11, 11%

45, 47% 41, 42%

UnenclosedSouterrain(s) Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastical

Figure 23: Excavated Souterrain(s) and EMAP Site Categories 1970­2002

Souterrains and the phasing of early medieval enclosed sites Clinton (2001, 94) has noted that souterrains are very likely to appear late in the history of known multi­phase sites. Souterrains occurred at a late stage in the history of a number of multi­phase raised ringforts and non­circular shape enclosures including Deer Park Farms and Rathmullan, Co. Down. Excavations at Letterkeen, Co. Mayo (S.P. Ó Ríordáin & McDermott 1951­2, 100) has also revealed that the souterrains post­dated the initial settlement phase (Clinton 2001, 47). Further examples can be found at Millockstown, Co. Louth (Manning 1986), Ninch, Laytown, Co. Meath (Eogan & Reid (2000, 2001 & 2002, Excavations Bulletin) and Raystown (Seaver 2006) where the souterrains date to the later stages of the settlement. Excavations also at the highly significant multi­ enclosed settlement at Rosepark, Balrothery, Co. Dublin also revealed that the great majority of the seven souterrains excavated dated to later than the enclosing ditches (Rónán Swan & Judith Carroll 1999 & 2000, Excavations Bulletin­ 99E0155). Souterrains then appear to date to the latest phases of highly significant enclosed settlement sites. It is likely that many more will display a similar chronology when further details are given in reports about the relationship between souterrains and the associated ringfort. What is not clear is, if this later evidence is evidence for a subsequent unenclosed settlement of souterrains and structures or if they were constructed during the twilight years of important ringfort sites. Clinton (2001, 46 & 203) has noted that the souterrains at Knowth dating to the 9th and 10th centuries A.D., post­dated the enclosed phase of the early medieval settlement at Knowth. The 9th and 10th century settlement at this royal site produced nine souterrains, all associated with rectangular houses, was described by George Eogan as an ‘unenclosed village’. The seven souterrains at Rosepark, Co. Dublin that also post­dated the ditches may possibly be further evidence for another such site. There were similar developments at Kitale ringfort, Co. Meath (Rynne 1974, 267) and Togherstown ringfort, Co. Westmeath (Macalister and Praeger 1929­31, 75) and Clinton (2001, 203) has concluded that there is a growing body of evidence to suggest that many souterrains located within a ringfort were associated with a subsequent and later open settlement site. These questions will only be further understood when detailed information is given about the chronology and stratigraphy of multi­phase ringfort settlements.

99

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

Early medieval unenclosed settlements
Background The early medieval period dates approximately from the 5th­12th centuries A.D. The extent, character and scale of unenclosed settlement during these centuries are likely to have varied due to different political, industrial, economic, agricultural and social developments. Our present understandings of early medieval unenclosed settlement are still very poor and partial and have been clouded by the pervasiveness of the ringfort in the early medieval archaeological narrative as well as the lack of well­investigated or surviving evidence for unenclosed sites. Only the chance discovery of an isolated souterrain is often the only evidence for a possible early medieval unenclosed settlement (Edwards 1990, 46). Early medieval settlement studies (e.g. Stout 1997) then have generally focused upon examining the distribution of ringforts in order to reconstruct a hierarchical model of settlement across regional landscapes. These models have however never completely factored in the role of unenclosed settlement sites in the character of early medieval settlement patterns. Kinsella (2007a) has noted that ‘archaeologists (Edwards 1990; Mallory & McNeil 1991; Mytum 1992; Seaver 2005), historical geographers (Graham 1993; Stout 1997) and historians (Charles­Edwards 2000) have all asserted that ringforts were occupied only by the ‘free classes’. In that case, the poor and unfree, undoubtedly a sizeable proportion – perhaps even a majority ­ of the population of early medieval Ireland has been ignored in this narrative. One recurrent idea proposed by scholars is that the mass of the population lived in small nucleated settlements somewhat similar to the clachans that survived in many parts of western Ireland until the twentieth century (Edwards 1990, 47). Yet many of these are post­medieval in date and are products of very particular social, demographic and agricultural forces (i.e. a population explosion based on crop cultivation of potatoes and barley) that were affecting Ireland in the 18th and early 19th century. Kinsella instead (2005, 2007a) has suggested that many small univallate ringforts, situated in unproductive or marginal lands, may have instead been used for the impoverished and semi­ free social classes. The extent, character and role of unenclosed settlement in the period when the ringfort was the predominant form of settlement monument (A.D. 500­900) then is still not clear. If enclosed settlements were the defining hallmark of a free­man, was then the unenclosed site the mark of the servile or did these sites play a different and perhaps more important role which has not been up till now not acknowledged? Furthermore, what was the extent and character of unenclosed settlement immediately prior to and after the main phase of ringfort use from A.D. 600­900 and what role did the souterrain play in this process, particularly in the later centuries of the early medieval period? The evidence for unenclosed settlement evidence principally comes in the form of isolated souterrains, souterrains with associated structures, unenclosed settlement sites with no associated souterrains, unenclosed settlement sites within field systems and coastal habitations sites. A list of unenclosed settlement sites is given within appendix 2. A total of 45 isolated souterrain sites, 32 unenclosed habitation sites and 5 coastal habitation sites were found in a variety of contexts and are listed in the appendixes for excavated sites 1970­2002. What follows below is both a description and discussion of these results as well as some discussion of those sites that were revealed prior to 1970 or after 2002. Rural Unenclosed Settlement; Souterrains with no associated buildings Evidence for early medieval unenclosed settlement principally comes in the form of the discovery of isolated souterrains (See Appendix on Souterrains). 45/97 or 47% of excavated sites from 1970­2002 revealed souterrains with no associated enclosure and have been listed above. 7/45 sites revealed potential associated structures/buildings therefore reducing this figure to 39 site excavations that revealed only isolated souterrains. Excavations at the majority of these identified sites revealed simply a souterrain with perhaps very limited quantities of souterrain ware, animal bone and domestic or personal items. 100

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

Excavations at Ballyboley, Co. Antrim (Lynn 1977­79, Excavations Bulletin) revealed large quantities of souterrain ware as well as a scatter of cobbling, occupation material and a hearth. No definite pattern for any structures could be discerned. Excavations at Kill, Co. Kerry (Mary Cahill 1988, Excavations Bulletin) revealed a souterrain which contained an east­west orientated burial as well as a quern stone. Excavations at Ballyknee, Spiddal, Co. Meath (George Eogan 1988, Excavations Bulletin) revealed two souterrains which produced a bronze mount, a single­ edged comb, piece of iron, bronze pin and a quern stone that dated to the 8th century A.D. Excavations at Mell 3 (Thaddeus Breen 2000, Excavations Bulletin­ 00E0631) exposed a bronze mount with openwork interlace. A gully which may have served as a drain preventing water running into the souterrain as well as two possible contemporary downhill were also discovered which contained iron slag, animal bone, spindle whorl, lignite bracelet, blue glass bead. A hearth was excavated outside a souterrain at Dromiskin, Co. Louth (Eoin Halpin 1988, Excavations Bulletin­ E461). Iron slag, souterrain ware, bone combs as well as pits and post for a souterrain door were found at Magheramenagh, Co. Derry (Alan Reilly, Excavations Bulletin). A large number of these isolated souterrains have been found with quern stones including Spittle Quarter, Co. Antrim (Brannon 1990, Excavations Bulletin), Ballyknee, Spiddal, Co. Meath (George Eogan 1988, Excavations Bulletin), Kill, Co. Kerry (Mary Cahill 1988, Excavations Bulletin), Randalstown, Co. Meath (Kieran Campbell 1986, Excavations Bulletin), Bishops Court, Co. Down (Chris Lynn 1973, Excavations Bulletin), Farrandreg, Co. Louth (Deirdre Murphy 1998, Excavations Bulletin­ 95E0109), An early medieval sickle was excavated at an isolated souterrain at Beaufort, Co. Kerry (Michael Connolly 1995, Excavations Bulletin­ 95E217) while an undated iron plough share was found at Boolies Little, Co. Meath (Sweetman 1982­83). More recently, excavations at Faughart Lower, Co. Louth produced a ploughshare and coulter in a souterrain, apparently deliberately deposited near the entrance (Niall Roycroft pers comm.). Excavations at Slievemore, Achill have also exposed an undated corn­drying kiln and souterrain (Theresa McDonald 1995, 1998 & 1999, Excavations Bulletin­ 91E0047) while a souterrain discovered at Ballygalley, Co. Antrim (Christopher Farrimond 2002, Excavations Bulletin­ AE/02/40) revealed an adjacent souterrain and corn­drying kiln which maybe early medieval in date. While this is only a very preliminary sketch of the associated material­culture found at souterrains, it nevertheless suggests that crop cultivation and cereal storage may have been an important activity at these sites. Rural Unenclosed Settlement; Souterrains with associated Buildings Many early medieval souterrains have been found adjacent to early medieval buildings. Edwards (1990, 31) has discussed a number of sites such as Craig Hill, Co. Antrim (Waterman 1956, 87) and Antiville, Co. Antrim (Waterman 1971, 65). The site at Craig Hill consisted of a single rectangular house and souterrain with an associated paved entrance and central hearth. The site at Antiville was located at a marshy spot beside a tributary of the River Larne. It contained a rectangular house and souterrain that were partially enclosed by a shallow cut that was likely used to drain excess water from the site (Edwards 1990, 46). The EMAP survey revealed seven examples where souterrains, not associated with any enclosures, appear to have been located adjacent to potential early medieval buildings. Excavations at Smithstown, Co. Meath (Margaret Gowen 1988, Excavations Bulletin­ E463) revealed four souterrains to the south of a series of gullies suggestive of buildings. A possible keyhole kiln was excavated nearby. Excavations at other sites at Farrandreg, Co. Louth (Teresa Bolger 2000, Excavations Bulletin­ 00E0082), Randalstown, Co. Meath (Kieran Campbell 1985, Excavations Bulletin), Sheepland Mor, Co. Down (S.G. Rees­Jones 1971, Excavations Bulletin), Marshes Upper (Gosling 1984 & 1985, Excavations Bulletin), Tullygarley, Co. Antrim (Liam McQuillan & Chris Long1999, Excavations Bulletin) and Markstown, Co. Antrim (Cormac McSparron 2001­ AE/01/17) revealed possible structures outside or near souterrain entrances. The shape of the structures could not be established from the excavations bulletin reports. Further research will be required in this area.

101

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

Rural Unenclosed Settlements – unenclosed sites with early medieval buildings and objects A large number of sites have been excavated in recent years that have revealed evidence for unenclosed buildings with some associated material­culture (See Appendix – ‘Unenclosed Settlement Sites’), but with no evidence for souterrains. Excavations at Platin, Co. Meath in advance of the M1 Gormanston­Monasterboice Motorway Scheme revealed two circular unenclosed buildings (Robert Lynch 2001 & 2001, Excavations Bulletin­ 00E0822). Two circular structures 10m in diameter were revealed in the eastern half of the site. Foundation trenches of the later structure yielded glass beads, crucible fragments, tuyère fragments and iron objects. Two parallel gullies also revealed burning and iron slag and may have formed the industrial centre associated with the occupation site. The earliest circular structure was 15m in diameter so it is not clear if it represents a building. A pit containing animal bone was contemporary with the later building. Excavations at Ballycullen/Oldcourt, Co. Dublin (Elinior Larsson 2002, Excavations Bulletin­ 02E0190) exposed a semicircular ditch measuring 10.2m east­west by 4.5m which was interpreted as a possible slot­trench of a house. The fills of the ditch contained bone, burnt and unburnt and charcoal. An internal hearth was also identified. A metalled surface containing six post and stake holes on the eastern terminal was interpreted as a possible entranceway for the semicircular shaped site. Two pieces of corroded iron were discovered from the eastern terminal and flint flakes were recovered from the metalled surface. Excavations were undertaken at Cloghlucas South, Co. Cork (Margaret Gowen 1986, Excavations Bulletin; Gowen 1988) in advance of the Bord Gáis Cork­Dublin Pipeline 1986. An unenclosed round house (9.5m in diameter) was excavated which contained two phases of activity and was defined by a shallow external gully with evidence for burning. The site appears to be an unusual double­ringed house. A rotary quern stone was discovered at the site while a hearth and a furnace bottom was found a short distance away. The site appears to date to the early medieval period as rotary querns do not usually date to the prehistoric period. A site was discovered at Blackhills Lower, Co. Cavan (Lucia McConway 1992, Excavations Bulletin­ 92E0058) in advance of the Bord Gáis Northeastern Pipeline (Dunleer­Mullagh Phase 3). Excavations revealed two curving gullies, one of which was Gully 2 was13.2m x 10.6m in diameter. Four pits were also discovered, two of which revealed evidence for in situ burning and could represent hearths. Flint scrapers were recovered from the topsoil while Bronze Age shards were recovered from one of the pits. C14 dates from one of the charcoal filled gullies however returned dates around A.D. 1000 for occupation (AD 890­895 and AD 1278­1294) so it appears that the building maybe early medieval. A site was excavated at Moorgate, Co. Tipperary in advance of a development (Brian Hodkinson & Tony Cummins 1999, Excavations Bulletin­ 97E0026). A small circular hut, 4m in diameter was located in the northeast corner of a field away an early ecclesiastical site. A hearth was located in the centre of the hut. Post holes and stakeholes were located inside the hut. Two shallow pits were located in the NE corner and one contained a jet/lignite bracelet. A circular/oval structure composed of a number of post holes, stakeholes and pits was discovered at Rossbeg (II) by Richard Gillespie (2001, Excavations Bulletin­ 00E0774). No hearths were discovered in or near the structure. Some rough flints and bone and a decorated stone spindle whorl that consists of a perforated stone disc 40mm in diameter by 10mm thick was discovered. It was decorated with incised concentric circles around the central perforation. Excavations at Drumadonnell, Co. Down revealed a house 9m in diameter (Cormac McSparron 1999, Excavations Bulletin). A central stone­lined hearth and a subcircular setting of post­holes around it were excavated. A second hearth was found nearby. No evidence for an enclosure was discovered. Souterrain ware pottery and burnt bone were discovered. Bone fragments, seeds and grains were recovered from the hearths and a pit to the north. Cattle and sheep

102

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

bone dominated the animal bone assemblage while oats, barley and a much smaller amount of wheat were the types of seeds and grains discovered. The two hearths returned dates of AD 705 to 1005 and AD 680 to 980. Excavations at Kilkenny Castle as part of the conservation of the site revealed a twelfth century pre­castle level (Ben Murtagh 1991 & 1992, Excavations Bulletin­ E627). It was found that the pre­castle ground level as up to 3.6m below the modern ground floor. A sod built structure dating to the 12th century was found beneath the castle. It consisted of three low walls whose west wall was destroyed by the batter of the northwest 13th century curtain wall. The house measured internally 4.2m north­south by at least 4.6m east­west. It contained a central hearth and the remains of a small furnace to the west. Iron and bronze working and local cooking ware shards were found associated with the house. The building had a short life and was destroyed by the large late 12th century earthwork castle. Excavations were undertaken at Maynooth Castle, Co. Kildare as part of the conservation of the site (Alan Hayden 1996 & 1999, Excavations Bulletin). 7 phases of activity were discovered in 1999. The first phase consisted of a prehistoric rectangular building. The next phase was represented by two small post and wattle round houses, c. 5m in diameter, which were interpreted as dating to the early medieval period. The two buildings contained hearths from which radiocarbon samples were taken but were not available at the time the report was submitted. The latest round house appears to have had a curving wooden stockade added to one side. The house appears to have been contemporary with the beginning of cultivation that was revealed in the form of regularly spaced furrows. The cultivation was found also over the house and continued till the Anglo­Norman phase. Excavation was conducted on an early medieval conjoined clochan at Coarha Beg, Valentia Island, Co. Kerry (Alan Hayden 1994, Excavations Bulletin­ 94E120). A trapezoidal stonewalled structure with a long stone­lined and originally stone­roofed entrance passage was uncovered. The site was 3.4m x2.8m internally. Two further rectangular stonewalled cells were annexed to it. A stone­lined hearth was excavated in the interior. Blue glass beads, stone spindle whorls and rubbing stones were found within the structure. A date between 562 and 758 AD was returned. A research project was undertaken along the Barrees Valley, Co. Cork (William O'Brien 2002, Excavations Bulletin­ 02E0914). Excavations focused on an early medieval cashel. Two hut sites recorded along the valley were also early medieval in date. A circular hut defined by a 0.8­ 1.4m­wide collapsed wall of rough fieldstones was excavated. No interior features were found and the only find consisted of early medieval multi­coloured bead. Two small charcoal deposits were found underneath the wall stones and were radiocarbon dated to 1380±40 BP (GrN­ 28303), consistent with a 6th­8th­century AD date range for the bead. A D­shaped stone wall structure measuring 4.8m by 2.7m internally and defined by a single narrow wall of rough field stones was also excavated. A spread of charcoal returned dated the site to the 11/12th centuries A.D. (895±20 BP (GrN­28304)). Excavations were conducted on two hut sites at Carrignamuck on the west sides of the Wicklow mountains (Anna Brindley 1977­79, Excavations Bulletin). Site A consisted of two circular, conjoined structures (Al, A2) each with an entrance in its west side measuring l0m. Traces of a possible third hut were found to the southeast. No evidence of habitation was uncovered except for a horse scapula. Site B lay a quarter of a mile to the east of Site A. It consisted of a level platform and a semicircle of drystone wall. No occupation evidence was found. Other hut sites have also been found within the King's River Valley in West Wicklow in the townland of Garryknock near the church of Templeteenaun and the St. Kevin's pilgrim road. These may well be later medieval or post medieval sites. Excavations were undertaken on a clochan situated near the western tip of the Dingle Peninsula, on the southern slopes of Mt Eagle. No early finds were discovered (Isabel Bennett 1989, Excavations Bulletin).

103

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

A possible building was excavated at Balgeen 4, Co. Meath in advance of the M1 Gormanston­ Monasterboice Motorway (Helen Kehoe & Robert O'Hara 2001 & 2002, Excavations Bulletin­ 01E0742). A hearth and a number of pits containing animal bone were also excavated. One pit was dated to the early medieval period. A possible unenclosed structure was excavated at the Leyland Road Industrial Estate, Ballycastle, Co. Antrim (Audrey Gahan 2001, Excavations Bulletin­ AE/01/65). It was revealed in the form of post pits, post holes and gullies. The date of the possible structure is uncertain. Rural unenclosed settlements within field systems There is also evidence for early medieval unenclosed or partially unenclosed settlements that were situated within field systems. A number of clochans, some conjoined and associated with souterrains were discovered at Ballynaveooragh within an elaborated system of fields on the uncultivated slopes of Mount Brandon, Co. Kerry. A complex of round houses belonging to a possible early medieval transhumance village was excavated at Aughnabrack, Ballyutoag was recorded and excavated on the northwest slopes of the Belfast mountains (Williams 1984). The site consisted of two large conjoined curvilinear enclosures with a group of circular hut platforms around the perimeter, a series of adjacent fields and a third smaller enclosure to the north (Edwards 1990, 46). Upwards of 23 hut sites were surveyed during the study. The excavated huts largely date to around the 8th century A.D. They could have housed upwards of 100 people. Comparable upland sites in Antrim have also been discovered at Browndod, Killylane and Tildarg (Williams 1983, 239­245). A complex of fields with eight houses dated to two phases was excavated at Beginish Island, Co. Kerry (Kelly, 1956). One house dated to the second phase contained a stone­lined passage roofed with lintels, one of which turned out to be re­used and contained a runic inscription suggesting it dated to a period after the coming of the Vikings (Edwards 1990. 47). A further significant field system with associated settlements was excavated on a terrace at ‘The Spectacles’ over looking Lough Gur in Co. Limerick (O’Riordain 1949). Two early medieval roundhouses (one relatively substantial and built of stone walls with a paved doorway and porch feature) and a rectangular house were located within four small rectangular fields that may have been used as gardens. A system of larger field systems and a semi­circular enclosure was located further up the hillside and may have been the location where the livestock was pastured. Excavations since the early 1980’s have revealed an extensive early medieval and prehistoric landscape at Marshes Upper, Co. Louth. A number of souterrains have been discovered in the area. Excavations by Paul Gosling (1980­4, Excavations Bulletin) exposed a souterrain a U­ shaped hut, two pits, a field boundary and a souterrain discovered with the souterrain. 50 shards of souterrain ware, iron belt buckle, plain bronze strap end, flint flakes, a whetstone and a shale­bracelet were discovered. A hoard of 8 Hiberno­Norse coins with a deposition date of AD. 995­1000 (M. Kenny, NMI) was recovered from the fill of the souterrain entrance. Further excavations in 2002 exposed a whole early medieval archaeological landscape (Matt Mossop & Robert O’Hara 2002, Excavations Bulletin­ 02E0008, 02E0233, 02E0234 & 02E0201) comprising corn­drying kilns, hearths, unenclosed structures, enclosures, ironworking evidence, rectangular field systems and a souterrain dating to the Late Iron Age and early medieval period. Area 7 revealed a possible souterrain, four possible hearths, circular pit/hearth, a small burnt spread and a field boundary. The backfill of the souterrain returned a radiocarbon date of AD 405­690 (Matt Mossop 2002, Excavations Bulletin­ 02E0008). Excavations at Carrigoran, Site 18 (100x110m) Co. Clare in advance of the construction of the N18/19 Ballycasey­Dromoland Bypass (Fiona Reilly, Thaddeus Breen & Billy Quinn, Excavations Bulletin 1998­2000­ 98E0337, 98E0426 and 98E0338) have also identified early medieval settlement within field systems. Site 18 was described as a field system in the SMR. The final season of excavation by Fiona Reilly in 2000 98E0337 saw many details clarified. Six main

104

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

phases were identified. Phase 1 was early medieval in date. It consisted of a series of pits, posts and stakeholes, some of which potentially indicate the remains of a hipped roof building cut into the ground. Another structure was oval and supported centrally by a post. Another structure possibly indicated by the presence of a curvilinear gully was identified. 8 pits were identified containing charred remains. They may have been used as storage or waste pits for cereal grain. A fragment of a rotary quern was also discovered. Three separate pits also indicate potential hearths. Two inhumations were also discovered and date to this phase. Phase 2 saw a natural build up material as the site went temporarily out of use in the early medieval period. Phase 3 saw a further phase of early medieval activity that witnessed the construction of several small stone­walls and ditched fields. Evidence for smelting and smithing was uncovered as many hearths/furnaces and pieces of slag were revealed. Evidence for cereal cultivation was also found. A Class E bone comb artefact was found dating to the 9/10th century A.D. The site then went out of use and the field systems being destroyed in the medieval period. Excavations were undertaken at Kilcarn, Athlumney, Co. Meath in advance of an industrial estate (Eoin Sullivan 1997, Excavations Bulletin­ 97E322). Four souterrains were examined in the area. Large quantities of animal bone, two hearths, two bone pins, glass bead, lignite bracelet fragment, bone bead, lithics and metal finds were found as well as field banks of several phases. Excavations were undertaken at Bray Head, Valentia Island from 1993­2001 (Alan Hayden 1993, Excavations Bulletin­ 93E0121, 94E119, 97E278 & 01E0814;Claire Walsh 95E166, Excavations Bulletin). Approximately 7 round houses and 5 rectangular stone built houses were excavated during these years. A further subrectangular, bow­sided building with Scandinavian associations was found overlying a circular stone building. Charcoal from a hearth inside a circular hut (3.5m in diameter) was dated to the late 8/early 9th centuries A.D. One large, rectangular, drystone­walled house was radiocarbon dated previously dated to the later 9th to early 11th century. Two corn­drying kilns were also excavated, one of which was dated to 934±110 AD and appears to be of similar size and shape to the probably 10th­century AD example excavated previously. The buildings appear to have been generally unenclosed in the early medieval period until it was replaced by field systems and cultivation activity dating to the late medieval period. Excavations were undertaken at Ballygeale 1, Co. Limerick in advance of the N20/N21 Adare to Annacotty Bypass (James Eogan & Sinclair Turrell 1999, Excavations Bulletin­ 99E0341). A possible circular building, c. 10m in diameter, a well and a number of hearths were excavated. An undated field system was excavated 200m away from this settlement in 1999 99E0342. A number of pits and ditches were excavated. A number of hearths were also excavated and the pits contained charcoal suggesting industrial activity in the area. The date of the circular building is uncertain.

Early medieval unenclosed coastal occupation sites (shell middens)
Background There is emerging evidence for early medieval settlement and industrial evidence in coastal and riverine locations. Some of these sites are clearly associated with shell middens situated along the dunes at the edge of the sea shore (O’Sullivan & Breen 2007, 116). There is currently a lack of understanding about the character and role of these coastal habitation sites as they were used by the people “outside history” (O’Sullivan 8 Breen 2007, 116). Excavations in recent years have examined a number of shell middens and have found that many contain early medieval evidence often in the form of surfaces, hearths, middens and occasionally structures. These attest to the continued economic and social importance of the coast in the well­being of many communities on this island.

105

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

EMAP survey and excavations of early medieval shell middens, 1970­2002 The EMAP survey has recorded 27 sites that have revealed shell middens within its database. All these sites were located in some proximity to coast or river. The majority of these middens are undated and some are likely not to be early medieval in date. A coastal habitation site was excavated at shell and Rabbit Valley, Ballybunion, Co. Kerry. Excavations exposed extensive shell middens in the former valley while a stone pavement, hearth and line of stakeholes was discovered at the latter. The author suggested that the former might have been associated with the nearby early medieval monastery while the latter could date to the Iron Age/early medieval period (Adelaide McCarthy 1986, Excavations Bulletin). Two early medieval sites were also examined at Doonloughan shore, Ballyconneely, Co. Galway as part of a QUB research project (Finbar McCormick & Emily Murray 1997, Excavations Bulletin­ 97E0197). The first site was dated to AD 723­889. An eroding horizon of interwoven charred wood and straw was identified and was suggestive of a wickerwork structure nearby. Two pits containing a vertical burnt post were also uncovered. An unidentifiable oxidised iron object and a copper penannular brooch were discovered. The second site was an incomplete circular stone hut. A broken blue glass bead, two worked bone pins, broken blue bead and fish bone were recovered. Broken dog whelp shells were also discovered suggesting the production of purple dye at the site. Excavations in the townlands of Truska, Manninmore and Manninbeg at False Bay to the northwest of Ballyconneely revealed further shell middens which predominantly dated to the Bronze Age although some examples did date to later (potential early medieval) periods (Finbar McCormick 1992, Excavations Bulletin). Early medieval shell midden excavations include a site at Grange West, Carrowkeel, Co. Sligo that was excavated as part of a research project into the megalithic landscape (Goran Burenhult 1988, Excavations Bulletin). The site consisted of a platform site that was adjacent to the coast and returned a date of A.D. 790­900. It had an associated midden. Excavations were also undertaken on an early medieval midden at Minnis North, Co. Antrim as the site was in danger of being completely eroded away (D. Simpson & Malachy Conway 1991, Excavations Bulletin). An initial survey by Chris Lynn and Brian Williams yielded three early medieval pottery shards (two souterrain ware and one everted rim). The midden dated from the Neolithic to early medieval period. A weathered bone pin was found. The pelvis and legs of a female were also found. The skeleton produced a radiocarbon date of 1244 plus or minus b.p. (c. A.D. 681­826). The bone pin was not found associated with the skeleton although its type has been found in a number of sites including Lagore Crannog. An early medieval shell midden was excavated at Oughtymore, Co. Derry (Mallory and Woodman, 1984). The excavation revealed a huge quantity of shells, mammal bones, fish and bird bones as souterrain ware shards, two fragments of a decorated bone comb, a portion of an antler ring, an antler spindle whorl, one fragment of a blue glass bracelet and one fragment of a lignite bracelet. The midden was dated to 665 plus or minus 45. A number of other middens have been recorded in the Magilligan peninsula. A series of animal bone deriving from red deer in Lower Drummans nearby as also importantly associated with a 7th century A.D. peat horizon. An important early medieval coastal habitation site was excavated at Dooey, Co. Donegal (O’Riordain, B & Rynne 1961;Edwards 1990, 46; O’Sullivan & Breen 2007, 119). The earliest phase revealed habitation evidence and fireplaces. The site was the defined by a shallow curvilinear ditch. Iron objects, cast bronze brooches, pins and worked bone and antler were recovered in phase 3 suggesting that forging may have been taking place during this period. The site was reused as a burial ground in the eleventh century A.D. The site has been interpreted as the location place of a high status smith that may have been served as potential beach marked located along the North Atlantic sea­ways (O’Sullivan & Breen 2007, 119).

106

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

Homes of the Poor or Specialised Craftworking Sites? O’Sullivan & Breen (2007, 118) have noted that there can be a temptation to interpret these sites as the location place of the homes of the poor and landless. It has been noted by Emily Murray that early medieval shell middens tend to peak in the 7th century A.D. She has suggested that rising population during this period in which crannogs and ringforts were occupied may have forced some communities to the margins along the coast (O’Sullivan & Breen 2007, 118). It has also been noted that dog whelk is a frequent discovery at these sites such as Dooey, Co. Donegal and Doonloughan, Co. Galway supporting the idea that dye production may have an important function of these sites (O’Sullivan & Breen 2007, 119). It is clear however that other sites like Dooey which revealed extensive evidence for metalworking might indicate that some of these ‘marginal sites’ may have been indeed places of high status and some importance (O’Sullivan & Breen 2007, 119).

Early medieval occupation and use of caves
Background There is a large corpus of evidence to suggest that caves were used and inhabited either by the poor and socially marginalized, or on a seasonal basis for the undertaking of a range of agricultural, domestic or even ritual tasks. A survey of the artefactual evidence from caves was first undertaken by Coleman (1947). Early medieval artefacts were recovered from a number of sites including Kilgreany, Co. Waterford, Edenvale, Co. Clare, Keshcorran, Co. Sligo, Cushendall, Co. Sligo and potentially Carrigagour, Co. Cork. Excavations at a site at Carrigmurrish, Co. Waterford were undertaken on a cave beneath a limestone knoll that was crowned by a site described as a ’Bronze Age fort’ (ringfort?). Finds from the cave included combs, whorls, whetstones, jet and iron fragments. It is possible that they are early medieval. Excavations at a cave at Middleton by Coleman in 1943 also revealed an early medieval habitation layer. Charcoal and artefacts of bone, metal and stone were recorded. Bone spindle whorls, beads, pins, iron artefacts, needles and other domestic items were the principal objects recovered from these sites attesting to some form of early medieval activity at these sites. Excavations were also undertaken by Hallam Movies at Kilgreany Cave, Co. Waterford in 1928 and 1934 as part of the Harvard Archaeological Expedition to Ireland. The material discovered by Movius at Kilgreany was re­examined by Marion Dowd (2002). She revealed a sequence of activity from the Neolithic to post medieval period. Phase IV was represented by the early medieval period. Evidence for hearths, whetstones, spindle whorls, tanged iron knife, bone points, worked bone, rotary quern and a bone needle were recovered. A number of personal items including a bronze baluster­headed ringed pin, a bone pin with a decorated bead and a ringed pin, lignite bracelet and a double edged bone combs and an 11/12th century gaming piece was also found. Similar bone combs that can be dated from the 5­10th century A.D. were found in nearby caves at Carrigmurrish and Ballynameelagh. A possible 8th century bell­shrine fragment was also recovered. A large collection of periwinkle, cockle, mussel, oyster and scallop shells were found inside the cave that was situated 10km from the coast. It appears that this food was collected from the seas hore and consumed inside the cave. It was suggested by Dowd (2002) that the evidence was not indicative of a person of low status. She suggested that the presence of three hearths indicated that people were actually living in the cave on a seasonal basis in the early medieval period. The artefactual evidence suggests that a range of activities were undertaken at the site including the sharpening of tools, textile manufacture and food preparation. EMAP survey and excavated caves, 1970­2002 The EMAP survey has found only one definite cave sites excavated 1970­2002 which contained early medieval evidence. This was an important excavation was undertaken on a cave whose

107

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

entrance was situated inside a D­shaped enclosure at Cloghermore, Co. Kerry (Michael Connolly, Excavations Bulletin­99E0431). Large quantities of disarticulated human bone and animal bone as well as amber beads, ring­pins, spindle whorls, bone gaming pieces, iron fragments, worked bone, whetstones, pieces of bone combs and a loop headed ring pin were discovered. The disarticulated remains of a child and female were also discovered near the entrance inside the cave. It is possible that the D­shaped enclosure was contemporary with the early medieval occupation of the cave and that the latter was used as some for of souterrain in this period.

The enigma of early medieval settlement at the end of the period?
Background We know, or think we know, some basic things about phases in early medieval settlement. We know that we know little about the transitional Iron Age/early medieval period (5­7th centuries A.D.), although an increasing number of sites have been discovered from this period (particularly of early burials). The early medieval period between the sixth and the ninth centuries AD is probably one of the most researched phases, and we have a good understanding of the character and organisation of houses, dwellings, settlement enclosures (including ringforts and crannogs), churches and ecclesiastical sites and are relatively familiar with crafts and economy (i.e. a cattle­based economy with a social organisation based around reciprocity and clientship). However, between the tenth and the twelfth century, our knowledge about early medieval settlement and landscape is a bit more hazy. Although we have an excellent view of Hiberno­ Norse towns, our understanding of the rural Irish landscape is less clear – although it should be admitted that an increasing number of settlement enclosures have produced radiocarbon dated evidence from this period. Various archaeolgists and historians have suggested that there was a shift at about AD 800 from a social organization based around clientship to a system of labour services to a lord indicative of feudalism (e.g. O’Keeffe 2000, 26). It has also been suggested that many ringforts may have been abandoned due to actual population relocation within new territorial frameworks under lordship control (O’Keeffe 2000, 26). It has been noted by Graham (1993, 44) that ‘if the gestation of lordship, vassalage and the emergence of feudal polities were all characteristic features of Irish society in the period after c. 800, the evolution of the fortress must have been an inevitable corollary’. Where are these fortresses then? O’Keeffe (2000, 26­29) has hypothesed that a dispersed settlement pattern in the form of ringforts gave way to a pattern of nucleation around sites which are interchangeably mentioned in the historical sources in this latter period as caislean, longphort or dun. A number of potential sites such as Caistel Duin Leodha at Ballinasloe and Dun Echdach (Duneight), Co. Down and the English Mount, Downpatrick as well as pre­Norman fortification at Limerick and Dunamase and the destroyed fort at Dun Mor, Galway have been mooted as potential caislen sites. Both Duneight and Dun Mor existed as large flat­topped mounds the site at Donwpatrick consists of a raised central mound enclosed by a large bank. It is likely that some of these monuments like Duneight were remodeled by the Anglo­Norman period. These sites can be paralled with raised and platform ringforts. A large number of sites have been excavated in the northeast of the country where they are particularly prevalent. A number of these sites, as discussed above, were also re­used by the Anglo­Normans subsequently. It has been suggested that the interiors of these sites may have been raised to differentiate themselves from the conventional ringfort of the pre­feudal age (O’Keeffe 2000, 29). There is therefore a potential link between raised ringforts and the emergence of a ‘feudal society’ in this period. Kerr’s (1997) recent study has found that platform ringforts have a tendency to date to the mid­eighth to mid­tenth centuries A.D. which is slightly later than the dates proposed by Stout (1997) for the ‘typical’ ringfort. The evidence for the re­use of these monuments by the Anglo­Normans could also be used to indicate that these monuments may

108

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

have been constructed due to slightly different political and economic forces than the traditional ringfort. Kerr (2007) has used this evidence to further suggest that this slight shift may represent evidence for a shift from a cattle­based economy to an arable­orientated economy in the tenth to eleventh centuries A.D. He has argued that the emergence of an arable­orientated economy may have caused the decline of the ringfort, as there was no need to construct these monuments anymore. It could then be argued that there is a potential link between these political developments and the emergence of a new form of economy in the later early medieval period. The evidence for these theories is still very limited. Raised ringforts are monuments that are only predominantly found in the northern part of Ireland. This begs the question; how was feudal status displayed in areas where the raised and platform ringfort were absent? Equally there had been no archaeological identification of a nucleated caislen settlement thus far. It is however likely that unenclosed sites emerged as the principal form of settlement in this period – although recent development archaeology has definitely not uncovered evidence for large­scale, nucleated settlements. One problem with identifying unenclosed nucleated settlement sites belonging to this period is that many of the sites mentioned above are undated. A number of examples only exist and they include Blackhills Lower, Co. Cavan, and Kilkenny Castle as well the later open settlement at Knowth (see above). It has been noted by Clinton 2001, 204) that the souterrain appear to have survived the apparent decline of the ringfort and continued to be used into the early second millennium A.D. Souterrains have also been found to often date to the final phases of many ringforts and enclosure sites further supporting this notion. Previous surveys by (Buckley 1988), Clinton (2001, 45) as well as the EMAP survey has found that isolated souterrain sites often constituted over 50% of the total number of excavated sites. It is likely that souterrain can then be understood as an independent form of monument whose role was re­defined following the possible decline of enclosed settlements. Clinton (2001, 204) has noted that many souterrains in open settlement sites in eastern and northern counties were found associated with rectangular houses which Lynn (1978­ see below) has proposed dates for after the 9th century A.D. He has also suggested that these souterrains in open settlement sites may have also been linked to the growth of a tillage economy in this period. The EMAP survey has indicated that a number of open settlement sites have been found associated with souterrains further supporting this notion. It is clear that a lot of these theories need to be further examined – particularly in the light of a thorough review of excavated evidence in more recent years (i.e. 2003­2007). There is growing evidence to support the notion that unenclosed sites may have been the predominant form of settlement in this later period though the exact character of this – whether dispersed or nucleated ­ needs still to be established. The role of the souterrain in this period also needs to be appraised to further understand its links with unenclosed settlement in this period. An archaeology of pre­Norman feudalism also continues to elude us at present. Many theories have been advanced to support this proposition, yet it is not clear presently how we can locate evidence for these changes in social organization and settlement pattern. Discussion and areas for future research There is now a large corpus of evidence available for both enclosed and unenclosed early medieval rural settlement sites. Potential new sites have emerged in the archaeological record further highlighting the complicated and diverse nature of settlement across the island during this period. It is evident that we still do not have a clear picture about continuity and change in the settlement pattern and organization of rural society from A.D. 400­1170. One major issue is the extent of continuity and change in settlement between the Iron Age and early medieval period. Previously the Iron Age was viewed as a black hole in Irish archaeology though this is beginning to at last change due to development­led excavations in recent years. There is no strong evidence for continuity between ringforts and other non­circular shaped enclosures with that of the Iron Age. Can we potentially trace some form of continuity as

109

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

Limbert (1996) proposed or was the emergence of the ringfort and the non­circular shaped enclosure a product of other economic and agricultural forces in the 6/7th century A.D. as McCormick (1995) has proposed. There is also emerging evidence to suggest settlement/cemeteries may have originated in the Iron Age/Early Christian transition. While many may have originated in this period, we do not yet completely understand the chronological development of these sites. How were these sites re­used and remodelled over time; what was the extent of settlement and burial evidence at these sites and how did their function change during the early medieval period? Finally can we describe all these sites as ‘settlement/cemeteries’ and what was their relationship with ringforts and morphologically similar non­circular shaped enclosures! We have seen how non­circular shaped enclosures dating to the second half of the first millennium A.D. have been identified in increasing numbers within the archaeological record. It is still not completely clear if they can be described as a new settlement type with their own unique origin or if instead only represent a different way of building a rath or ringfort? It is evident that we may need to systematically re­evaluate and re­examine previous non­circular shaped enclosures which have been previously described as ringforts in the archaeological record to understand how prevalent these shaped sites are and do they exhibit a particular range of material­culture or convey any distinct preferences for topographical location. There is also an exciting body of evidence for unenclosed settlement in early medieval Ireland. A large corpus of sites include coastal, upland and rural unenclosed sites; highlighting the problems in restricting ourselves to constructing models of society based on enclosed sites like ringforts to interpret early medieval settlement landscapes. We then need to understand how people worked and exploited the upland, lowlands and coasts and to write about those marginal places and the people often neglected in the dominant narratives of early medieval settlement. We need to understand who lived in these places and what activities took place there. Is there wider evidence, for instance of communities living together either seasonally or annually in the uplands or even the coast? We also need to examine the extent of unenclosed rural settlement during the principal occupation of ringforts and other enclosed sites c. 600­900 A.D. to establish if they were indeed the homes of the servile or is something else going on? The final great unknown is what happened when ringforts and other enclosed settlement sites appear to have fallen out of use from the 10th century onwards? It has been suggested that there was a shift from a dispersed form of settlement based around ringfort towards a more nucleated form of social organization indicative of the emergence of a pseudo­feudal society from the 9/10th century onwards (O’Keeffe 2000, 26), but this remains a large theoretical proposal not particularly supported by the archaeological evidence. Did new pseudo­feudal defended sites develop in this period and what character did these places take archaeologically? Furthermore, what was the character of unenclosed settlement immediately prior to the coming of the Normans and is there evidence for continuity of enclosed sites in this period?

The archaeology of Viking settlement, AD 800­1200
Background The Vikings are first reported in the annals as making a violent appearance off the Irish coast in A.D. 795. From then till the late 12th century, they played a significant role in shaping the ethnic, political, economic, social and military development of Ireland. The peoples of Scandinavian origin that lived in the 9th and 10th century are generally known as Vikings while those who lived after in the 11/12th centuries have generally been given the description of the ‘Hiberno­Irish’ because they had gradually blended into the Irish political landscape and had converted from pagan to Christian burial and religious practices. In perhaps the single major contribution of archaeology to the modern Irish sense of identity, the last 20 years has seen the invention and widespread public dissemination of the concept of

110

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

Vikings in Ireland. Urban renewal developments, particularly in the 1980/1990’s have transformed our understanding of urban Viking/Hiberno­Norse settlement and burial practices in the towns of Dublin, Waterford, Cork, Limerick and Wexford. In recent years, excavations have also begun to throw up some interesting candidates for Viking rural settlements outside the major towns though the extent and character of Viking rural and coastal settlement is still something of a debate.

Viking Regions Urban Cork Urban Waterford Urban Wexford Urban Dublin Urban Limerick Burial Longport Dyflinarskiri Coastal Settlement Miscellaneous Total

Quantity 12 19 6 45 5 3 1 3 3 5 102

Table 35: Excavated Viking Sites 1970­2002

Excavated Viking Sites 1970-2002
Urban Wexford Urban Waterford Urban Limerick

Viking Region

Urban Dublin Urban Cork Miscellaneous Longport Dyflinarskiri Coastal Settlement Burial

0

10

20

30

40

50

Excavated Viking Sites

Figure 24: Excavated Viking Sites 1970­2002 Urban renewal developments have transformed our understanding of the origins, character and development of the five Viking towns in Ireland. They have revealed vast quantities of information about craftworking, woodworking, industry, trade and commerce, buildings, house

111

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

plots, town defences and waterfront revetments. We now have an emerging understanding about the environment, landscape and topography of the developing towns and their hinterlands. We also recognize the role that these towns played within as hubs of trade and commerce along the sea ways of Ireland in the later early medieval period. The reasons and motivations behind the location of Viking settlements is another area of current debate. It has been noted that many historically recorded 9th century Viking bases were situated on the border of political kingdoms and two examples include Linn Duachaill between the territories of the Conaille and Ciannachta and Dublin between Southern Brega and Laigin (O Floinn 1998, 162). These Viking bases would then have been suitably located to exploit the local political situation to their own benefit. O Floinn (1998, 163) has also noted that a number of bases including Ireland’s eye, Scattery Island, Clondalkin and Dublin itself appear to have been established on or adjacent to early medieval monasteries. He (1998, 164) has suggested that it is in this context that we should understand such archaeology as the Castledermott Hogsback and the runic inscriptions at Killaloe, Co. Clare. It has also been noted recently that Woodstown, Co. Waterford is likely to have been located on the site of a former early medieval monastery in the mid 9th century A.D. (O’Sullivan & Breen 2007, 120). Viking burials (See Burial Section) have also been discovered adjacent to a number of ecclesiastical sites including St. Michael le Pole’s and St. Peter’s in Dublin city centre, Finglas, north Co. Dublin and St. John’s Point, Co. Down. This evidence throws up interesting ideas about the interaction and relationship between pagan 9/10th century Vikings and the local church authorities as well as the possible presence of a large lay population around these sites. EMAP and Viking raiding periods: the archaeology of the early Viking Longphort The longphort is generally viewed as the earliest form of Viking settlement. The term was first used to describe a Viking defended ship encampment on Lough Neagh in A.D. 840 (Kelly 1998, 13). It has been typically interpreted as a fortified base, often located oat the confluence of a river and its tributary, from which the Vikings carried out raids into the neighbouring territories (O Floinn 1998, 161). A number of these sites are historically recorded in the annals in the 9th and 10th centuries A.D at Annagassan, Co. Louth, Inbher Dee (Wicklow or Arklow town), Lough Neagh, Linn Duachaill, Co. Dublin, Narrow Water and Strangford Lough, Co. Down, Lough Ree on the Shannon and at the subsequent Hiberno­Norse towns of Cork and Limerick (O Floinn 1998, 162). Kelly and Mass (1995) have further argued that a D­shaped enclosure at Dunrally, Co. Laois on the banks of the River Barrow can be identified as Longphort Rothlaib, the camp of Rodolf, which was destroyed in A.D. 860. Kelly and O’Donovan (1998, 13) have suggested that Athlunkard, Co. Limerick can be identified as the site of a Longport due to the discovery of finds from the site and nearby which included a silver weight, spearhead and spear butt. Excavations were undertaken at another potential site at Ballaghkeeran Little, Co. Westmeath on the bank of Lough Ree as the Vikings are historically recorded as establishing a defended encampment in the area in the mid­9th­early 10th century (Fanning 1980­84, Excavations Bulletin). The earth had been considerably disturbed by subsequent ridge and furrow cultivation. The eastern bank proved to be substantial upon excavation. Some iron slag and fired clay fragments were found in a cutting made directly south of the promontory in a large banked­up hollow beside the mouth of the River Breensford. In recent years, excavations have revealed an important Viking longphort at Woodstown, Co. Waterford where a Viking burial, weaponry, decorated weights, sliver ingots and other objects were found inside a defended enclosure along the River Suir. A coastal enclosed site situated on a promontory with potential Viking associations was excavated at Shandon, Dungarvan, Co. Waterford (Deirdre Murphy & Stuart Elder 2000, Excavations Bulletin­ 00E0442; Emer Dennehy 2001, Excavations Bulletin­ 01E0327). It was rectangular in shape and measured 90mx40m. A fine Hiberno­Norse trial bone motif piece was

112

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

discovered during quarrying in the area in the past leading to speculation that it was the site of a Viking base. Several hearths and a large number of pits containing animal and fish bone in the interior as well as potential middens were identified. Six oval charcoal pits and an ironworking area with evidence for iron smelting outside the enclosure were excavated. A further line of the rectilinear ditch was excavated and revealed a narrow slot­trench along the inner edge of the ditch, which could possibly indicate a palisade. Finds recovered included iron pins and a coper ingot. The report writer concluded that this site was intermittently visited for fishing during prehistory before becoming an established settlement during the 10/11th century A.D. It was suggested that the site might have been used by the Vikings due to the discovery of a Hiberno­Norse coin, 10th century trial bone Hiberno­Norse motif, several iron knives and the proximal end of a whale humerus at the site. It must be said that our knowledge is still very scant about this site type. Gibbons (2004, 23) has highlighted how the archaeological evidence for these settlements is still very slim and not enough is known yet about their character, use and form in the 9th and 10th centuries A.D. Gibbons (2005) has also challenged the identification of Athlunkard as the site of a Viking longphort as he feels that there is no strong place name or archaeological evidence to yet make such an association. It is then evident that there is still a clear lack of understanding – and certainly of agreement ­ about the role, function and character of ninth century Viking defended ship encampments or longphoirt. EMAP and the archaeology of the Viking/Hiberno­Norse Towns The EMAP survey of excavations 1970­2002 has found that both excavated ‘settlement’ and ‘ecclesiastical sites’ from the five major Viking towns amounted to 86% (88/102) of Viking­ defined sites across the country (See Appendix). This percent illustrates the undoubted significance of these towns in early medieval Ireland. It is still not clear whether it is also a product of the large­scale urban excavation projects or represents a reality of the density and distribution of Viking settlement island wide in the early medieval period. The scale and quality of Viking evidence in this area at Dublin surpasses that of all the other towns. It constitutes 45/102 or 44% of excavations across the country. Viking/Hiberno­Norse town defences EMAP also undertook a survey of the Viking/Hiberno­Norse town defences and embankments, which were excavated from 1970­2002. Both Dublin and Waterford have revealed evidence for successive phases of substantial defences/waterfronts. An undated ditch was excavated at Wexford while a 12th century bank was also revealed in Limerick. Table 36 and Figure 25 illustrate the results.

Table 36: Excavated Viking Town Defences 1970­2002
Hiberno­Norse defences Wexford Ditch Limerick Bank (12th cent.) Waterford Ditch1 (Dundory) Waterford Bank2 (late 11th) Waterford Wall3 (c.1100) Waterford Bank4 (c.1150) Dublin Bank1 (c.850­925) Dublin Bank2 (10th cent.) Dublin Bank 3 (c.1000) Dublin Wall4 (c.1100) Dublin Ditch/waterfront EMAP Site 1 1 1 4 3 4 2 7 7 6 4 Quantity 1 2 2 5 4 5 3 9 8 8 5 113

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

Excavated Viking Town Banks/Ditches 1970-2002
Wexford Ditch Waterford Wall 3 (c.1100) Waterford Ditch 1 (Dundory)

Quantity EMAP Site

Town Defences

Waterford Bank 4 (c.1150) Waterford Bank 2 (late 11th) Limerick Bank (12th cent.) Dublin Wall 4 (c.1100) Dublin Ditch/waterfront Dublin Bank 2 (10th cent.) Dublin Bank 1 (c.850-925) Dublin Bank 3 (c.1000)

0

2

4

6

8

10

Number of EMAP Sites and Excavated Town Defences
Figure 25: Excavated Viking Town Defences 1970­2002

There is still a whole range of research topics concerning the Viking/Hiberno­Norse towns including the character, shape and development of theses settlements. Did these settlements evolve from early longphort sites and what was the extent of urbanization in the 9th century A.D.! How did the character of these urban centres evolve from the 9­12th century A.D. and what was their relationship with the rural hinterlands. Finally, what is the size and extent of urban settlement at Dublin in comparison to other Viking/Hiberno­Norse towns? These research themes will be the focus of the future studies of EMAP. Viking rural settlements and the archaeology of Dyflinaskiri The Vikings established a raiding base at Duib Linn about A.D. 841 but it was not long until they were exerting their authority across the regional landscape that would later become known as Dyflinaksiri in the historical sources. Bradley (1998, 56­65) has examined the place­name evidence in the environs of Dublin to reconstruct the potential size and scale of the region. He has argued that by the twelfth century this Viking controlled area comprised all of county Dublin and parts of Wicklow, north Wexford and Kildare. Historical evidence supports the idea that the Vikings did establish or more often take over settlements across this region. The Annals of Ulster report an outlying Viking settlements and at Clondalkin in A.D. 867. Therefore both historical evidence and place­name evidence has been primarily used to interpret Scandinavian rural settlement across the region. The scope of Viking/Hiberno­Norse regional influence is however still a matter of debate and is likely to have fluctuated over time due to different political and military developments. The character of Viking/Hiberno­Norse settlement in this region outside Dublin is also still highly circumspect and not enough is known yet to reconstruct Scandinavian settlement patterns or their interaction with the local Gaelic communities.

114

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

There is scant but nevertheless emerging archaeological evidence for some form of Scandinavian rural settlement in the region. Excavations at Ninch, Laytown, Co. Meath (James Eogan & Martin Reid; Cia McConway 2000, 2001 & 2002, Excavations Bulletin­ 98E0501) revealed a highly complex multi­phase settlement dating from the fourth to twelfth century A.D (See Settlement/Cemetery Section). The last phase saw the construction of a series of sub­ rectangular enclosures in the southern half of the site. A stave built bucket, coarse pottery, jet bracelet and two ring­pins were recovered. A ring­pin with Viking Dublin parallels was also recovered dating to the late 10th/early 11th century A.D. The writer suggested that these rectangular enclosures were not indigenous and might reflect Viking influences (McConway 2001, Excavations Bulletin). A further potential rural Viking settlement was discovered at Cherrywood, Co. Dublin (O’ Neill 1999). The second phase consisted of possible Viking long houses, two accompanying structures and a number of pits built inside an earlier ring­ditched enclosure which contained a 6/7th century A.D. inhumation cemetery. A rectangular pit was found associated with these two structures and contained a decorated whalebone plaque that has been found associated with Viking women in Ireland in the ninth/tenth centuries. The form of the buildings as well as the artefactual evidence would suggest that this site may have been the location of a rural Viking settlement. It is instructive to note that both the potential settlements at Cherrywood and Ninch were located on previous important early medieval cemeteries with associated settlement evidence. Other potential Viking settlements sites include Brownsbarn, west of Tallaght in Co. Dublin where a partial investigation uncovered a Viking bone comb dating to the ninth/tenth century A.D (Bradley 1995, 12) and Feltrim Hill, Co. Dublin where an enclosed site revealed a number of paved areas and a hearth. Viking Age bronze stick pins were among the finds (Bradley 1995, 12). A potential site at Cooldrinagh, Leixlip (Lex hLaup, trans. ‘Salmon Leap’), Co. Dublin has also been identified as a potential Viking site. Excavations were undertaken on a mound at Cooldrinagh by Clare Mullin (1995, Excavations Bulletin­ 95E039) in advance of the upgrade at the Leixlip River Liffey Water treatment plant. A copper­alloy spiral­ringed pin and copper­alloy brooch pin was also found at the summit and edge of this potential prehistoric monument. The assertion for Scandinavian rural settlement is then highly circumspect and often based on very tentative evidence. Perhaps the best indicators for Scandinavian influence across the rural countryside can be found in the distribution of Viking coin and bullion hoards indicating interaction between the two groups of people while a group of grave­markers known as the ‘Rathdown slab’s in South Co. Dublin is still conceivably the best evidence for regional Viking settlement within Dyflinaskiri. Viking Age rural miscellaneous finds 1970­2002 The majority of evidence for Viking activity across the island is attested through the discovery of stray find objects. Whether this can be construed as evidence for Viking rural activity or were instead the products of trade or stray­finds is still open to debate. The vast majority of these finds have been recorded in the topographical files in the National Museums. Excavations from 1970­2002 have also uncovered a number of other examples potentially indicative of Viking activity or trade across the country. Excavations and underwater diving from 1970­2002 have been responsible for discovering a range of Viking­related archaeological items. River dredging at Shanmullagh, Co. Armagh in 1990 uncovered 10th century Viking hoard and an underwater dive was undertaken in 1992 and 1993 to recover other associated items (Cormac Bourke 1992 & 1993, Excavations Bulletin). Further Viking and ecclesiastical items were uncovered. Bourke (1992) suggested that the whole assemblage represented the stock­in­trade of a 9th century A.D. Hiberno­Viking metalworker, perhaps derived in part from the treasury of Armagh, only some 10km from the findspot. A ford is also located close by. River dredging along the Bann at Ferrystown, Gortgole,

115

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

Co. Antrim also required an underwater rescue dive in which Hiberno­Norse ring­money was recovered (Bourke 1995, Excavations Bulletin). A number of Viking age stick pins and a coin (c.1035), minted in London for King Cnut was discovered during the Limerick Main Drainage Scheme adjacent to Broad Street and George’s Quay (Edmond O’Donovan 1999, Excavations Bulletin­ 98E0581). A possible Viking axe was discovered during underwater diving at Coreen Ford, Co. Roscommon (Kelly 1989, Excavations Bulletin). A seventh to eighth century iron sword, an iron spearhead of about the same date and a possible tenth century Viking axe were discovered during underwater diving at Kellysgrove Ford, Co. Galway. The ford may have been linked to a togher or road that ran towards the early medieval monastery of Clontuskert. (Eamonn Kelly 1991, Excavations Bulletin­ E611). Other potential Viking/Hiberno­Norse coastal settlements A number of potential unenclosed Viking sites have been discovered along the south and southeast coast. Erin Gibbons and Eamonn Kelly have recently excavated a sunken rectangular stone­built house overlooking False Bay near the location of some Bronze Age and early medieval shell middens (Gibbon & Kelly 2003, 63; O’Sullivan & Breen 2007, 121). The house had a hearth that contained animal and fish bone and a tenth century double­sided antler comb discovered at the site could be interpreted as Hiberno­Norse in style. The house was abandoned during the third phase. Two burials were found buried outside the house shortly after in the ninth century A.D. They were laid with their heads to the west; a tradition not found in Christian graves (O’Sullivan & Breen 2007, 121). A further example of a potential Scandinavian unenclosed coastal settlement can be found at Beginish, Co. Kerry. A large unenclosed site contained at least 8 stone houses which were used over two phases as well as an associated field system was excavated at Bray Head in the 1990’s (O’Kelly 1956; O’Sullivan & Breen 2007, 122). One sunken round house belonging to Phase 2 revealed a stone­lined passageway in which a lintel was found to have a runic inscription. A steatite (soapstone) bowl, Hiberno­Norse ringed pins and the rune­inscribed lintel stone suggest Scandinavian influences. Sheehan et al (2001) have speculated that the site may have been used as a way station for mariners sailing from Hiberno­Norse Cork to Limerick in the later part of the early medieval period. The place­name of Smerwick Bay has been suggested as meaning ‘Butter Bay’ in Old Norse and many attest to further Viking associations with the southwest coast – although again there are alternative interpretations (Edwards 1990, 191). Excavations were undertaken at an early medieval cashel at Rinnaraw, situated on the western side of Sheephaven Bay Co. Donegal (Thomas Fanning 1987­92, Excavations Bulletin). The central stone­built house dating to around the ninth century was compared by Fanning to similar Scandinavian examples with rounded external corners at the Orkney Islands (Comber 2006). Both the historical sources and further ninth century Scandinavian stray­find objects in the general area support the idea that the northwest coast was an area of importance to this maritime people, but again Rinnaraw could be an Irish settlement whose inhabitants were simple participating in the traditions and ideas of the Atlantic seaways of Ireland and Scotland. Excavations at the promontory fort at Dalkey Island off the Dublin coast have recovered Viking age finds suggesting that the site was re­used in the period. Bradley (1995, 12) has suggested that the site may have operated as a detention camp for slaves. Conclusion and Areas of Research We now have a great understanding of the character and physical appearance of urban Viking/Hiberno­Norse towns in Ireland, largely due to the work of such leading scholars as Pat Wallace and Linzi Simpson in Dublin and Maurice Hurley in Waterford and Cork, amongst others. By c. A.D. 914, Viking towns were being established around the coast that served as trading and settlement centres ­ Dublin, Wexford, Waterford, Cork and Limerick all owe their origins to this period. In the tenth and eleventh century, these towns became the centre of their activity

116

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

involving international trade and politics. By this stage, Hiberno­Norse were increasingly assimilated into Irish society, and the Ostmen (as they called themselves) were very much part of the Irish political scene. The archaeology of Scandinavian and Hiberno­Norse settlement in the tenth and eleventh century is still largely understood in terms of the development of these towns, as might be expected given the quality of archaeological information being produced by recent excavations in Waterford, Wexford, Cork and Dublin. Traditionally, it is believed that the Vikings founded the town of Dublin (although there were almost certainly native Irish church settlements already there). The Irish annals state that in AD 841, a Viking fleet was present at Duib linn and a longphort was established to raid Leinster and Meath. This longphort was probably a defended enclosure on the river bank, used as a permanent trading base. It was either located on the River Liffey near Islandbridge­Kilmainham (e.g. Viking burials found there in the 19th century and the 1930s imply at least the use of native Irish cemetaries) or was somewhere north of the present location of Dublin castle. Recent archaeological excavations in Dublin have uncovered burials of probable Viking raiders, perhaps even dating to well before the historically attested longphort. Other excavations in Temple Bar have also located Viking type dwellings dated to ninth century that may represent the longphort settlement itself. In any case, in AD 902, that earliest Viking settlement was apparently sacked by the Irish kings of Brega and Leinster and its inhabitants (or at least the political elite of the settlement) expelled, whence they went to northern England and the Isle of Man. In AD 917, these Norse settlers returned and established the town of Dyflin proper, probably at Duib Linn, somewhere at the confluence of the River Liffey and the Poddle, near Temple Bar. This was an ideal location for a settlement, on high ground overlooking the River Liffey, protected from the south­east by Poddle. It also had access to the river for boats. Although initially located at the east, the town gradually expanded westwards along High Street, so that by the eleventh century it was a large thriving urban settlement, with streets and houses inhabited by a large, ethnically mixed population of traders, craftsmen and slaves. What was the Hiberno­Norse town on the Liffey estuary like? We know it was enclosed within a large earthen bank, topped with post and wattle fence. We have good archaeological evidence for houses, streets and plot boundaries, which suggest that the town was laid out in an organised if cramped fashion, following the contours of the hill. At Fishamble Street, twelve tenement plots can be traced more or less constantly across time, with the occupation of at least 150 different houses over 150 years. These houses were probably owned by individuals, but the evidence suggests that the town was laid out according to the instructions of a central regulating authority. Hiberno­Norse Dublin’s houses were entered from the street, each had vegetable plots, gardens and midden spaces out the back. Other structures included pig pens, workshops and storehouses. The town was a major centre for craft production, with such raw materials as wood, leather, bone, antler, amber and metals used for domestic equipment and high­status goods. In terms of economy, it is likely that the townspeople were largely self­ sufficient, raising pigs and goats, while beef cattle, agricultural produce and raw materials were brought in from the surrounding countryside. There is also evidence that the people of Hiberno­Norse Dublin, Cork and Waterford consumed a lot of fish and shellfish – perhaps more than the native Irish. Indeed, recent stable isotope analyses of some early medieval human skeletons hints at an increased marine diet in Ireland in the Viking Age and Anglo­Norman periods. This is also suggested by the archaeological evidence for the increase in use of early medieval wooden fishtraps on the Shannon estuary and Strangford Lough (and elsewhere around the coastline of Britain) after about AD 1000. At Hiberno­Norse Dublin, fishing was clearly important, as lead line­weights, wooden net­floats and stone sinkers found in excavations indicate fishing using lines and nets from both the shoreline and offshore in boats. Margaret McCarthy’s archaeozoological studies of deposits from Dublin, Waterford and Cork confirms this focus on marine species, with bones from hake, cod, ling, plaice and herring all known from these towns. Undoubtedly too, there were wooden fishtraps situated along the banks of the river. It is also likely that the Vikings were involved in

117

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

hunting marine mammals, such as porpoise, whales and seals. Indeed, an iron harpoon head found at Fishamble Street was probably used for this purpose. Wildfowl such as teal, duck and mallard were also trapped in the estuarine marshlands. Hiberno­Norse Dublin was a town located on an estuary, and the river frontage provided access to boats bringing in people and goods from distant lands. Burials were also placed in barrows on the edge of the marshes, particularly along the southern bank. Indeed, one of the earliest cemeteries was located upstream at Kilmainham­Islandbridge, where during the ninth century, some of the inhabitants of the original longphort were buried. What is not as clear is the character of Viking rural settlement. There is some form of consensus that the longphort was the primary form of defended ship enclosure used by the Scandinavian to establish a foothold in the Irish countryside during the 9th and early 10th century A.D. The archaeological identification of these sites however remains highly debated. The best evidence for ninth century Viking rural evidence are the few Norse burials on the northeast, west and southwest Irish coastline (Bradley 1995, 10). There is no definite evidence for Scandinavian rural settlement within Dyflinaskiri with the possible exception of Cherrywood, Co. Dublin. It is clear that the discovery of a Viking stray­find in rural Ireland cannot be directly equated with evidence for Viking settlement as this material­culture can also be a product of trade or imitation on the part of the Gaelic Irish. It is also still not clear what role the Scandinavian towns played within the Irish countryside or how and what criteria should be used to identify a Viking settlement outside the urban towns. Evidence for Scandinavian settlement along the west and south coast is also beginning to emerge in the archaeological evidence and indicates the importance and role of the seaways and rivers in Viking interaction and movement around and through the Irish countryside. Sheehan (2001) has speculated that Beginish Island may have been used as a station for marines sailing from Hiberno­Norse Cork to Hiberno­Norse Limerick in the later part of the early medieval period. Similarly bases along the northwest coast at Rinnarraw potentially may have been used for mariners sailing from Scandinavia to the southwest coast of Ireland.

Early medieval buildings
Background Early medieval buildings are key artefacts, as they provide significant information on domestic life, crafts and industry, as well as the social and ideological understanding and role of space (O’Sullivan 2006). In early medieval Ireland, houses were hugely significant places in people’s daily lives. They were the places where the household slept, ate food, gathered for social occasions and extended hospitality to their wider kin and neighbours. At times of the day and during the darkness of night, people would have gathered there to prepare food, to carve bone and wood and embroider textiles, or simply to while away the hours around the fire, listening to songs and stories about past times. Indeed, it could be suggested that houses were the places where early medieval social identities were created – as children were socialized, through their observation of the ways of the household, into an understanding of their own place in the world and how their society worked. Early medieval houses and dwellings should be seen then as key venues for the enactment or performance of social identities of ethnicity, social status, gender, kinship and community. O’Sullivan (2006) has explored how these people built, dwelled within and thought about houses and how in particular they might have used the house, and the objects within it, to build their distinctive social worlds. A range of multidisciplinary sources can be used to reconstruct the character and use of houses in early medieval Ireland. There is particularly good archaeological evidence for houses in this period, particularly between the seventh and the tenth century AD (in contrast with both the Iron Age and the later medieval period). Chris Lynn’s (1978, 1994) studies have developed a good understanding of their architectural development in terms of their shape, size, building materials and the organization of internal features. Archaeological excavations have uncovered evidence for several hundred examples in early medieval ringforts, crannogs and other sites.

118

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

Urban archaeological excavations – particularly those by Pat Wallace (1992) on Fishamble Street and Maurice Hurley’s publications on Waterford and Cork ­ have also led to an unsurpassed understanding of the form of houses from Hiberno­Norse Dublin, Wexford and Waterford, with waterlogged conditions leading to intact floors, benches, beds, doorways and porches. This physical or material culture evidence for house shape and size, for construction materials, floors, hearths, storage and domestic occupation can be used to enable a reconstruction of cultural norms and daily life and practice within actual early medieval houses. A growing corpus of excavated early medieval buildings is now present within the archaeological record. Rural round and rectangular buildings have been the traditionally revealed at ringfort excavations. In more recent years, there has been a massive increase in evidence for Viking/Hiberno­norse structures within the towns. The buildings are listed in appendix. 4 EMAP and early medieval rural buildings

Previous research Both round and rectangular buildings were a feature of early medieval rural buildings. Round houses were the most common form of building in the early medieval period till rectilinear buildings began to emerge in importance during the 10th century A.D. (Lynn 1978, 37; Lynn 1994, 83). Lynn (1978, 32) has cited a number of examples in which round houses were succeeded by rectangular buildings including Carraig Aille II, Co. Limerick, Church Island, Valencia, Co. Kerry, Cush, Co. Limerick, Dunsilly, Co. Antrim, Lecanabuaile, Co. Kerry, Nendrum, Co. Down and Rathmullan, Co. Down to bolster his argument. He noted that the early round houses were usually built using wicker or post and wattle and had an average diameter of 6m (Lynn 1978, 91). Lynn’s observation that round houses had a tendency to be associated with enclosed settlements spurred him onto claim that sites like ringforts were not likely to have been occupied at the end of the early medieval period; a claim that has been supported by Stout’s (1997) radiocarbon dating of this monument. Round houses then tended to occupy central positions within enclosed settlements. Rectilinear houses, typically measuring between 6­8m and constructed with drystone and/or turf lower walling, emerged as the dominant form of building by the end of the 10th century A.D (Lynn 1978, 85). Rectilinear buildings tended to also occur in early medieval settlement sites like ringforts, but it was often able to prove that they were preceded by an earlier phase of circular buildings (Lynn 1994, 92). They appear to date to the final use of enclosed settlements in the 10/11th century A.D. EMAP rural building survey In 1978, Lynn suggested that there were over 160 early medieval rural houses and structures recorded (Lynn 1978, 29). Many of these sites could be identified by annular gullies, circles of close­set stake­holes or a scatter of posts and stake­holes with perhaps an associated hearth and occupation area. He further increased this figure in a publication in 1994 suggesting that there were approximately 250 ground­plans comprehensively recorded up to 1986 with some further updating till the time of publication of the article (Lynn 1994, 81).
EMAP also undertook a survey of the amount, shape and form of early medieval buildings excavated between 1970­2002. The results are very provisional and should be treated very cautiously as the bulletin reports often failed to give information about the date, shape or construction methods used. This quality of information will have to be established at a later date in the EMAP project when excavation reports will hopefully be consulted. EMAP established that approximately 480 early medieval buildings/structures were excavated from 1970­2002. It could be suggested that there approximately over 500 ground­plans of early medieval buildings/structures have been excavated when we take into account those excavations that predated 1970 as well as those buildings listed in the EMAP database which will eventually prove not to be early medieval in date. It must be emphasised again that these are provisional results.

119

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

Early medieval rural buildings – form and character As bulletin reports were often written while excavations were in progress, it was not always possible to give information about detailed information about the buildings. It is very early days in beginning to synthesis the figures, particularly as the results are based on partial and incomplete evidence. The table and graph below illustrates the figures for the total approximate amounts from different excavated types of buildings. The vast majority of these wooden buildings were post and wattle structures. It is difficult to establish if sill beam structures were constructed in rural Ireland in the early medieval period. Preservation in rural contexts is unlikely to have been as good as that which occurs in the Viking towns such as Dublin and Waterford where evidence of sill beam structures survive. One possible example of a sill beam structure was excavated recently at a settlement/cemetery site at Balriggan. (http://www.nra.ie/Archaeology/LeafletandPosterSeries/file,3409,en.pdf). It is evident that further research will be required for these forms of buildings.
A number of sod and stone walled structures were also excavated. These structures were contained of drystone and/or turf lower walling. The figures for these structures are preliminary and represent a work in progress. It is evident that no major distinction can be made between a stone or sod walled structure as both materials can be used in the construction of these buildings. While these figures are provisional, it does not appear that these forms of buildings were as popular as post­built structures in the early medieval period.

Building Type Possible Building Building Post and Wattle/Wooden Sod Walled Building Stone Building Clochan Total

No of Exc. License 39 39 95 7 33 12 ­

No. of Sites 37 38 78 5 26 10 ­

Total No. Buildings 81 101 221 12 51 14 481

Total Definite 25 53 171 12 51 16 329

Total Approximate 56 48 50 0 0 0 154

Table 37: Excavated Rural Buildings 1970­2002

120

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

Excavated Rural Buildings 1970-2002
Clochan

Total No. Buildings No. of Sites

Rural Building Type

Stone Building

Sod Walled Building Post & Wattle/Wooden Building

Possible Building

0

50

100

150

200

250

Number of EMAP Sites and Excavated Buildings
Figure 26: Excavated Rural Buildings 1970­2002

Early medieval rural buildings shape Lynn (1978 & 1994) has examined the evidence for round and rectilinear shaped houses in great detail. It is not necessary to give examine this evidence in detail. It is evident that that the figure above are very provisional. Only a cursory review of some of the details and findings are thus outlined below.
Excavations at Ballynacarriga, Co. Cork revealed that a large circular stake hole structure was replaced by a later rectangular structure (Daniel Noonan 2001, Excavations Bulletin­ 01E0224). A large mound­like feature 45.2m in diameter was excavated at British & Seacash, Co. Antrim (Norman Crothers 1998, Excavations Bulletin) and is likely to represent a platform ringfort. Three phases were revealed. The first phase revealed post and stake­hole indicative of a wooden building while the last phase exposed souterrain ware and stone wall footings. The first two phases of occupation at Rathmullan were associated with circular houses while rectangular buildings were constructed in phase 3 & 4 (Lynn 1981­2, 65). Excavations at a cashel at Loher (O’Flaherty 1986, Excavations Bulletin­ E840) also revealed that two early circular wooden buildings were succeeded by a rectangular structure. Approximately 7 round houses and 5 rectangular stone built houses were excavated during a number of seasons of excavation at Bray Head, Valentia, Co. Kerry (Alan Hayden 1993, Excavations Bulletin­ 93E0121, 94E119, 97E278 & 01E0814;Claire Walsh 95E166, Excavations Bulletin). Charcoal from a hearth inside a circular hut (3.5m in diameter) was dated to the late 8/early 9th centuries A.D. One large, rectangular, drystone­walled house was radiocarbon dated to the later 9th to early 11th century. Excavations beneath Kilkenny castle revealed a 12th century sod built structure with associated industrial evidence. These examples serve to support Lynn’s assertions that round post and wattle buildings are often found to predate rectangular stone or sod­walled structures. It must be said however, that while the survey discovered a large number of sites containing both rectangular and circular buildings, no information was given about the dating of these structures with the

121

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

consequence that it was not possible to establish a chronology of building types for the majority of sites. Figure of eight sites have been exposed during excavation at a number of secular and ecclesiastical sites. Excavations at Corrstown, Co. Derry revealed an enclosed settlement containing a figure of eight house, a souterrain, a corn­drying kiln, possible furnace area, pits, post holes and gullies (Malachy Conway 2001, Excavations Bulletin­ AE/01/82). Figure of eight structures have also been excavated at other enclosed ringforts and cashels at Deer Park Farms (Lynn 1987), Lisleagh 1 (Monk 1980­84, Excavations Bulletin­ E218), Cathair Fionnúrach, Ballynavenoor, Co. Kerry (Erin Gibbons 1994­97, Excavations Bulletin­ 94E005) and Newtown, Co. Limerick (Avril Hayes, Excavations Bulletin­ 00E0853) where a figure of eight building and another associated circular structure were discovered inside a large sub­triangular enclosure. Figure of eight buildings have also been excavated in a number of ecclesiastical contexts including Ballybrolly, Co. Armagh (Chris Lynn 1978 & 1979, Excavations Bulletin), Illaunloughan, Co. Kerry (Claire Walsh & Jenny White Marshall 1992­95, Excavations Bulletin­ 92E0087) and Caherlehillan, Co. Kerry (John Sheehan 1998, Excavations Bullletin­ 93E0073). Viking/Hiberno­Norse Buildings

Previous Surveys While early medieval ‘Gaelic’ rural circular and round houses have been excavated since the early 20th century, our knowledge about Viking/Hiberno­Norse buildings have only more recently come to light over the last thirty or so years during urban redevelopment projects. Since then a vast amount of buildings have been excavated, nearly all from within the urban towns of Dublin, Waterford, Cork, Limerick and Wexford. The preliminary EMAP survey has established that approximately 566 Viking buildings may have been excavated from across the island from 1970­2002 (See Appendix 4).
Murray (1983) was the first person to publish a corpus of a total number of excavated sites. She examined 58 buildings excavated before 1976 in Dublin city centre and established an initial classification for the structures. Wallace (1992) systematically reviewed the evidence and made the major statement on these buildings in their Irish and international contexts. Wallace (1992, 7) found that over 200 buildings had been excavated in Dublin from 1961­82 at the sites of Winetavern Street (13), St. John’s Lane (10), Fishamble Street (127), Christchurch Place (26) and High Street (19) and Dublin Castle (6).

EMAP Survey and Viking/Hiberno­Norse Buildings
A review of the EMAP provisional data now suggests that approximately 425 Viking buildings were excavated within the Hiberno­Norse area of Dublin from 1970­2002. Taking into account those building pre­dating 1970, a figure of approximately 440­450 could be suggested for the total number from 1961­2002. ! Approximately 106 buildings were excavated at Waterford. The majority were excavated during the large­scale redevelopments around Arundel Square and Peter Street in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s. Approximately 10­20 Viking buildings were finally excavated at Wexford at Bride Street as well as potentially at Barrack and St. George’s Street in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s. A slightly smaller figure of approximately 10­15 Viking buildings was excavated at Cork. The most fruitful excavations were on the South Island mostly from the later 1990’s till 2002. A figure of approximately 10 excavated buildings could be suggested for Limerick. Those that have revealed Viking habitation evidence were undertaken in the early 1990’s and were primarily around King John’s Castle.

!

!

!

122

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

The figures demonstrate over 75% of Viking building excavations have been undertaken in Dublin city centre. The results from the large­scale redevelopment undertaken in the heart of Viking Waterford also indicate that the other towns are also likely to have been intensively occupied during this period.

The character of Viking Type Buildings Murray (1983) was the first person to purpose a classification for Viking houses based on her corpus of 58 buildings in Dublin excavated before 1976. She suggested that the buildings should be classified based on the type of wall construction. Wallace (1982; 1992, 19) however suggested that the house form or plan of the buildings should be the principal mechanism used to establish a classification of buildings. Wallace (1992) analysed a large sample of buildings excavated from 1961­82 in Dublin city centre and suggested that the buildings could be divided into five principal types.
! Type 1 structures were the most common building that Wallace discovered in his survey of the Dublin evidence. They amounted to 67% of all the buildings examined by Wallace (1992, 17) in his survey. They were rectangular in plan usually with a doorway at each end and with a floor space divided into three strips which comprised a central nave flanked on either side by narrow bedding area. This type of building appears to have been used throughout the Viking period. Type 2 buildings were less common and sub­rectangular in plan. They were smaller than Type 1 buildings and did not contain three aisles or often formal hearths (Wallace 1992, 14). They were often found associated with Type 1 buildings. Less than 6% of Wallace’s surveys were Type 2 buildings. Type 3 class of building was created for shortened and slimmed down versions of the Type 1 building but which did not create evidence for threefold division (Wallace 1992, 16). They often contained a doorway at either end like the Type 1 building. Slightly more than 6% of Wallace’s types were classified as Type 3 buildings. Type 4 class buildings denote those sunken­floored buildings (SFS) which were generally rare in the Irish archaeological record. One example excavated at Winetavern Street was dug into a steep hillside and had an internal walling comprised of earthfast vertical planks (Wallace 1992, 17). Type 5 buildings dealt with those structures that could be described as small post and wattled huts often sub­rectangular in plan and contained no internal roof supports. Less than 5% of Wallace’s surveys were classified as Type 5. They were found in all levels of occupation. Type 6 buildings refer to Sill­Beam structures with load­bearing walls which appear to have been constructed from the early twelfth century onwards, particularly in Waterford. Type 7 refers to rectangular stone buildings found within Hiberno­norse towns. They have also only been found at Waterford and date to the mid twelfth century.

!

!

!

!

!

!

EMAP Viking Type building results This survey was adhered to the classification system purposed by Wallace (1982 & 1992). Buildings were described as ‘Viking Building’ when no information was given or could be established about the structures. Stave­built buildings whose type were not mentioned or could be established were classified as ‘Viking Stave­built Building’. It was often difficult to establish an accurate number for excavated Viking types at a site. Recourse was made to published material however when it was available. It is evident however that this survey was based on partial and incomplete evidence. These early results should then be treated very provisionally.

123

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

Viking Type 1 Buildings clearly predominate and comprise approximately 300 or so of the total number of excavated buildings. They have discovered elsewhere in Cork, Wexford and Waterford. Type 2, 3 & 5 buildings were found principally in Dublin, Waterford and Cork. Type 2 buildings comprised 33% of the total number of building found during the Waterford excavations from 1986­92 (Scully, 37). They constituted a small percentage of Wallace’s (1992) survey results. However, excavations at Essex Street West revealed a vast number of Viking buildings, a large portion of which were Type 1. It is likely then that the location of different political, economic and industrial activities effected the distribution and density of different building types across the towns. A small number of sunken­floored buildings have been discovered in the towns of Waterford, Limerick and Dublin. Four were excavated at Waterford and were dated to the late eleventh century A.D. (Scully 1997, 45). Similar structures have been excavated at King John’s Castle and date mainly to the twelfth century (Kenneth Wiggins 1990 & 1993­98, Excavations Bulletin­ 93E0082). One example was recorded at Werburgh Street, Dublin and was early eleventh century in date (Hayden 1994, Excavations Bulletin­ 94E025). They have been compared to ninth/tenth century examples from English towns but do not appear to have been a major feature of the architectural landscape of their Irish counterparts. Suggested sources for their origins include the native Irish souterrain, the Anglo­Saxon Grubenhauser tradition of England and parts of northern Europe and most likely the parallels in English towns (Walsh 1997, 52). With the exception of the tenth century Winetavern street example, most date to after A.D. 1100. The earliest houses from Cork, Waterford and Wexford principally date from the eleventh century A.D. Excavations in Dublin have revealed building dating from the ninth century A.D. and perhaps even earlier. We have a good understanding about the evolution of architectural styles in Dublin. It has been noted by Scully (1998, 37) that the mid­eleventh/early thirteenth century Viking/Hiberno­Norse type 1 buildings at Waterford can be compared to the Dublin examples which principally date to the tenth and eleventh centuries bolstering Wallace (1992, 11) argument that they all belong to a conservative tradition that continued to be used through the Viking period. The 12th century appears to have begun to see a change in architectural traditions. Excavations at Waterford and Cork have revealed evidence for 12th century sill­beam structures as wattle appears to have begun to have fallen out of use. The sill­beam structure is not a feature was not recorded from a review of the excavations evidence from 1970­2002 although it is likely that this type of construction was beginning to be employed during the 12th century. Stone­footed and walled buildings appear to have succeeded sill­beam structures in Waterford (Scully 1997, 39). They appear to date from the 12th century and continued to be constructed into the medieval period. One stone­walled example was excavated at Waterford which predated the coming of the Anglo­Normans. It is still not completely clear if stone was an important resource used for constructing buildings in the other town previous to the coming of the Anglo­Normans. An unusual early house was discovered at Copper Alley during the excavations at Temple Bar West (Linzi Simpson 1999). It was a rectangular structure measuring 7m long and 4.5m wide and consisted of a double row of large post holes with a hearth and side entrance (Simpson 1999, 9). It did not adhere to any of the Wallace’s Type building plans and has been compared to Anglo­Saxon houses in England dating to the late fifth/early sixth centuries A.D. Radiocarbon dates indicate a 68% probability of it belonging to between A.D. 780­890. If it does date to around A.D. 800, then it could represent evidence for potential Anglo­Saxon contacts that are occasionally apparent in burial practice, art and trade. It is unique to any other building in Ireland and its function and origin are still a matter of debate.

124

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

Viking Building Viking Building Viking Stave­Built Building Viking Type 1 Viking Type 2 Viking Type 3 Viking Sunken Floored Type 4 Viking Type 5 Viking Sill­Beam Type 6 Viking Stone Building Type 7 Anglo­Saxon Type Building

Exc. Lic 24 4 19 6 3 9 3 3 2 1 ­

Site 23 4 18 6 3 8 3 3 2 1 ­

Total No. 116 8 330 66 20 22 14 4 2 1 566

Total Definite 88 4 275 32 16 22 10 4 2 1 433

Total approx. 28 4 54 34 4 0 4 0 0 0 132

Table 38: Excavated Viking Buildings 1970­2002

Excavated Viking Building Types
Anglo-Saxon-type Building

Excavated Viking Building Type

Viking Stone Building Type 7 Viking Sill-Beam Type 6 Viking Type 5 Viking Sunken Floored Type 4 Viking Type 3 Viking Type 2 Viking Type 1 Viking Stave-Built Building Viking Building

Total Building No. Sites

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Number of Viking Building Types

Figure 27: Excavated Viking Town Buildings 1970­2002

Conclusions O’Sullivan (2006) provides the most recent synthesis and debate on the social and ideological organisation of houses and buildings in early medieval Ireland, and the following summary abstracts from this paper. For early medieval Ireland, Chris Lynn’s (1978, 1994) studies have shown that the earliest (between c. AD 500­800) house structures were usually roundhouses, constructed of stone or post­and­wattle walls, with wooden poles for joists and roofs of thatch of reed, turf or straw. Most were fairly small, typically 4­5m in diameter, although some were significantly larger, 6­ 10m in diameter. The enclosed house space was typically about 45m2, comprising a single small room. In terms of location, roundhouses tend to be located towards the centre of

125

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

enclosures. Both early Irish law and archaeology suggest that these sizes were closely related to social rank, so that both custom and law restricted an individual from building larger than a certain size. However, even the largest houses in early medieval Ireland were relatively small by contemporary European standards – despite the claims of the narrative literature, there is no archaeological evidence for massive longhouses as found in Anglo­Saxon England (e.g. Yeavering) or Viking Age Scandinavia (e.g. Borg in Lofoten). Neither is there evidence for use of concentric rings of internal roof supports to enable significantly larger houses (as is common on Iron Age British sites). In early medieval Ireland, people often chose instead to build a second circular structure and attach it to the larger house, to create a figure­of­eight shape. This backhouse or cúile may have been used as a kitchen, sleeping area or private or exclusive space. Lynn (1994) has identified a significant change from the use of roundhouses to rectilinear houses after about AD 800. Towards the end of the early medieval period (tenth to eleventh centuries AD), rectangular houses built in stone or turf were normal, and roundhouses became rare. Moreover, on most ringfort sites where there is clear dating evidence, roundhouses are actually replaced by rectangular structures. These rectangular houses were typically built in stone, earth or turf, with an average measurement of 6­8m in length. They were simply constructed; with low stone walls, lines of boulders, with internal wooden poles to support roof of reed, turf or straw. Rectangular houses are often paved. They also tend to be found closer to entrances and towards the sides of enclosures. The reasons for this transition in architectural styles from round houses to rectangular houses remain unclear and influences from the Irish church, from later Anglo­Saxon England and the Viking Age world are all possible. However, it is possible that this architectural shift relates to significant changes in early Irish society. At the time of this architectural transition (i.e. the eighth and ninth century AD), social changes included an increasing centralisation of power, an increased focus on smaller familial groups, more restrictive or individualistic land ownership practices. The ownership and use of a rectangular house, which could more easily be divided up into compartments and sections may have went hand­in­hand with changing ideas about personal status, wealth and emerging concepts of private and public space. Archaeological excavations in Dublin, Waterford and Wexford have also provided much evidence for houses in these towns between the tenth and the thirteenth centuries AD. In Hiberno­Norse Dublin, houses were usually located on the front end of long narrow plots, which originally seem to have stretched from the street frontage and occasionally back to the town defences. Each house was entered from the street, with a back or side exit into the plot out the back where there may have been vegetable gardens, pig pens, latrine buildings, workshops and storehouses. Each house also would have had a cess pit out the back. There were several different types of house in use in Hiberno­Norse Dublin and late Viking Age Waterford. Wallace’s Dublin Type 1 houses were the most common (comprising about 70% of all houses in Dublin). The origins of the Dublin Type 1 house is still a matter of debate. It may have evolved in Ireland before the tenth century, or it may be an insular version of the rectangular farmsteads found in Norse settlements in the Earldom of Orkney. In any case, it appears to be an ethnically distinctive house type that also influenced other Irish domestic architecture. There are broadly similar rectangular houses to the Dublin Type 1 house from rural Irish sites such as Knowth, Co. Meath; White Fort, Drumaroad, Co. Down, Antiville, Co. Antrim and most recently from Truska, Connemara, Co. Galway and from Cherrywood, Co. Dublin. The question of whether the latter two in particular are actually ethnically Viking, Norse or ‘Irish’ rural dwelling places remains an interesting if controversial topic. By the mid­twelfth century AD (in Waterford) and slightly later in Hiberno­Norse Dublin, there is a shift towards the use of rectangular houses constructed on sill­beams with earth­fast roof supports or to houses built of stone walls. By the mid­thirteenth century AD, fully­framed timber houses emerge. In the tenth­century AD, Dublin’s Hiberno­Norse houses were sub­rectangular in plan, with double entrances, aisled partitions and internal roof supports. They typically measured 7.5m by 5.5m; with walls up to 1.25 m high. The walls were of post­and­wattle, typically of ash, hazel and willow. The roofs were supported on four main posts arranged in a rectangle within the

126

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 4: Early Medieval Dwellings, Settlements and Landscapes

floor area. There were usually two opposed doors, located in the end walls, one giving access to the street, the other to buildings at the rear of the plot. Internally, the floor space was divided into three, with the central strip, sometimes paved or gravelled, being the broadest. The floors of the houses were also often covered with laid clay or post­and­wattle. A rectangular stone­lined fireplace was located in the centre. Along the side walls, two low benches were used both for sitting and sleeping. Sometimes corner areas near the doors were partitioned off to form a private space. The front and rear ‘porches’ are also occasionally distinguished by a separate area of flooring of clay or a distinct panel of wattle. Palaeoenvironmental studies of floor deposits of dung, hair, mosses, food remains, ash, and brushwood have revealed much of living conditions and practices. Social and cultural interpretations of these Norse buildings would attempt to trace the organization of domestic space in terms of household, ethnicity, kinship and gender. It should also be remembered that these Norse houses were occupied by people who believed in different gods and mythologies, who lived in a society structured differently to ‘native’ Irish society. Norse houses in Scandinavia, Iceland and Greenland do seem to be organized into ‘rooms’ that reflect social, cultural or symbolic spaces (living areas, sleeping rooms, working areas, rooms for animals). In Hiberno­Norse Dublin, there is a sense that the houses have social spaces of some sort. The front porches, often floored differently from the rest of the house (with clay or wattle) and perhaps screened from the rest of the house by post­and­ wattle, perhaps enabled some control of how neighbours would encounter the inner, private household. The back porches leading out into the plots behind the houses may have been used to separate the living space from the backyard, perhaps used as a space to store food, tools or raw materials or to defecate comfortably inside the house (amongst the mosses, textile rags and food debris recovered from Dublin’s cess pits have been old, turned wooden­bowls which were presumably used as ‘chamber pots’ before they were finally discarded!). At Essex Street West, an early tenth to mid­eleventh century house had a concentration of hazelnuts and large animal bones in one corner, suggesting either the storage of food – or food waste. In the town of Hiberno­Norse Dublin (unlike the rural setting of other Norse houses in the north Atlantic), it is also to be presumed that a degree of ‘social blindness’ – an ability to discretely ignore the noises of the neighbours’s family rows through the wattle walls – would be necessary to enable households to live in such close proximity in the densely packed streets of the town.

127

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 5: The Early Medieval Church

Chapter 5. The early medieval church
Introduction
Early medieval archaeology in Ireland, with its long tradition of scholarship on Ireland’s ‘Golden Age of Saints of Scholars’ going back to the work of Francoise Henry, Ann Hamlin and others, has a unique base of research and publication on aspects of the early Irish church. The remains at significant ecclesiastical sites like Glendalough have been the subject of curious speculation by antiquarians and archaeologists since the late 18th century. Ecclesiastical sites have been identified through a range of methods including field survey, excavation, documentary evidence and associated folklore. More recently, archaeologists such as Michael Ryan, Peter Harbison and Dorothy Kelly, sustained the study of the early Irish church, focusing on such topics as ecclesiastical metalwork, manuscripts and high crosses. Early medieval historical scholarship has also thrived, with publications by Colman Etchingham and others on the introduction of Christianity and the organization of the early Irish church. The EMAP survey reveals that there is a growing body of excavated archaeological evidence that can now be used to contribute an even broader understanding of the role of the church in settlement, economy and the transformation of the Irish landscape. Early Ecclesiastical Research George Petrie (1845) was the first scholar to systematically appraise the evidence for ecclesiastical archaeology prior to the Anglo­Norman invasion. His publication placed early medieval ecclesiastical research on a sound footing as he succeeded in replacing traditional, mythological explanations of his antiquarian predecessors with objective reasoned calculations of the ecclesiastical evidence. Alongside John O’Donovan, he was involved with the Ordnance Survey project that recorded the location, history and folklore of many ecclesiastical sites across the country. In 1844 another scholar William Reeves (1902) precociously sought to establish a link between the early medieval monastery of Nendrum in the written sources and the site on Mahee Island, Co. Down by using field­survey, small­scale excavations and local folklore evidence (Hamlin 1992, 140). The early twentieth century saw one of the few large­scale excavations of an identified early medieval ecclesiastical site at the hitherto mentioned Nendrum (Lawlor 1925). The mid twentieth century decades were characterised by some notable publications concerning ecclesiastical art and sculpture (Leask 1955; Lionard 1961; Henry 1961, 1965, 1967, 1970). Archaeological surveys and excavations principally at western hermitage sites including Inishkea, Co. Mayo (Henry 1945 & 52), South Kerry (Henry 1957), Beginish and Valencia, Co. Kerry (O’Kelly 1956 & 1958) as well as the secluded retreat of Temple­na­skellig, Glendalough, Co. Wicklow (Henry, Unpublished) were also undertaken in this period. These studies sought to examine the art, architecture and form of these early ecclesiastical sites. A number of studies in the later 20th century were responsible for transforming our knowledge about the character and morphology of early ecclesiastical sites. However, the key transformation of our knowledge was that by Swan which made the ecclesiastical enclosure a ubiquitous feature of these sites. A number of important surveys were undertaken in the counties of Down (Hamlin et al 1966), Donegal (Lacy 1983) and Dingle (Cuppage et al 1986) while a detailed appraisal of evidence for the early church in the counties of Cork and Kerry was also undertaken by Hurley (1982). Aerial photography undertaken by both Norman and St. Joseph (1969) and Swan (1983) identified further early ecclesiastical sites across the Irish landscape. Using the resources of aerial photography, Ordnance Survey maps and field work, Swan identified over 600 enclosures surrounding ecclesiastical sites. Many were found to contain double concentric enclosures. The average enclosure of ecclesiastical sites measured

128

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 5: The Early Medieval Church

from 90­120m (Swan 1983, 274) though outer enclosures at various sites could range from 300­500m in diameter. Swan’s Criteria for identification of early ecclesiastical sites These breakthroughs led Leo Swan (1983) to suggest a range of criteria for the identification of early ecclesiastical sites. He suggested that consistently recurring features at early ecclesiastical sites comprised 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. Evidence for Enclosure Burial evidence Placename with ecclesiastical associations Structure or structural remains Holy well Bullaun stone Carved, inscribed or decorated stone cross or slab Line of townland boundary forming part of the enclosure Souterrain Pillar stone Founders tomb Associated traditional ritual or folk custom

Swan suggested that a site should meet at least four or five of the following criteria to be identified as ecclesiastical. The criteria proposed by Swan have been useful to identifying a whole range of ecclesiastical sites across the Irish landscape. After the presence of an enclosure, burial was identified as the second most important indicator of an early medieval ecclesiastical site. It was then implicitly understood that if an enclosed site contained early medieval burial evidence, it could be automatically identified as ‘ecclesiastical’ in function. Issues with Swan’s Criteria Enclosed sites containing early medieval burial evidence but without any further ecclesiastical links were not long being discovered within the archaeological record. By 1992, Ann Hamlin had noted three previously unknown examples which did not easily fit with the criteria proposed, though she still tended to consider these as likely ecclesiastical sites (Hamlin 1992, 142). Excavations at Knockea, Co. Limerick (O’Kelly 1967, 74­83) revealed a squarish enclosure complete with 66 Christian burials that were set inside a complex earthwork enclosure. She also noted the site at Millockstown, Co. Louth (Manning 1986) which revealed evidence for a ringfort that was superseded in the excavator’s opinion by ‘a large ecclesiastical enclosure’ and graveyard. The final unknown site was at Dunmisk, Co. Tyrone (Hamlin & Lynn 1988, 27­9) that revealed over 400 burials, areas of metalworking and a possible wooden church inside a hilltop enclosure. However, in the last ten years development­led excavations have dramatically increased the number of ‘settlement/cemetery’ sites (See appendices). It is now evident that early medieval burial inside enclosures cannot be used to automatically indicate the presence of an ecclesiastical site. It is also evident however that we cannot simply describe a site as a ‘settlement/cemetery’ complex simply because it has no known historical associations with a church or contains no archaeological evidence for ecclesiastical structures. It is very likely that many ecclesiastical sites may have fallen out of use by the 8/9th century A.D. due to different ecclesiastical, political and demographic reasons. Furthermore, as discussed below stone was not generally used as a building resource prior to the 10th century A.D. Timber was then the principal resource used for ecclesiastical structures from the 6­10th century A.D. It is evident that these ‘settlement/cemetery’ sites are not always completely excavated and when evidence for timber structures are discovered, it is often not easy to completely establish if it was is a church or building. It is then obvious that we need to establish new criteria that can differentiate between ‘settlement/cemetery’ sites and ‘ecclesiastical sites’.

129

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 5: The Early Medieval Church

Additional Ecclesiastical Criteria Perhaps the size of the enclosure can be used to partially differentiate between settlement/cemetery sites and ecclesiastical sites. It has been observed that settlement/cemetery sites generally measure between 50­80m in diameter though there are examples of some which are less and others slightly more. Ecclesiastical sites generally contain an enclosure measuring 90­120m in diameter (Swan 1983). The majority of important ecclesiastical sites had inner enclosures of between 100­200m while the outer banks and ditches varied from 300­500m in size (Swan 1985, 97). Perhaps the generally slightly larger size of ecclesiastical site can be used to differentiate between both. On the other hand, these larger enclosures will often be at sites whose ecclesiastical origin is not in doubt. It is the more minor ecclesiastical sites with smaller enclosures that will present difficulties in differentiating them from settlement/cemeteries. Much smaller ecclesiastical enclosures are commonplace in parts of the west. Ó Carragáin (2005, 47) has discussed the subject of regional variation in enclosure diameter: ‘Within a given area their diameters are broadly indicative of a site’s importance, but cannot be used as a rigid index of status. However, there also seems to be significant regional differences in enclosure form. For example, even in the west, average enclosure diameter varies markedly from 37m in peninsular Kerry (calculated from Cuppage 1986; O’Sullivan and Sheehan 1996) to 81m in west Galway (calculated from Gosling 1993), while those in north Kerry are much larger again (Toal 1995).’ It is evident that we may need to establish even further discriminating criteria to differentiate between these two site types and fundamental to this is establishing the character and archaeology of early ecclesiastical sites from the 6­10th century A.D. While stone may have been an increasingly important resource from the 10th century onwards, it is also likely that timber may have continued to be used by many churches due to economic, social or personal factors. Wood was still by far the most common material used for churches at the more minor ecclesiastical sites in most areas of the country until after AD 1100. The only exceptions are south Co. Dublin, Lough Corrib/Lough Mask, Aran and Peninsular Kerry (Tomás Ó Carragáin, pers comm.). Excavations in recent years – including some after the 1970­2002 period reviewed by EMAP have revealed a number of previously unknown sites that could be described as ‘ecclesiastical’ as opposed to settlement/cemetery sites. Excavations at Butterfield, Rathfarnham, Co. Dublin (Judith Carroll 1997, Excavations Bulletin­ 97E0140) discovered an occupation phase that was then subsequently succeeded by burial evidence inside a large enclosure 200m in diameter. The burials were roughly contemporary with the enclosure. It is quite possible that the site developed into an ecclesiastical complex in its second phase (8­11th century A.D.). Excavations at Oldtown, Swords, Co. Dublin revealed three concentric enclosures measuring 70m, 130m in diameter and 300m x 200m in diameter. No historical evidence could be found for an ecclesiastical origin for the site. A total of 120 unprotected burials were found inside the enclosure as well as bone combs and iron knifes dating to the 9th­12th century A.D (Margaret Gowen 2003 & 2004, Excavations Bulletin­ 03E1080). Excavations at Killeany, Co. Laois finally revealed an enclosure (180 m by 150 m). A number of associated corn­drying kilns were excavated as well as a cemetery of c. 70 people (Wiggins 2007; Kenny 2007). The site was interpreted as an early medieval ecclesiastical enclosure. It is possible that these three examples may represent previously unknown early medieval ecclesiastical sites.

130

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 5: The Early Medieval Church

EMAP survey and ecclesiastical archaeology
Excavated Ecclesiastical Sites 1970­2002 The EMAP survey revealed that 188 ecclesiastical sites with known early medieval historical or archaeological origins were excavated from 1970­2002 (See Appendix 2). A further 41 sites were also identified though the early antiquity of these church sites could not be established. These figures exclude sites where excavations were only undertaken near an ecclesiastical site. It could be suggested then that over 200 definite early medieval ecclesiastical sites have been excavated to differing extents so far although hundreds and undoubtedly thousands more potential sites have been identified through aerial photography, fieldwork and on earlier O.S. map editions. Table 39: Excavated Ecclesiastical Sites 1970­2002
Ecclesiastical Possible ecclesiastical Site Ecclesiastical Site Total Ecclesiastical Sites EMAP Site 42 188 230 Ecclesiastical Site 42 190 232

Distribution of Excavated Ecclesiastical Sites 1970­2002 Ecclesiastical sites with known early medieval origins were excavated in 29/32 counties of Ireland. Relatively few excavations were undertaken in the northwestern and northern central parts of Ireland. Few excavations of ecclesiastical sites appear to have been undertaken in Southern Leinster outside the Hiberno­Norse town of Wexford. Galway and the southwestern counties of Tipperary, Cork, Kerry and Clare, the counties of Down and Antrim in Ulster and Kildare, Meath and Louth bordering Dublin saw the next frequent amount of excavations. The number of excavations at Dublin far surpasses any county and indicates the number of excavations which have been undertaken in both Dublin county and the Hiberno­Norse town. Table 40: Distribution of Excavated Ecclesiastical Sites 1970­2002 County Antrim Armagh Clare Cork Derry Donegal Down Dublin Fermanagh Galway Kerry Kildare Kilkenny Laois Number 11 6 7 9 4 3 9 26 4 14 8 8 5 2 County Leitrim Limerick Louth Mayo Meath Monaghan Offaly Roscommon Sligo Tipperary Tyrone Waterford Westmeath Wexford Wicklow Number 1 3 5 6 8 1 5 7 7 10 5 5 2 5 2

Figure 28: Excavated Early Medieval Ecclesiastical Sites Per County 1970­2002

131

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 5: The Early Medieval Church

Excavated Early Medieval Ecclesiastical Sites Per County
Wicklow Wexford Westmeath Waterford Tyrone Tipperary Sligo Roscommo Offaly Monaghan Meath Mayo Louth Limerick Leitrim Laois Kilkenny Kildare Kerry Galway Fermanagh Dublin Down Donegal Derry Cork Clare Armagh Antrim

County

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Number of Excavated Ecclesaistical Sites

Significance of Excavated Ecclesiastical Sites 1970­2002 It is evident that while excavations have been undertaken on 188 sites with known early medieval historical origins, only a small number have revealed early medieval archaeology that could be considered significant.

Significance Uncertain No Significance General Significant Highly Significant Total Ecclesiastical

Number 26 27 68 51 16 188

Table 41: Significance of Excavated Early Medieval Ecclesiastical Sites

132

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 5: The Early Medieval Church

Significance of Excavated Early M edieval Ecclesiastical Sites (1970-2002)

16, 9%

26, 14% 27, 14% Uncertain No Significance General Significant 68, 36% Highly Significant

51, 27%

Figure 29: Significance of Excavated Early Medieval Ecclesiastical Sites Excavations at 27 (14%) revealed no early medieval archaeological evidence. It was not possible to establish if excavated evidence was indeed early medieval in date (e.g. Burial evidence) at a further 26 sites (14%). A further 68 sites (36%) revealed limited early medieval archaeological evidence. The remaining 67 sites or 36% revealed archaeology of significant or highly significant early medieval archaeology. The majority of the excavations at ecclesiastical sites have revealed limited or no early medieval archaeology of any significance. Testing and monitoring licenses have been responsible for the great majority of these excavations that indicates that these sites have only been very partially investigated. It is evident that relatively very few ecclesiastical sites have been comprehensively excavated. Excavated Ecclesiastical Structures 1970­2002 Data about a number of excavated ecclesiastical structures were also collected for the EMAP database. The results are illustrated in the table and graph below. The figures illustrate that relatively few oratories, round towers, leachta and High Crosses have been excavated. Excavations have also revealed that 80 ecclesiastical cemeteries were excavated. 77 cemeteries were from within historically known early medieval ecclesiastical sites. A discussion of the cemetery evidence is provided in the burial section. Site and license information about the excavated structures listed in the table below are outlined in the appendix. Table 42: Excavated Ecclesiastical Structures 1970­2002 Ecclesiastical Feature Wooden church Stone Church Oratory Cemetery Round Tower Leacht High Cross No. of Sites 8 30 8 80 7 9 10 Total Number (Structures) 8 35 11 80 7 17 11

133

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 5: The Early Medieval Church

Excavated Ecclesiastical Structures 1970-2002

Wooden church

Ecclesiastical Structures

Total Number (Structure) No. of Sites

Stone Church Round Tower Oratory Leacht High Cross Cemetery 0 20 40

60

80

100

Number of Structures and associated Sites
Figure 30: Excavated Ecclesiastical Structures 1970­2002

The Origins and Location of Ecclesiastical Sites The majority of ecclesiastical sites have been recorded in eastern and central Ireland along important communication corridors such as rivers and potential routeways such as the Slighe Mhor and Slighe Dhala (Edwards 1990, 105). While access to local communities and political elites was a necessary perquisite for ecclesiastical sites, many hermitages, particularly along the west coast preferred instead sites of solitude and retreat. Even the great monasteries like Glendalough and Clonmacnoise though located beside strategic communication corridors in the form of the Slighe Mhor and St. Kevin’s Way, were nevertheless situated in secluded bog and upland settings. It is evident that we still do not have a clear understanding about the political and social context in which ecclesiastical sites were founded. It has been observed below (See Burial Section) that there is potential evidence that the location of prehistoric burial monuments may have influenced the origins of a number of ecclesiastical sites like Armagh and Derrynaflan. Other sites at Omey, Co. Galway, Kiltullagh, Co. Roscommon and Durrow have also revealed potential evidence for some form of continuity of burial between the Late Iron Age and early medieval period (See Burial Section). Excavations at Armagh have also revealed a possible Iron Age ditch enclosing the hill supporting the view that it was used as a place of habitation prior to the ecclesiastical site (Swift 1998117). On the other hand, most of the extensively excavated sites have produced no evidence for pre­ecclesiastical burial at the core of the site. It has also been argued that the size of the enclosure walls at a number of western ecclesiastical sites including High Island, Co Galway and Illauntannig, Co. Kerry indicate that these sites are likely to have had a secular origin (White­Marshall, Jenny & Rourke, Grellan (2000, 32). Furthermore, excavations at Iona by Finbar McCormick have revealed evidence for occupation in the half millennium before the site was converted into a monastery. McCormick also argued that the rectangular shape of Iona’s earthen enclosures might have been the result of the monastic re­use of an existing Iron Age bank (McCormick 1997; White­Marshall 2000). Fanning’s excavations at Reask, Co. Kerry also revealed a Late Iron Age precursor for the ecclesiastical site based on a radiocarbon date from a hearth inside a circular wooden structure that produced a range of A.D. 260­650 (Fanning 1972­75, Excavations Bulletin). The enclosure of the site was also early dating to the 5/6th century A.D. There is therefore emerging evidence 134

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 5: The Early Medieval Church

for some form of continuity of settlement and burial between Late Iron Age sites and early medieval monasteries. An Iron Age enclosure was excavated at Taghmon, Co. Wexford (Clare Mullins 1998, 1999 & 2000, Excavations Bulletin­ 98E0483). It returned a radiocarbon dated between the first to fifth centuries A.D. A large pit containing charcoal, organic material and significant quantities of cremated bone were also found and were dated to AD 660 to 795 supporting the idea that the monastery was founded on this habitation site shortly after. Significantly early origins were revealed at an ecclesiastical site at Randalstown, Co. Meath (Eamonn Kelly 1975, 1976 & 1980­84, Excavations Bulletin). The earliest datable find was a Roman imported fibula dated to the first century A.D. Shards of B and E­ware and green glass described as possibly coming from sub­Roman Gaul were excavated indicating activity from the 5th century AD onwards. It is possible that there may have been some form of settlement in the area before an ecclesiastical site was established. At Caherlehillan, a fifth­century foundation including a rimary wooden church has been excavated (Tomás Ó Carraigáin pers comm.) Excavations at Dunmisk, Co. Tyrone revealed a significant enclosed burial ground with evidence for ferrous and non ferrous metalworking and glass­production (Ivens 1988). The enclosed burial ground however appears to have been preceded by an earlier hillfort. It must be said that there is a strong argument for Dunmisk being classified as a ‘settlement/cemetery’ site as its ecclesiastical historical origins are tenuous and there is no evidence for any ecclesiastical structures, except a postulated wooden church. Further potential examples of secular origins include the possible ecclesiastical site at Butterfield, Rathfarnham (discussed above) that revealed an earlier occupation phase preceding the enclosure and cemetery. Excavations at an ecclesiastical site at Moyne, Co. Mayo revealed a faint circle (40m in diameter) in the northern half of the large enclosure (Manning 1987). Manning speculated whether it could represent an earlier ringfort that was superseded by an ecclesiastical site. He compared to it another example at Millockstown where a potential ringfort was succeeded by a lintel cemetery. It has been suggested however that both Millockstown and Ninch where a similar phenomenon occurs, may instead represent ‘settlement/cemetery’ sites (See Burial Section). A final example has been observed by O’Brien (1992, 134) at Dooey, Co. Donegal where a cemetery was found to be located in a former habitation area. There is therefore emerging evidence for some form of continuity of both burial and settlement between Late Iron Age sites and early medieval ecclesiastical sites. How extensive and widespread this pattern is has yet to be established. It has been argued by O’Brien (1992, 134) that sites like ringforts may have been given over to ecclesiastical communities – as lords granted settlements and land to the church. She has cited examples from Millockstown, Dooey and Reask to support this case. It is very likely that monks may have re­used earlier secular enclosures at sites like High Island and Iona while early ferta cemeteries at sites like Kiltullagh may have been Christianised in other cases. It is likely that other ecclesiastical sites like Reask and Randalstown could have very early foundation dates dating to the transitional Iron Age period. It is possible however that ecclesiastical sites like Butterfield and perhaps Millockstown (if you view the later phase as ecclesiastical) could instead have been founded at a later in the early medieval period and have superseded secular settlement sites like ringforts. There is therefore likely to have been a whole range of factors which shaped the foundation of ecclesiastical sites through the early medieval period. Previous Research and the Development of Ecclesiastical Sites Studies by numerous scholars such as Herity (1995) have appraised the organization and spatial layout of early medieval ecclesiastical sites. These studies have discussed recurring archaeological features such as churches, oratories, round towers, the tombs of the founder Saint, high crosses and cross­slabs and enclosing walls. Some studies have focused on the spatial layout of particular monuments such as high crosses and round towers in relation to churches and other ecclesiastical structures (e.g. Swan 1985; Herity 1995; O’Keeffe 2004). The

135

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 5: The Early Medieval Church

evidence and character of pilgrimage at ­ and around ­ tomb shrines and leachta have also been discussed particularly by Herity (1995) at western hermitage sites. Doherty (1985, 57) has argued that the perceived spiritual problems associated with the pollution of a sacred core by the laity led to the creation of an idealized form ‘which allowed a monastic site to have a holy of holies at the core, around which were areas of sanctuary that decreased in importance the further out they were from the centre. In this model, the construction of concentric enclosures around monastic sites allowed for monasteries to be organized in terms of a hierarchy of holiness in which a priestly elite was based in the sacred core while the laity was located at the periphery. Archaeological studies then have generally focused on appraising the layout of early medieval ecclesiastical sites. Yet, it is clearly evident that the character and form of ecclesiastical sites very likely varied across the island through the early medieval period from the 5­12th century A.D. It is evident then we may have some understanding about the organization and layout of ecclesiastical sites at some general abstract level, but it is also clear that we have yet to understand the transformation in the organization, character and extent of settlement and ecclesiastical activity at these sites through the early medieval period.

Early medieval archaeology and the early Irish Church (5­9th century A.D.)
Background For all the archaeological studies outlined above, our knowledge about the character of the early Church is still limited in many ways and is still reliant on historical sources. Few studies with the exception of Hamlin (1985), Hamlin and Lynn (1989) and Swift (1998) have appraised the archaeological evidence for settlement and economy around churches and monastic sites. It has been argued by Swift (1998) that neither the historical or archaeological evidence support the notion of any form of urbanization around ecclesiastical sites in the seventh and eighth century A.D. She has examined the use of biblical terms such as civitas and suburbana used in seventh and eighth century texts and has concluded that these sites were surrounded by agricultural buildings, pastures, enclosures and the houses of the monastic labourers rather than streets, fortified defences and the semi­industrialised craftsman. Furthermore, she has argued, like Hamlin and Lynn (1989), that secular and ecclesiastical settlement during the seventh and eighth century was essentially similar. It is evident however that we still have a largely incomplete understanding about the early archaeological evidence and that few sites have been comprehensively excavated or published concerning this subject. Enclosures Hamlin (1985, 280) identified enclosures as fundamental features of the early Church in Ireland. The archaeological evidence does tend to support this hypothesis. Twigs and branches from the base of a large ditch enclosing Armagh hill returned a radiocarbon date of A.D. 130­ 600. It cannot be definitely assumed that this represents the enclosure of the ecclesiastical site as it may also represent evidence for a preceding habitation site (Swift 1998, 117). Excavations at Tullylish, Co. Down also revealed a massive ditch that returned a radiocarbon date of A.D. 455­655. It was succeeded by a later ditch that returned a date of A.D. 680­995 (Ivens 1987). An early outer enclosure was excavated at Clonmacnoise, Co. Offaly. It was filled in between A.D. 714­873 (Donald Murphy 1999 & 2000, Excavations Bulletin). Excavations at Doras, Co. Tyrone also revealed an early enclosing ditch dating to AD 615­885 (McDowell 1987). Enclosing ditches were also revealed at Dunshaughlin, Co. Meath (Linzi Simpson 1994 & 1995, Excavations Bulletin). A number of enclosing ditches were excavated at Tallaght, Co. Dublin. A radiocarbon date of twigs in one ditch yielded a mid­6th to 8th century A.D (Rosanne Meenan 1996, Excavations Bulletin­ 96E054). A ninth century date was returned for another ditch at

136

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 5: The Early Medieval Church

Tallaght (Margaret Gowen 1990 & 1991, Excavations Bulletin). Excavations at High Island, Co. Galway revealed a low wall outside the north wall of the church enclosure that was built in AD 728­971. It appears to have been a retaining wall for burnt domestic refuse and was not earlier than the church enclosure (Georgina Scally 2000, Excavations Bulletin­ 95E124). It appears then that ecclesiastical enclosures were being built particularly from the 6­8th centuries A.D, although earlier enclosures are known such as at Caherlehillan where the ditch dated to the 5th century AD Excavations at many sites such as Tullylish, Doras, Armagh, Tallaght and Dunshauglin have also revealed evidence for a number of ditches succeeding each other indicating the growth and transformation of the shape and character of these ecclesiastical sites over time. Wooden Churches and Structures Hamlin (1985, 286) has observed that wooden churches would have predominated in the period This view has been supported by more recent studies which have indicated that mortared ecclesiastical structures only became common from after the 10th century A.D. ­ although shrine chapels such as Temple Ciaran at Clonmacnoise and St. Declan’s at Ardmore may belong to the 8/9th centuries A.D. (Ó Carragáin 2003, 132). The physical evidence for early wooden churches is still very limited however. Possible early wooden churches have been excavated at Church Island, Co. Kerry; White Island, Co. Fermanagh; Inishcaltra, Co. Clare and Carnsore Point, Co. Wexford (Hamlin 1985, 285). Excavations at Inischcaltra revealed a large structure (8 x 5m) that was possibly built using wattles and clay (Hamlin 1985, 285). The excavations at St. Vogue’s Church, Carnsore revealed a small rectangular building (2.25m. x 1.5m) that was later succeeded by a stone church. The possible wooden church was radiocarbon dated to A.D. 660 ± 80 (O’Kelly 1975). The wooden church at Church Island, Co. Kerry was roughly the same size measuring 3 x 2m. It was indicated by five postholes and was on the same alignment as the phase 1 burials. A further small possible church was excavated at Reask, Co. Kerry and was revealed in the form of two post holes to the south of a slab­lined structure (Edwards 1990, 117). Another early potential wooden church has been recorded at Cashel, Co. Tipperary that has been dated to between the sixth to ninth century A.D. (Brian Hodkinson 1992 & 1993, Excavations Bulletin­ 92E0202). Post and stakeholes beneath stone churches recorded in the excavation bulletin reports at Church Island, Co. Mayo (Frank Ryan 1993, Excavations Bulletin­ 93E0109); Killtuagh, Co. Roscommon (R.A. Gregory 2000, Excavations Bulletin­00E0322); Dunmisk, Co. Tyrone (Ivens 1988) and Killelton, Co. Kerry (Conleth Manning 1987 & 1988, Excavations Bulletin) might also indicate wooden churches. These wooden churches were contemporary with many drystone oratories and clochans built at many hermitages in the west of Ireland. One of these drystone oratories was excavated on the mountain pilgrimage site at Croagh Patrick, Co. Mayo. It was radiocarbon dated to between AD 430­890. (Gerry Walsh 1994 & 1995, Excavations Bulletin­ 94E0115). A further stone oratory was excavated at Illaunloughan, Co. Kerry. The oratory was preceded by a sod walled or earthen building. Carbonised material overlying the clay floor of the oratory gave a C14 date of 640­790 Cal. AD for the stone oratory. A further drystone corbelled hut measured 4.3m in diameter and was radiocarbon dated to A.D 775­961 (Claire Walsh & Jenny White Marshall 1992­95, Excavations Bulletin­ 92E0087). Excavations at hermitages such as Reask, High Island, Sceillig Mhichil and Killelton have all revealed evidence for roughly contemporary clochain and oratories dating to around the 7/8th centuries A.D. There is a growing body of evidence to suggest that these early churches were surrounded by a large number of structures including huts, outbuildings and areas of craftworking and agricultural production. A large number of buildings have been excavated at ecclesiastical sites. A number of the early western hermitage sites have also revealed evidence for associated wooden and earthen buildings at Illaunloughan, Co. Kerry (Claire Walsh & Jenny White Marshall 1992­95, Excavations Bulletin­ 92E0087) and Reask, Co. Kerry (Thomas Fanning 1972­75, Excavations Bulletin). Excavations at significant monasteries like Clonmacoise (Heather King

137

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 5: The Early Medieval Church

1990­98 Excavations Bulletin­ E558) and Armagh (Lynn 1988) have also revealed early habitation evidence. Agriculture, Craftworking and Pottery There is also evidence for a growing range of craft and industrial activities at these early ecclesiastical sites. Both ferrous and non­ferrous metalworking activities have also been identified in early contexts from a number of ecclesiastical sites like Clonmacnoise, Co. Offaly and also at Corbetstown, Co. Westmeath (Leo Swan 1973, 1975 & 1980­84, Excavations Bulletin­ E124) and Armagh (Lynn 1988). Examples of evidence for early agricultural production at these sites are illustrated at Nendrum where the phase 1 tidal mill and mill pond was radiocarbon dated to A.D. 619 (Norman Crothers & Tom McErlean 1999, Excavations Bulletin). A further example of early agricultural production was discovered outside the enclosure at Lorrha, Co. Tipperary where three corn­drying kilns were excavated, one of which was radiocarbon dated to A.D. 545­660 (Stephen Linnane 2002, Excavations Bulletin­01E1055). A dumb­bell shaped kiln was excavated outside the ecclesiastical enclosure at Ballyman, Co. Dublin. It was dated to A.D. 425. This very early date might suggest that the kiln dates to a habitation site that preceded the monastery. (Elizabeth O’Brien 1980­84, Excavations Bulletin­ E182). The excavation of both B and E ware at a large number of ecclesiastical sites is perhaps one of the best indicators for the influence and wealth of the early church during the 5­7th centuries A.D. E ware has also been commonly found at settlement/cemetery sites in this period (See Appendix) suggesting that both types of settlements may have different but inter­related focal points in this formative period. Conclusion This review has just touched on some features of the archaeological evidence for the early church dating roughly from the 5th­10th century A.D. There is now emerging evidence to suggest that many of these sites may have been significant centres of craft and agricultural production within their local landscapes. Evidence for extensive craft production and metalworking have been recovered at many sites The investment in effort in constructing early ecclesiastical enclosures and the evidence for large tidal water mills at Nendrum suggests that many early monasteries may have been significant population centres with large labour forces in the early period. Whether we can suggest that settlement around these ecclesiastical sites was dispersed and non­nucleated as Swift (1998) suggests has not yet been completely established. What is required now is a detailed comparative analysis of the early material­ culture recovered from a range of ecclesiastical sites across the country. This could provide valuable information about the origins, character, location and scale of settlement, craftwork and industrial evidence, burial and ecclesiastical structures within an around these sites.

The Monastic Town Debate
The debate – a brief outline Doherty (1985) first advanced the concept of ‘monastic towns’ in early medieval Ireland. He argued that there was evidence that monasteries were the locations of markets from at least the eighth century AD onwards. He suggested that a process in which a standard cosmological layout was imposed on ecclesiastical sites had taken place by c. A.D. 800. An architectural monumentalisation of the sacred core and the appearance of market crosses at the periphery of such settlements then followed in the 10th century and leaves Doherty to conclude that ‘it is at this point, that one might with confidence begin to use the term urban’ (Doherty, 1985, 60). He (1985, 68) has argued that there is ‘no difficulty in describing major monasteries in Ireland between the tenth and twelfth centuries as towns”. It is important to emphasise then that Doherty’s claims for ‘monastic towns’ really refer to the tenth century and afterwards, roughly contemporary with Hiberno­Norse towns, rather than the eighth or ninth century AD.

138

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 5: The Early Medieval Church

By the late 1990s, some scholars voiced some concerns about the applicability and assumptions behind the concept of the ‘monastic town’ and suggested that it was time for a reassessment of the role in which we accord the monastery in this period (Graham 1993; Valante, 1997; Swift, 1998). They variously suggested that the model was built upon a flawed theoretical framework, a misinterpretation of documentary sources, unsubstantiated archaeological evidence and even nationalist overtones (Graham, 1993, Valante, 1997 & Swift, 1998). Valante (1997) challenged the whole notion that monasteries were at the centre of a re­distributive economic system. She also claimed that these sites cannot be described as urban as the majority of people living in these settlements relied instead on agricultural production. Swift (1998) principally sought to re­ address misconceptions of seventh/eighth century monastic towns through a critique of Doherty’s use of putative ‘urban’ (e.g. the reading of the words civitas to mean city, suburbanis to mean suburbs) terminology in texts dating to this period to support his theory. This is a debate that would benefit from a re­statement of the ‘monastic town position’ taking into account the more recent archaeological evidence (such as the extensive settlement and craftworking evidence from Clonmacnoise and the presence of cattle remains there that are broadly similar to those that suggest provisioning into Hiberno­Norse Dublin). In any case, if the character of monasteries prior to the tenth century is still unclear, we can still pose the question; what was the extent of both settlement and ecclesiastical evidence from the tenth­ twelfth century period? Can we go as far to describe significant ecclesiastical sites as ‘towns’ or ‘urban’? What then are the criteria we should use to define such terms? Was the emergence of pseudo­feudal lordships a significant catalyst in the emergence of monastic towns in Ireland and were these sites then political capital and economic redistributive hubs within their regional landscape? Finally what was the relationship between monastic towns and Viking towns in this later period? How can archaeology contribute? How can archaeology contribute to this debate? Swan (1985) examined the plans of monasteries and argued that early medieval monasteries display a remarkable similarity in plan and format. He has argued that there is strong evidence to suggest a link between the location of high crosses and the existence of outer market­places immediately outside the entrance of the significant monastic sites like Armagh, Kells and Glendalough. This then may represent evidence for the gradual ‘transformation of monastic communities into centres of trade and commercial activity’ (Swan 1985, 101). Bradley (1994) has recently suggested some archaeological criteria to define an Irish monastic town; these include settlement complexity with a central core, domestic houses, streets, fairs, trade, enclosure and defence, a political role for the site as well as documentary evidence. He has argued that Clonmacnoise could be described as a monastic town in this period. It is evident however that excavations have yet to reveal evidence for all these criteria at the majority of ecclesiastical sites across the country. There is good evidence for an architectural monumentalisation of these ecclesiastical sites from the 10th century A.D. through the use of stone. Indeed the EMAP survey identified that 30 extant and non extant stone churches dating from c.900­1200 A.D. were excavated from 1970­2002 (See Appendices). Excavations at numerous sites including Iniscealtra, Clonmacnoise, Armagh, Cashel, Downpatrick, Corbetstown as well as St. Peter’s Church in Viking Waterford and St. Michael Le Pole’s church outside the walls of Dublin have all revealed extensive evidence for settlement, industry and craftworking dating to this period. What is needed then is a comprehensive review of the character, location and scale of settlement, craftwork and industrial evidence, burial and ecclesiastical structures dating to this period. Parallel to this, studies need to be undertaken into the impact of these ecclesiastical sites within local and regional landscapes to establish if they were indeed centres of political power and nucleated settlement as well as hubs of an economic redistributive system.

139

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 5: The Early Medieval Church

The Evidence for Pastoral Care and Agricultural Estates
Background One largely unresearched area concerns the evidence for the provision of pastoral care in early medieval Ireland. Traditionally, the twelfth century has been viewed as a defining period in which monastic forms of ecclesiastical organisation gave way to diocesan parish­based systems (Hughes 1966). Recently, one historian (Sharpe 1992) has argued for a dense early medieval parochial system with others (e.g. Etchingham 1999) preferring a more restricted model. Etchingham has argued for a late conversion to Christianity among the lay aristocracy, limited pastoral care by the Church and continuing burial of the laity within unconsecrated grounds. He has suggested that a small Christian elite as well as ecclesiastics were buried within ecclesiastical sites. More recently, archaeologists like Swift (2001) and Ó Carragáin (2006) have examined evidence for early pastoral evidence at sites like Clonmacnoise. Swift (2001) has analysed the evidence the distribution of cross­slabs on the Island of Islay near Iona. She argued that no distinction can be made between local parochial centres and agricultural centres in the early medieval period for both services by the laity and ecclesiastics were inter­related. Swift has observed that the bulk of the secular population in the surrounding lands were not controlled directly by ecclesiastical authorities and thus has supported Etchingham’s (1999) view that there was no obligation for these people to buried in ecclesiastical consecrated grounds. Swift then applied the applicability of this model to the evidence at Clonmacnoise and its surrounding hinterland and argued that the distribution of high status cross­slabs in at Clonmancoise and its ecclesiastical estates attest to the presence of a commited Christian elite in this area. Ó Carragáin has also examined evidence for pastoral care at (in his paper in a recently edited volume on the Parish in Medieval and early modern Ireland) and on the basis of the great density of church sites evident through archaeology favours the idea that a good proportion of those people that wanted to, could have received pastoral care in the early Irish landscape. Mortared stone churches Firstly, he reviews the evidence for mortared stone churches. He states that the vast majority of mainland sites with Viking Age mortared stone churches were founded in the pre­Viking period and then at a later stage go on to become parish centres in the high medieval period. These 150 or so churches are not comparable to the ‘great rebuilding’ of local community churches in contemporary England – i.e. they are not representative of a new parish network. However they are probably at sites that benefited from a winnowing out of some more minor ecclesiastical sites during the Viking Age. Ó Carragáin also suggests that the absence of eastern cells does not preclude a pastoral function because abroad it is only in the late 11th century that the altar moves into the eastern cell at which point it becomes a proper chancel. Before that the altar was at the east end of the nave in both pastoral and other churches. Previous authors have overemphasized their small size – being misled by well­preserved examples at minor sites. In fact the mortared churches of early medieval Ireland are similar in size to their Anglo­Saxon contemporaries. His aim in the paper is not to suggest that most pre­ Romanesque churches were built with pastoral care in mind, but rather to point out that they cannot be used as evidence that pastoral provision was minimal or non­existent. Drystone churches in peninsular Kerry Sharpe overstates that case in suggesting that the majority of drystone churches in peninsular Kerry sites were pastoral. Diversity is the key – in the absence of documentary sources, we must distinguish between these sites on the basis of subtle differences. Peninsular Kerry is the

140

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 5: The Early Medieval Church

only area where we can compare sizes of churches from the majority of sites because of ubiquity of drystone churches. We can safely dismiss the idea that these churches were designed as chancels while the congregation stood outside. To some extent form follows function – the smallest has 1/5 internal area of the largest – suggesting that they also vary in function. Most are tiny and clearly not designed for communities, but were probably for families or small monastic communities. There is a cluster of four relatively large examples – probably as large as can be managed using this building technique – and interestingly they are often at the centre of dense ringfort distributions and are at sites that go on in use in the high medieval period. Ó Carragáin’s paper finishes with a ‘compare and contrast’ exercise of two sites located not far apart – at Church Island and Illaunloughan, Co. Kerry. In many ways, these are similar sites (i.e. being small churches and burial grounds on maritime islands) but varying strategies of investment (in churches, shrines, burials etc) and suggests that the former site (Church Island) had close links with secular elite and may have had a pastoral role, while the latter (Illaunloughan) was a small male monastery. Clearly, sites that combined a range of functions were much more common than those that were purely monastic or purely pastoral. This is particularly true after the office of coarb became firmly established from c.AD 700, the period to which much of our quantifiable archaeology belongs. We must therefore guard against placing these sites in excessively rigid, preconceived categories. The differences between them are usually differences in emphasis; and so the challenge for archaeologists is to distinguish between sites on the basis of nuances like those discussed above. It is evident then that there is great potential for a landscape based study of ecclesiastical studies that could appraise the evidence for ecclesiastical estates and the provision of pastoral care within early medieval Ireland. Furthermore, can archaeology shed light about how the provision of pastoral care and the interaction between monasteries and local secular communities shifted over time? Such a study could provide valuable information about the meaning of religion and the character of the Christian Church in early medieval Ireland.

Early medieval church archaeology ­ future research areas
Despite the enormous riches of the archaeological record for the early medieval church and its iconic role in early medieval studies generally, our understanding of the chronological and structural development of early medieval ecclesiastical and hermitage sites during the early medieval period is quite limited. Many western hermitage sites such as Illaunloughan, High Island and Reask, Co. Kerry have been extensively excavated and we have a good understanding about the chronological development and organization of activities at these few sites. Yet, it is evident that few ecclesiastical sites across the rest of the country have been comprehensively excavated, with the possible exception of Clonmacnoise, Co. Offaly. We still then do not have a complete understanding about how ecclesiastical sites were organized in terms of industrial areas, cemetery locations, habitation areas and ecclesiastical structures through the early medieval period. Furthermore, what were the scale and quality of industrial and craftwork production at these ecclesiastical sites through the early medieval period? What was the extent and character of settlement both during the period of the early church (5­10th century A.D) and during the postulated development of ‘monastic towns’ from the 10­12th centuries A.D? Was the scale of settlement and craftwork something previously unparalleled at earlier church sites (5­10th century A.D.) and what was the economic, social and religious role of these sites within the local landscape? A final largely unresearched area concerns the archaeological evidence for the

141

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 5: The Early Medieval Church

provision of pastoral care by these ecclesiastical sites. Historians have advanced many theories yet it is evident that there have been few archaeological studies that have sought about examining the social and religious role of these monastic sites within their local landscape context. There is then great potential for studies comparatively assessing the archaeological development of these churches both within a site and landscape context. Such studies could then be in a position to identify regional patterns in terms of the organization, character, layout and function of ecclesiastical sites through the early medieval period.

142

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 6: Early Medieval Burials and Cemeteries

Chapter 6. Early medieval burials and cemeteries

Introduction
Background The centuries from A.D. 400­1200 are commonly regarded as the ‘early Christian period’. Yet there is a growing body of archaeological evidence for the long­lived nature of Pagan practices, or more appropriately the slow conversion of Irish society (or elements of it) to Christian belief and practice; as well as a growing sense of the diversity and complexity of burial practices during this period across the island. Christianity only appears to have emerged as the dominant religion by perhaps the 6th century A.D. but old traditions died hard and burials continued to be interred in many diverse, often probably ancient contexts up to the 7th/8th century A.D. and even beyond (with a re­introduction of ‘Pagan’ burial rites in the Viking Age between the 9th and the 10th centuries AD. It is certainly the case that Irish archaeology has uncovered an extraordinarily rich array of evidence for people’s beliefs, ideologies and ritual practices, which future research by EMAP and others could usefully investigate. This EMAP report describes and analyses the wide range of early medieval burial evidence that has been discovered in Ireland. It draws extensively from the publications of Elizabeth O’Brien (1990, 1993, 2003), who has written the key texts in understanding and interpreting the burial practices of the peoples of early medieval Ireland, while it also acknowledges the work of many site directors of various excavations who have themselves offered significant conclusions. The first section describes the rites and practices used in burying the corpse of the deceased, in other words the actual treatment of the body itself. EMAP then examines the diversity of burial practices in the Iron Age/early medieval transition period (i.e. in the 5th­6th century A.D.), in enclosures, mounds and other contexts. It also describes the increasingly rich evidence for unenclosed burials and cemeteries in the early medieval archaeological record (See Appendix 5). The function and role of these sites still has to be established. The Chapter then explores the evidence for burial practices as we move into the early medieval period proper, including the emergence of burial in ecclesiastical contexts and also in settlement/cemetery sites. It examines the emergence of ecclesiastical cemeteries in the 7th/8th century, their links with earlier funerary sites and the evidence for diversity in burial rites. There is intriguing evidence that ‘Pagan’ burial practices continued into the early medieval period – suggesting that the hegemony of Christian authorities was not total in the landscape. However, ‘Pagan’ burial practices are certainly re­introduced in the 9th century AD, when Viking raiders were being buried in Dublin and elsewhere, until the Hiberno­Norse were converted to Christianity and merge into the gradually more homogenous burial practices of the Medieval world.

Burying the dead in early medieval Ireland – how was the corpse treated?
We can firstly explore the rites of burial itself. Early medieval people in Ireland buried their dead in a range of ways, using a variety of rites and practices, involving the placing of the body in slightly different positions and using grave goods, stone, wood and cloth in different ways. Almost all early medieval burials were buried without grave goods, in an east­west orientation (with the head to the west), in an extended, supine position (i.e. lying on the back) in a long dug grave (that may be defined in various ways). This is a burial practice that is not entirely Christian in origins, as it emerges in Roman­Britain in the 2nd/3rd century AD. Rarely, early medieval burials are in a prone (lying face down) or flexed (with legs drawn slightly upwards); practices that may be contingent on events (hurried burials during war, disease) or cultural

143

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 6: Early Medieval Burials and Cemeteries

practices (Anglo­Saxon influences or the treatment of marginalized people such as criminals or outlaws). However, it is not as simple as this and it is now known that the treatment of the corpse itself (as well as the grave furniture, see below) shows some chronological development through the early medieval period (e.g. the gradual shift away from an unwrapped body towards the use of a shroud cloth tightly wrapped around the body), but there is also evidence for continuities (e.g. the use of unprotected or unlined graves ­ simple dug pits – across the entire early medieval period) and for rites that vary within burial grounds at the same time (e.g. the use of stone slab­lined cists in the 5th/6th century or lintelled graves in the 7th/8th century at the same time as unprotected graves). This means that although patterns can certainly be discerned, it would be unwise to date excavated burials by burial rite alone. There are also a few practices that, although rare (such as the very rare use of ‘pillow stones’ placed behind the head) can be found across all periods. In summary, burial rites in the early medieval period include: ! Iron Age/early medieval transition period burials (5th/6th century AD) (evolving from Iron Age traditions in the 3rd/4th century AD): Bodies are buried as extended inhumations, east­west in orientation, in long stone slab­lined cists or in unprotected dug graves. The corpse is placed ‘loose’ (i.e. not wrapped in a shroud or cloth binding ­ although there may have been a covering cloth over the face ­ so that arms and feet are apart). The long stone cist might be defined with upright kerbstones along the sides and ends of the grave, with stones also laid as a base and across the top as capstones. It is not possible to say whether such burials in slab­lined graves are ‘Pagan’ or ‘Christian’, as extended inhumation in east­west orientation is a rite descended from Romano­British practices Early medieval ‘Christian’ and ‘Pagan’ burial (7th/8th century AD, or later). Early medieval Christian – as most of them probably were by the 7th/8th century AD ­ burials were often (but not always) in ecclesiastical graveyards: Bodies must have been tightly wrapped in a cloth shroud, causing the arms to lie tight against the body while the feet are close together at ankles (as depicted on Cross of Scriptures). Bodies may be placed in a ‘lintelled’ grave (with stones at edges and ends, but NOT with laid stones in the base of grave) or alternatively in a dug, unprotected grave. Lintelled graves tend to be dated to after the seventh century AD. The head may be flanked or propped by ‘ear­muff’ stones (preventing the head from slumping sideways) or there may be a ‘head­cist’ (i.e. an arrangement of stones around head only). Other unusual burials are also known in caves that might be ‘Christian’ burials, but some of these may well be ‘Pagan’ burials (e.g. at Cloghermore, Co. Kerry) well into the Christian era (i.e. in the 7th/8th century AD). There are also some burials from the 6th/7th century AD, mostly along the east coast, that have produced a few grave goods (e.g. brooches, knives, deposits of charred grain) that might be interpreted as Anglo­ Saxon burials. Early medieval ‘Norse’ furnished burials (9th/early 10th century) will usually be in unprotected graves, typically with various associated objects (e.g. males with daggers, swords, shield bosses or females tortoise shell brooches – although it is possible for such gender roles to be not so clear). It should be noted that not all Norse people were buried with such high­status grave goods, suggesting that it may be difficult to distinguish between Christian ‘Irish’ and Pagan ‘Norse’ burials in the 9th century AD. Early medieval Christian burial with recumbent decorated/cross slabs (8th­11th century AD). The burial is associated with gravestones, such as recumbent slabs. The burial may be in unlined graves or lintelled graves, but the distinctive touch is the recumbent slab over or beside the grave. This practice

!

!

!

144

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 6: Early Medieval Burials and Cemeteries

was probably reserved for people of high (e.g. aristocratic or ecclesiastical authority) status. High status recumbent slabs have also been recovered from a large number of significant early medieval ecclesiastical sites particularly at Clonmacnoise and Gallen, Co. Clare, Iniscealtra, Co. Clare, Glendalough, Co. Wicklow, Nendrum, Co. Down, Inishmurray, Co. Sligo, the Aran Islands, Co. Galway, Kilpeacan and Kilberrihert, Co. Tipperary and Tullylease, Co. Cork (Lionard 1961). A number of high status burials at Iniscealtra and Glendalough were lined with slabs that project over the surface. They were then covered with recumbent slabs, many of which were decorated with incised and carved crosses. Small socket­holes were present at the head or foot of the graves and would have held upright crosses (Lionard 1961, 150). These burials tend to date to after the 8th century and may represent the burial places of high status ecclesiastics and secular individuals. ! Late Medieval burials (12th/13th century and later), Corpses are placed in wooden coffins (with surviving iron coffin nails), arms will be placed crossed across chest, and body will be tightly wrapped in a shroud – and shroud pins will be associated with body (as at Ardfert, Co. Kerry).

Early medieval burial and the use of enclosures/ring­ditches (5­7th century A.D.)
Introduction

annular

burial

O’Brien (1993) was the first archaeologist to note that Iron Age/Early Christian transitional burials were being interred in annular burial enclosures (i.e. circular ditched enclosures, descended from the very long tradition (i.e. as in Bronze Age and Iron Age) of burial in ring­ ditches and barrows). She showed how historical sources like the Collecto Canonum Hibernensis provided information about the continuing practice of burial within possible pagan unconsecrated cemeteries in the 6/7th centuries. O’Brien (1993, 133) noted a comment by Tirechan which mentioned the burial of two daughters of a king inside a round ditch “after the manner of a ferta, because this is what the heathen Irish used to do, but we call it a relic”. O’Brien suggested that Iron Age/early Christian ring­ditches or ring­barrows were the possible location of these pagan ferta or relic cemeteries in the 5th/6th/7th centuries AD. O’Brien’s (2003) paper mentioned five annular burial enclosures which could be examples of ferta or relic cemeteries. Early Medieval burial in Penannular Enclosures/Ring­Ditches Before reviewing the evidence for burial in annular enclosures, it should first be stated that there is also a very rare practice of burying the dead in penannular enclosures (i.e. ring­ditches where a single causewayed entrance is left, so that the ditch is not continuous. In contrast, more common annular enclosures are continuous ring ditches: Elizabeth O’Brien pers comm). Sites included Westreave, Co. Dublin; Colp, Co. Meath and Ardsallagh I, Co. Meath where penannular enclosures became the focus of inhumation cemeteries containing both east­west unprotected and stone/slab­lined graves. O’Brien (1993) also mentioned an excavation at Greenhills, near Kilcullen Co. Kildare which a number of unprotected and stone/slab­lined east­ west inhumations inside and outside the ditched enclosure. Other examples included Castle Upton, Templepatrick, Co. Antrim where a centrally placed stone­lined grave and an unprotected parallel grave were found inside a penannular enclosure. At Westereave, Co. Dublin, the first phase saw the establishment of a well­ordered cemetery containing east­west unlined pit burials inside a penannular burial enclosure or ring­ditch. The second phases saw further stone­lined burials extending out over the fill of the ditch into the surrounding area. In total 52 burials were excavated at the site (Gowen 1988, Excavations Bulletin).

145

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 6: Early Medieval Burials and Cemeteries

At Colp West, Co. Meath, excavations revealed a cemetery of over 100 inhumations, 14 of which were set in stone­lined burials. A number of primary burials appear to have been contained within a penannular burial enclosure, 15m in diameter that in turn was succeeded by a cemetery of approximately 100 burials (Gowen 1988, Excavations Bulletin; O’Brien 1993, 98). At Ardsallagh II, Co. Meath, archaeological excavations by Linda Clarke (ACS) (since O’Brien’s review) in advance of the M3 Clonee to north of Kells Motorway, identified an early medieval penannular enclosure, 21m in diameter with an entrance causeway. The excavations revealed two early Bronze ring­ditches containing flat cremation cemeteries. The early medieval pennanular ring ditch was found beside these features and was found to have imitated them in form (a feature noted at Rathdooney Beg, Co. Sligo, where a Neolithic bowl barrow was similarly replicated in the Iron Age (Carlin & Clarke 2006)). Its primary and main fills were radiocarbon dated to between the fifth to the eighth century and it was later re­used as a segmented enclosure. There was no clear evidence for burials (Linda Clarke pers. Comm.). At Ardsallagh I, Co. Meath located close by, a pennanular ring­ditch, 14m in diameter, was also recently excavated by Linda Clarke (ACS). Late Bronze Age and Iron Age cremation burials were found on the site, indicating that it already existed as a ritual locale. The Iron Age/early medieval transition pennanular enclosure ditch, with an entrance to the west, was dug in the 4th­6th century AD and the burial enclosures showed evidence for use in the 5th­7th century AD. The early medieval burial ground had up to 30 east­west inhumations, including 5 stone­lined inhumations outside the enclosure and 24 interred bodies inside the ring­ditch. Four radiocarbon­dated burials ranged from the fourth to the seventh century AD (Clarke & Carlin 2006; Linda Clarke pers comm). Early Medieval Burial in Annular Enclosures/Ring­Ditches However, early medieval burial in annular enclosures (i.e. with continuous, circular ring­ditches) is much more common. One of the earliest hints of this early medieval burial tradition ironically came from the later prehistoric research of the Discovery Programme. The Ballyhoura Hills Project’s (directed by Martin Doody) excavations at Chancellorsland, Co. Tipperary discovered that a fill (not a burial deposit) from the ditch of a ring barrow produced a radiocarbon confirming its use in the 7/8th centuries – although the site had originally been excavated as it was thought to be a Bronze Age barrow located close to a confirmed Bronze Age settlement enclosure (O’Brien 2003, 69). However, O’Brien (1993) noted this late date and also noted how a similar ditched enclosure containing extended inhumations in unprotected graves was revealed 200m to the southeast of the ecclesiastical enclosure at Durrow, Co. Offaly. Though the dates of this annular ditched enclosure were not available at the time (they have since suggested a 9th century AD date; Elizabeth O’Brien, pers comm.), she postulated whether it might represent a pagan cemetery (ferta) that was Christianised later. EMAP’s review of the excavation evidence has thrown up other potential sites which could be considered in such a category involving burial inside ditched enclosures described in this instance by O’Brien as “Annular Burial enclosures” but which could also be variously described as ring­ditches or ring­barrows. Excavations at Mell II, Co. Louth in advance of the M1 Motorway revealed nine crude stone­ lined graves in close proximity to a ring­ditch that may date to the Bronze Age. A silver ornament was found interred with one inhumation while a cremation pyre was also potentially excavated (Breen, excavations Bulletin, 2000). A ring­ditch was excavated at Cloncowan, Co. Meath in advance of the Bord Gáis Pipeline Scheme to the West. Sixteen burials were excavated, 13 of which were found within the ditch with the remainder in the interior. There was no consistency in their alignment though one burial was defined by earmuffs while another contained a pillow stone.

146

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 6: Early Medieval Burials and Cemeteries

Excavations at the large settlement­cemetery site at Raystown, Co. Meath also revealed a 4/5th century ring­ditch, 20m in diameter that served as the setting for an inhumation cemetery of 93 people that continued through the early medieval period. Excavations at Armagh by Lynn in 1979 revealed a Neolithic ring ditch, 11m in diameter which was found associated with a cemetery of approximately 60 east­west inhumations. The site was located in the postulated area of the historically known Temple na Ferta. A radiocarbon determination for one grave returned a date spanning the mid fifth­mid seventh century (cal. A.D. 430­640) (Edwards 1990, 130). One of these was interred within a wooden coffin and marked out by wooden posts which Ó Carragáin (2003) suggested might represent evidence for a translation. The cemetery appears to have fallen out of use by the 9th century when the area was used for industrial purposes. Excavations at Corbally, Co. Kildare revealed a site that began as a small ring­ditch but later evolved into a large sub­rectangular enclosure, c. 50m in diameter. Eight simple dug graves were excavated. Burials inside the ring­ditch were radiocarbon dated to between 330AD and 540AD, while those from outside the enclosure were dated to between 770AD and 820AD (Stout 2006). It appears then that burial activity switched from the interior of the ring­ ditch to around the monument as appears to have occurred at Westereave and Colp West. A vast quantity of settlement evidence was also uncovered. The site appears to have been an important settlement site with some burial activity from the Late Iron Age to the 10/11th century at least. Excavations at Coldwinters, Lusk, Co. Dublin in advance of the M1 Airport­Balbriggan Motorway Bypass (Opie 1999, Excavations Bulletin) revealed a double­ditched enclosure. The outer ditch was 45m in diameter while the inner enclosed an area of 39m. Six east­west burials were excavated within the interior of the site. A small circular ring­ditch measuring c. 10m in diameter, 0.8m wide and 0.3­0.8m deep was cut into the large enclosure. A single human extended supine burial contained within a slab­lined grave and covered by a few covering lintels was excavated within the centre of the ring­ditch and was aligned south­east/north­west. There were no grave­goods present. A limited quantity of settlement evidence was uncovered. Early Medieval Burial in Ancient Ring­Barrows One interesting facet of this burial evidence is the hint that some communities buried their dead in barrows and ring­ditches that had actually been created in prehistory. In other words, people were actually using ancient monuments, as opposed to building new monuments that either respected or mirrored ancient forms. Excavations have therefore revealed that Iron Age/early medieval transition inhumation cemeteries were interred inside and around pre­existing ring­ barrows. An Iron Age ring­barrow was excavated at Bellinstown, Co. Dublin in advance of the M1 Balbriggan­Airport Bypass (Lynch excavation bulletin, 2002). A deer antler and a small deposit of cremated bone were found inside the monument. The northeastern side of the monument was cut by five unprotected east­west inhumation. Immediately beside these inhumations were four others, orientated northeast­southwest. A possible annular enclosure or ring­barrow was found 10m to the north of the ecclesiastical cemetery at Derrynaflan monastery, Co. Tipperary and excavated by Elizabeth O’Brien. The barrow had been extensively disturbed by later activity but survived as a shallow flat bottomed ditch 1.0m wide and enclosing an area of 6m in diameter. Two pits were found to contain quantities of charcoal, cremated bone and animal bone as well as potential undisturbed burials. No human bone was identified (O’Floinn excavations bulletin, 1985). Excavations at Kiltullagh, Co. Roscommon revealed a cemetery of stone/slab­lined and unprotected inhumations and Iron Age cremations pits beside a standing stone and ring­barrow on the summit of the hill. One stone/slab­lined inhumation burial was dated to the 5th century

147

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 6: Early Medieval Burials and Cemeteries

A.D. It is clear that the ring­barrow and standing stone had become the focal point of later inhumation burials in the 5/6th centuries. Recent excavations at Cross, Co. Galway in advance of the N6 Galway­Ballinasloe Road Scheme revealed two ring­barrows that appear to have been the focal point of burials in the early medieval period (Bermingham 2007). The Origins and Chronology of the Iron Age/Early Medieval Annular Burial Enclosure In summary, there is increasing evidence for the burial of predominantly east­west inhumations (that may or may not be Christian burials) inside, outside and around ditched enclosures that have been variously described as penannular enclosures, annular enclosures, ring­ditches and ring­barrows. It is clear that excavations in recent years have increased the number of known ditched enclosures with Iron Age/early medieval east­west inhumations, many buried within stone/slab­lined cists. Radiocarbon dating indicates that some of these were re­used Iron Age monuments; some were located on or close to Late Bronze Age or Iron Age burial grounds (although these ancient cremation burials would hardly have been distinctively marked or highly visible in the fifth century), while some were actual Iron Age/early medieval dug monuments constructed a novo in the mid­fifth century AD and after (i.e. contemporary with the earliest Christian missions in Ireland, although this of course does not signify that these were Christian believers). What are the origins of these Iron Age/early medieval burial grounds – that may well be the form of monuments known to Tirechan as ferta? O’Brien (1993, 2003) noted that the Iron Age/early medieval burial enclosures had possible common ancestral antecedents in the Irish landscape in the form of the Bronze Age and Iron Age ring­ditch and/or ring­barrow. It is certainly possible that Irish Iron Age/early medieval transition burial enclosures have their origins in native Irish prehistoric monuments (and it is striking that at Ardsallagh I and II, there was clear Late Bronze Age and Iron Age burial activity there beforehand). Clarke and Carlin (2006), amongst others, have also noted how the annular ditched enclosure (ring­ditch, ring­ barrow) is a monument that is continuously found from the Neolithic through to the early medieval period. However, O’Brien (1993, 2003) also noted that these Iron Age/early medieval sites tended to be located in areas of Ireland that had both historical and potential archaeological links with Anglo­ Saxon England in the 7th century; i.e. the kingdom of Brega on the east coast. She noted that her five examples dated to around the 7th century A.D. and that importantly this type of annular burial enclosure could be compared particularly to sites in Anglo­Saxon England. O’Brien was of the opinion at that stage that the annular burial enclosure was probably a once off phenomenon which was due to contacts with Anglo­Saxon England in the 7th century. However, EMAP can demonstrate from the 1970­2002 data, but also from more recent discoveries that the great majority of known excavated Iron Age/early medieval ditched enclosures containing inhumation cemeteries continue to be located in the counties of Dublin, Kildare, Louth and particularly Meath: eastern counties which would very likely have enjoyed contacts with Anglo­ Saxon England. A counter argument could be made however that these discoveries are a product of the huge scale of excavations in these eastern counties due to the scale of the M3, M2 and other major roadway schemes rather than evidence for regionality of burial practice within early medieval Ireland. However, the dating evidence shows that this is a monument that emerges out of the period AD 400­500, potentially well before any Anglo­Saxon connection. Excavations at Ardsallagh 2, Co. Meath and Raystown, Co. Meath have confirmed that the early ring­ditches date to the 4/5th centuries A.D. Furthermore, it is likely that the ring­ditches at Bellinstown and Cloncowan date to this period. The fact that burials tended to be located in the interior, inside the ditch and around the ditched enclosures at a number of the sites including Bellinstown and Ardsallagh 2 supports the idea that the ring­ditches predated the inhumation cemeteries by at least some time (although the enclosing ditches could be merely days or weeks earlier than the first burial within them). While it is possible that while this type of annular enclosure may be related to

148

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 6: Early Medieval Burials and Cemeteries

influences from Anglo­Saxon England in and around the 7th century, that the re­use of pre­ existing funerary monuments such as ring­ditches was an important component of religious practices in this period. This is particularly relevant when we understand that many of these like Ardsallagh and Chancellorsland contain evidence for ritual practices extending back into the Bronze Age. It is evident then that we should then consider the power of ancestral places as a powerful motivation factor in the location of transitional burials. This is clear when we consider the other settings and forms of 5th/6th/7th century burials and cemeteries across the island. The abandonment of Iron Age/early medieval transition annular enclosures as we move on into the early medieval period Some ring­ditches possibly like Chancellorsland, Castle Upton, Templepatrick and Greenhills appear to have only been used for a limited number of burials in the transitional 5­7th century A.D. period. The ring­ditches at Westereave and Colp West though appear to have provided a focal point for subsequent unenclosed early medieval cemeteries that later developed over the fills of the ditch and into the surrounding area. Both sites appear to have revealed no settlement evidence though it must be stated that only a small part of the sites, particularly at Colp West were fully excavated in 1988/89. Excavations at Cloncowan, Ardsallagh 2, Bellinstown and Kiltullagh also attest to the continued practice of limited early medieval burial in the interior and exterior of these monuments. The ring­ditches at Raystown and Corbally appear to have developed into subsequent significant enclosed settlement sites with evidence for burial well into the early medieval period (See Settlement/Cemeteries­Settlement Section). A ring­ditch was also located in close proximity to another significant early medieval enclosed site with limited burial evidence at Castlefarm, Co. Meath. It is also possible that the ring­ ditches and ring­barrows provided burial foci for subsequent ecclesiastical cemeteries at Armagh, Durrow & Derrynaflan. It appears then that many Iron Age/early medieval ring­ditches which may have been used for burial in the 5­7th century A.D. only saw limited activity and fell out of use after this period. The bulk of sites though appear to have seen intermittent burial evidence up around the 8th century A.D with a minority of sites developing into significant settlement/cemetery sites and possible ecclesiastical cemeteries.

Early medieval burials and standing stones (5­7th centuries A.D.)
While the Iron Age/early medieval transition annular burial enclosure or ring­ditch/ring­barrow was possibly the most significant form of burial monument in the 5th/6th/7th century, EMAP’s research also makes it clear that other types were also popular across the island in this period. Some of these are similar to the above evidence, in that pre­existing funerary or ritual monuments provided a focal point for transition­period burials. Standing stones were one important ancestral monument that appear to have been foci for burial in this period. The Evidence for Standing Stones and Iron Age/early medieval transition Burial Excavations at Kiltullagh, Co. Roscommon mentioned above were undertaken beside a standing stone indicating the important significance of this site in the period. Excavations at Kiltullagh, Co. Roscommon revealed a cemetery of stone/slab­lined and unprotected inhumations and Iron Age cremations pits beside a standing stone and ring­barrow on the summit of the hill. One stone/slab­lined inhumation burial was dated to the 5th century A.D. It is clear that the ring­ barrow and standing stone had become the focal point of later inhumation burials in the 5/6th centuries.

149

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 6: Early Medieval Burials and Cemeteries

Excavations at Ballykeel South, Co. Clare revealed a stone/slab­lined cist burial that was radiocarbon dated to c.A.D. 400 beside a standing stone and near the enclosure known as Ballykeel Fort (Cahill 1988, Excavations Bulletin). Excavations on the summit of an artificially constructed mound at Kilgowan, Co. Kildare revealed at least 9 extended east­west inhumations besides a cross­inscribed standing stone (Valerie Keeley 1987, Excavations Bulletin). A ditch­type feature (ring­ditch?) was excavated to its east though it was unclear if it enclosed the burials. Though no dates were given for these extended inhumations, it is probable that they date to this transitional period. Excavations at Brackloon, Co. Kerry (Fionnbarr Moore, excavations bulletin 1991) revealed a roughly east­west slab­lined burial situated halfway between a cross­inscribed pillar stone and an outcrop of rock art. No dates were available for this burial though it could potentially be early in date. Excavations at Forenaughts Great, Co. Kildare revealed a carefully constructed mound 1m in height containing a cremation burial dating to the 5th century A.D (Grogan 1980). It is unique in that it is the only excavated cremation burial site that dates to the fifth century A.D. A standing stone was located the Longstone Rath where Early Bronze Age cist burials had been excavated beneath previously. It is evident then that Standing Stones were considered as important ancestral monuments that could be reused in a funerary context in and around the 5/6th centuries. The antiquity of these Standing Stones is still a matter of debate with some commentators suggesting dates from the Neolithic to Iron Age, although ogham stones are obviously also standing stones. Continuity of burial on into the early medieval period A number of these examples such as Ballykeel South and Brackloon appear to represent isolated examples of stone­lined cists which potentially date to the 5/6th centuries A.D. Along with Kilgowan, it appears that these sites did not continue to remain a focal point of burial into the early medieval period. The cremation burial at Forenaughts Great remains an enigma. Its discovery beneath a mound suggests that that it fits neatly with the ‘mound burial’ category which appears to also have been a once of construction during the transitional 5­7th century A.D period. Kiltullagh was located both beside a ring­ditch and standing stone. The site is likely to have provided foci for an ecclesiastical site with early medieval origins at the summit of the hill. Another possible exception is Millockstown, Co. Louth where an important early medieval ‘settlement/cemetery’ site was excavated in close proximity to a standing stone.

Early medieval mound burials (5­7th century A.D.)
Elizabeth O’Brien (2003) has noted another type of Iron Age/early medieval transitional burials that she has described as “Mound Burials”. O’Brien’s (2003) ‘Mound Burial’ typically takes the form of classic transitional stone/slab­lined cists which were covered beneath low mounds. The Evidence for Transitional Mound Burials O’Brien (2003) noted four burials excavated beneath a low mound at Pollacorragune, Tuam, Co. Galway (Riley 1937, 44) that were subsequently dated to approximately the fourth/sixth centuries A.D. An excavation at Muckduff, Co. Sligo undertaken by Joseph Raftery (1941, 302) also revealed an extended inhumation beneath a low mound which O’Brien (2003, 66) suggests dates to a similar period. O’Brien (2003, 65) has also observed that extended east­west inhumations were excavated beneath a mound at Ninch, Co. Meath, one of which was possibly stone­lined. The mound

150

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 6: Early Medieval Burials and Cemeteries

measured 5m in height and 24m in diameter. One burial was radiocarbon dated to the fifth century A.D (Sweetman 1983). A burial contained within a long stone cist was excavated beneath a low mound 14m in diameter at Farganstown & Ballymacon, Co. Meath (Kelly 1976). No radiocarbon dates were available for the site although it is quite likely that it is also transitional in date. Other potential sites in which Iron Age/early medieval transition burials may have been interred in a raised mound include Knocklore, Co. Louth that was bulldozed in 1964. No extant remains of the raised mound survive though it was believed that upwards of 20 burials were recovered of uncertain date. Testing was conducted at the area in 1996 by Martin Fitzpatrick in advance of the N2 Ardee­Rathory Road Realignment but nothing appears to have been recovered. The site is of uncertain date though could potentially date to this transitional period. Fifty inhumations were also excavated inside a mound at Johnstown, Co. Meath and dated to around the Late Iron Age. A charnel pit contained three inhumations and dated to AD 370­640 (Carlin, Walsh & Clarke, forthcoming). This cemetery later provided a focus for a significant early and late medieval settlement and cemetery site. In this case, the mound was probably a natural hill feature, but it may well have been that Iron Age/early medieval communities – unaware of its natural origins ­ regarded the site as a ferta. Eoin Grogan’s (1980) excavations at the low Forenaught Great, Co. Kildare could potentially be 5th century cremation appears to represent an cremation appears to have fallen out of use by the mound containing a cremation burial at regarded in this category. The presence of a aberration in the burial data however as 2nd/3th century A.D.

Ad hoc burial and the concept of the ‘burial mound’ It is clear then that pre­existing burial places – possibly regarded as ancestral or ancient monuments ­ were significant sites of high­ranking burial from the 5­7th century A.D., O’Brien (1992, 133) has however also alluded to another type of isolated burial. She has noted a number of historical references by Muirchu and Tirechan to people being buried on the spot of their death. Another reference by Adomnán refers to how after Columba had baptized an old pagan man, he presently died and was buried beneath a cairn of stones. It is evident that slab­ lined cist burials were interned beneath a number of mound burials at Ninch, Co. Meath, Ferganstown & Ballymackon, Co. Meath and Pollacorragune, Tuam, Co. Galway and Muckduff, Co. Sligo as noted by O’Brien (2003, 65). A further slab­lined burial was interned beneath a cairn of stones at Claristown 2 although there was evidence for preceding prehistoric evidence. It is possible however that the examples of Knocklore and Johnstown 1 provide exceptions to the idea that transitional mound burials were associated with ad hoc burial as they appear to have contained in themselves important cemeteries.
Continuity of burial into the early medieval period The ‘mound burials’ typically take the form of one or a limited number of inhumations, often set inside stone/slab­lined burials that were interred beneath small mounds. These small burial mounds do not appear to have remained a focal point of burial after the 5/6th century A.D. The possible exception listed under this category is at Knocklore, Co. Louth where upwards of 20 undated burials and Johnstown 1 that continued to be used as a settlement and cemetery site into the post medieval period. It is possible that these two examples belong to different categories as ‘mound burials’, observed by O’Brien (2003) appear to have been a once of construction built during the 5­7th centuries A.D.

151

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 6: Early Medieval Burials and Cemeteries

Early medieval burial and prehistoric mounds and cairns (5­7th century A.D.)
It is also evident that ancient prehistoric mounds or cairns could also provide a focus for burial from the 5­7th centuries A.D. Evidence for this form of burial has been excavated in a variety of contexts including Neolithic passage tombs, early Bronze Age cemeteries and Bronze Age cairns. The evidence for the re­use of prehistoric monuments by Iron Age/early medieval transition burials Excavations at Knowth (Eogan 1974) revealed nine crouched, four flexed, eight extended and thirteen disturbed inhumations around the circumference of the passage tomb at Knowth, Co. Meath. The crouched and flexed inhumations contained grave goods and are Iron Age in date. Four extended slab­lined graves were set slightly apart and Elizabeth O’Brien (pers comm.) suggested that these were likely to date to the fifth century A.D. They indicate the continued importance of this ancestral funerary monument during the transitional Iron Age/early medieval period. Excavations at Betaghstown, Co. Meath revealed another complex funerary landscape dating from the Neolithic to Bronze Age. The prehistoric evidence there took the form of a Neolithic timber circle and an early Bronze Age cemetery. It was possible that the Bronze Age burials excavated by Kelly in 1979 may have been covered by a mound (Kelly 1979; Meenan 1998). Excavations also discovered an inhumation cemetery dating from the Late Iron Age/early medieval transition. A number of crouched pit and slab­lined cist burials were excavated at the primary levels of the site. One of the crouched pit burials was by an iron belt buckle, two penannular brooches, stone axe pendant and bronze plate and is likely to be late Iron Age/early medieval in date (Kelly 1979). Elizabeth O’Brien (pers comm.) suggests that the ritual and grave goods indicate that this could be a Romano­British or early Anglo­Saxon burial. Early medieval burials were also found in a Bronze Age cairn, 25m in diameter, excavated by Elizabeth O’Brien in 1997 and 1998 at Ballymacaward, Co. Donegal, not far from the sea. The cairn measured 25m in diameter and was surrounded by a later stone kerb. A Bronze Age cist was probably the primary use of the cairn. Iron Age cremated bone mixed with charcoal and contained within two small bowl­shaped pits were uncovered near the centre of the site and radiocarbon dated to 2/1st centuries B.C. A total of ten Iron Age/early medieval east­west inhumations were also uncovered. Three were contained within slab­lined cists, one of which was radiocarbon dated to the mid fifth century AD. The remaining burials were in unprotected dug graves; some wrapped in shrouds, and were dated to around the 7th century AD. Ballymacaward is a fascinating example of a burial ground used periodically across later prehistory and into the early Middle Ages, with interesting connections being established by early medieval communities with the past. Excavations along the M1 motorway at Claristown 2, Co. Meath revealed an enigmatic site that dated from the Neolithic to early medieval period. The earliest Iron Age phase consisted of a circular hut measuring 6m in diameter. It was succeeded by the burial of an adult inside a stone­lined cist in the centre of a possible ring­ditch that was then covered by a small mound. A possible circular structure was then built over the central burial. The structure was eventually dismantled and covered by a cairn of stones. Nine stone­lined inhumations were found to the north of the cairn and are likely to be Late Iron Age/early medieval in date, while another four unprotected burials were interred to the south of the cairn in the early medieval period (Russell, 2001). It is possible that people in the late Iron age/early medieval period understood the mound covered by a cairn of stone as an ancient ancestrally funerary monument. Excavations were undertaken at Knoxspark, Co. Sligo (Mount 1994, Excavations Bulletin­ 94E060). A large early medieval cemetery with possible Late Iron Age/early medieval origins was excavated around two cairns which contained a cremation and child burial. It appears that the site was then enclosed by a rectangular promontory fort measuring 23m north­south by

152

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 6: Early Medieval Burials and Cemeteries

19m east­west. Evidence for settlement evidence was also recovered indicating the site’s possible function as an early medieval ‘settlement/cemetery’. Continuity into the early medieval period Ballymacaward appears to have been re­used in the fifth century with a final number of unprotected burials interred around the site in the 7th century. A similar phasing of activity may have taken place at Claristown 2 where number of Late Iron Age/early medieval slab­lined burials were succeeded by unprotected burials dating to the early medieval period. No accompanying settlement evidence appears to have been uncovered at these sites. The burial sites at Knowth and Betaghstown are likely to date to the 5/6th centuries A.D. However the burials and the megalithic tomb at Knowth provided a focus for the development of a significant early medieval settlement site with royal associations. Similarly, the burials at Betaghstown were located a short distance from an unenclosed early medieval cemetery (See Below), while an important enclosed settlement/cemetery site appears to have developed around two cairns at Knoxpark in the early medieval period.

Enclosures as foci of early burial
There is also a growing body of evidence to suggest that large, pre­existing enclosures – or newly built enclosures (subtly different from the annular enclosures described above) ­ were used for burials in the Iron Age/early medieval transition period (4­7th centuries A.D.) some of which also became a focus for later settlement activities (See Settlement/Cemetery­ Settlement Section). There is however no evidence for any churches on these sites, suggesting that they are some form of ‘secular’ burial ground. Some of these enclosed burial grounds became a focus for settlement. The Evidence Excavations at Cherrywood, Co Dublin revealed a 6/7th century inhumation cemetery containing 38 burials inside an enclosure measuring 43m x 20m. The site was situated in a rich prehistoric funerary landscape and was subsequently reused by later early medieval and potential Viking settlements (O Neill 1998, Excavations Bulletin­ 98E0526). Excavations at Mount Offaly, Co. Dublin revealed a large cemetery dating from the 5/6th century­11/12th century A.D. was enclosed within a bivallate enclosure (inner 50 x60m; outer 60­65m) at Mount Offaly. The enclosure was subsequently expanded in the early medieval period. Excavations at Parknahown, Co. Laois by ACS also recently revealed a double­ditched enclosure (60m in diameter) whose ditches fill contained a late 7th century brooch. It enclosed a cemetery of approximately 600 people and was used for a number of centuries during the early medieval period. Excavations at Faughart Lower by NAC also revealed a double­ditched enclosure that was dated to the 4­6th century A.D. The enclosure appears to have pre­dated the burials that began in the 5­6th century A.D. (http://www.nra.ie/Archaeology/LeafletandPosterSeries/file,9105,en.pdf). Excavations at Millockstown, Co. Louth in Phase 1 revealed an enclosure measuring 65m x 56m. The enclosure was subsequently succeeded by a ringfort and later lintel cemetery (Manning 1986). A similar scenario occurred at Ninch, Laytown that revealed that a number of enclosing ditches possibly indicative of a ringfort preceded the construction of a lintel cemetery c. 6­9th century A.D. (James Eogan; Cia McConway 2000­2002, Excavations Bulletin­ 98E0501).

153

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 6: Early Medieval Burials and Cemeteries

It must be said that 4­7th century A.D enclosures appear to have provided a foci for burial at these places though not all sites necessarily contained 5­7th century burial. These enclosures all appear to date to the Iron Age/early medieval transitional period. They were however not all necessarily associated with other prehistoric monuments though this appears to have been the case at Millockstown and Cherrywood. There are a number of other settlement/cemetery sites that contained large enclosures (See Gazetteer). No approximate dates were provided for the enclosures though they are likely to belong to roughly the same period.

Early medieval unenclosed cemeteries
Excavations in recent years have also revealed a number of apparently unenclosed cemeteries that date to the early medieval period. In many cases, the site appears, from Excavations Bulletin reports, to have only been partially excavated leaving open the possibility that some form of enclosure may have existed in the past (or still exists on the site). The origins and character of these unenclosed cemeteries have yet to be established. It is not yet clear who was buried in these sites and whether they represent a different cemetery site type to ‘settlement/cemeteries’ and ecclesiastical cemeteries. Some of these sites have revealed a locational preference for gravel ridges and prominent topographical features. It also appears that a number of these sites may also have originated in the late Iron Age/early medieval period. The evidence: unenclosed cemeteries Excavations at Betaghstown (The Anchorage) by James Eogan (Rosanne Meenan 1998 & 1999 Excavations Bulletin­ 98E0072) in advance of a development revealed an unenclosed burial­ ground of approximately 60 burials situated approximately 500m from a small transitional Iron Age/early medieval burial­ground uncovered by Kelly in 1977 (Kelly, 1987­ See above). The site appears to have been fully excavated by Eogan but no enclosure appears to have been discovered. The majority of the burials were set into stone­lined pits although a few were found within lintel and slab­lined graves. Two burials were crouched. No accompanying settlement or ecclesiastical evidence appears to have been uncovered. Excavations at Mount Gamble, Miltonsfields, Cobbe’s Hill, Co. Dublin revealed an unenclosed cemetery (and this site was fully excavated) just southeast of the early ecclesiastical site at Swords, Co. Dublin. The excavations revealed 287 burials, the vast majority set in simple unprotected graves though some were also found to incorporate ear­muffs (O’Donovan 2002, Excavations Bulletin; Frazer 2003, Excavations Bulletin). The cemetery dated from the 6­12th century and no accompanying settlement evidence appears to have been uncovered. This excavation seems to indicate that this was the burial ground of a community across time, with the burial of a few individuals every few years, as might be expected in the normal mortality rates of a rural community (Edmond O’Donovan, pers comm.). Excavations at Kilshane, north Co. Dublin (Gowen 1988, Excavations Bulletin) revealed a further unenclosed cemetery containing 123 burials. The inhumations appear to have been interred 3­4 deep in unprotected graves although about a dozen did contain ear­muffs on either side of the skulls. Some burials had grave goods in the form of knives and there was also burnt grain. Consequently, O’Brien (1993, 98) has suggested that there were some early Anglo­Saxon influences at the site. No date was provided for this site though it is quite possible that it was in use by the 6/7th century A.D. and continued into the early medieval period. Excavations were undertaken at Peterstown, Trim, Co. Meath in advanced of a road development in 1997 (Murphy 1997, Excavations Bulletin­ 97E0389). Four unprotected east­ west inhumations were excavated. One returned a radiocarbon date of 1594±37 years BP (cal. AD 414­532). The site may represent a small isolated transitional Iron Age/early medieval cemetery. It is not clear if the whole site was fully excavated.

154

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 6: Early Medieval Burials and Cemeteries

The evidence: unenclosed cemeteries located along gravel ridges/mounds A large number of burials were recovered from beneath and adjacent to two burial mounds at Ballysadare, Co. Sligo in advance of N4 Ballysadare­Collooney Bypass Road (Opie 1995; 1996). Excavations revealed a burial with an associated pillow­stone, a large number of east­west unprotected inhumation burials, two lintel graves as well as two furnished inhumations apparently containing a ribbon torque and a bronze ring. Though no dates were available at that time, it is possible that this cemetery was in use from the late Iron Age through the early medieval period. Excavations at Ardnagross, Co. Westmeath in advance of a quarry extension along a gravel ridge in 1995 revealed an unenclosed cemetery dating from the mid 6th­early 9th century A.D (James Eogan 1995, Excavations Bulletin). The small cemetery consisted of two rows of burials, 6 in the eastern row and 8 in the western. Approximately 20 burials were discovered. The majority were extended inhumations. One was interred in a prone position and others were in flexed positions (with a radiocarbon date of AD 548­820; Elizabeth O’Brien pers comm). One definite stone­lined burial was discovered while another contained ear­muffs. Further burials had been revealed during initial quarrying activity so it is likely that the cemetery is somewhat greater. A bronze annular ring was also excavated from one grave. The cemetery then appears to go from an Iron Age/early medieval transitional period to well into the early Middles Ages, with burials taking place into the 9th century A.D. Excavations at Boolies Little, Co. Meath by (David Sweetman 1982) revealed the remains of a souterrain and a small along a pronounced ridge of land. The earliest burials amounted to 16 internments and were contained in shallow stone­lined graves dug into stratified boulder clay. Some of them had secondary burials inserted directly above them but all predated the construction of the souterrain. Associated finds included a polished bone pin and iron plough sock. Post medieval burials were found above this early medieval cemetery. A potential early medieval cemetery was excavated at Sarsfieldstown, Co. Meath (Mary Deevy 1999, Excavations Bulletin). At least 8 east­west unprotected inhumations with no associated grave­goods were excavated beneath a gravel mound. A preliminary analysis of the skeletons by Laureen Buckley suggested that they are very likely to be pre­medieval in date (Mary Deevy 1999, Excavations Bulletin). This suggests that they may date to the early medieval period. Other potentially early unenclosed early medieval cemeteries include Cushinstown, Co. Meath and Ahena, Co. Mayo. At least 14 lintel graves (usually dated to after the seventh century AD) were uncovered at Cushinstown, Co. Meath (Victor Buckley, 2000, Excavations Bulletin). The site is located 200m from a medieval church so the possibility remains that they form part of an ecclesiastical burial­ground. This is strengthened by the presence of lintel burials that O’Brien (2003, 67) has noted tend to be discovered in ecclesiastical contexts and date from the 7/8th century A.D. It has been tentatively classified as unenclosed. Excavations at Ahena, Co. Mayo revealed nine east­west inhumations during gravel quarrying (Murphy 1998, Excavations Bulletin). The dates of these burials are uncertain. Burial across the early medieval period It is likely that the cemeteries at Kilshane and Betaghstown were in use from the 6/7th century­ 8/9th century A.D. Although no dates are available, a similar phase of activity could be suggested for Boolies Little. This site appears to have originally been used as a cemetery before it was succeeded by a possible phase of occupation attested by the souterrain. Only a part of the site was excavated so it is possible that further cemeteries and habitation evidence could await discovery. It is possible that some of these burials may have interred at the site from 6­ 10th century as souterrains are usually found to date to the 9/10/11th century (Clinton 2001).

155

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 6: Early Medieval Burials and Cemeteries

The cemetery at Ardnagross was radiocarbon dated to the mid 6th­early 9th century while that at Ballysadare is likely to have spanned this period at the very least due to the size of the cemetery. Excavations at Mount Gamble revealed an unenclosed cemetery dating from 6­12th century A.D. The site at Sarsfieldstown can only be broadly dated to the early medieval period while that Peterstown is rooted in the transitional Iron Age/early medieval period. The evidence suggests that these unenclosed cemeteries are likely to have originated in the transitional Iron Age/early medieval period and have continued well into the early medieval period. These sites appear to have revealed no definite evidence for associated settlement sites, except possibly at Boolies Little though both the cemetery and habitation evidence here do not appear to have been contemporary with each other. The majority of these sites are then likely to have been in use from the 5/6th century­8/9th century with the exception of Mount Gamble and possibly Ballysadare that continued to be used up to the end of the early medieval period.

Undated Enclosed Cemeteries
The EMAP survey also identified a number of enclosed undated cemeteries that could possibly date to the early medieval period. Rescue excavations were undertaken at Sand Pit Grove, Caherabbey Lower, Co. Tipperary when a number of burials were uncovered during quarrying activity along a gravel ridge beside the River Suir. Six burials orientated east­west and buried within unlined graves were discovered during the excavation. The dates of the burials are uncertain though their location along a gravel ridge might suggest an early date. Cartographic evidence suggested that the cemetery was situated within an enclosure of undetermined size (Mary Cahill, 1988, Excavations Bulletin). Excavations at Murphystown, Co. Dublin in advance of the M50 Southeastern Motorway in 2002 revealed a possible enclosed cemetery of uncertain date (Valerie J. Keeley 2002, Excavations Bulletin­ 02E0153). The site was situated near a stream. Seven wholly or partially intact skeletons were found along with 13 disarticulated skeletons. The burials were extended east­ west inhumations with no grave goods. One burial was however orientated north­east/south­ west. A possible enclosure was represented by a shallow depression in the landscape (Breen, 2002, Excavations Bulletin­ 02E0153). Excavations at Rathmiles, Co. Laois in advance of the construction of a golf course in 2001 revealed a sub­circular enclosure containing a cemetery. The east­west inhumations were uncovered. No associated settlement evidence was uncovered. The date of these burials is uncertain (Delany, 2001, Excavations Bulletin­ 01E1100). The dates of these enclosed cemeteries are uncertain though the potential remains that they could be early medieval in date.

Isolated Unenclosed Burials
O’Brien (1984) has further documented the discovery of a number of isolated slab­lined cists across the country from time to time, particularly in the counties of Kerry, Mayo, Meath, Offaly, Cork, Galway, Waterford, Wicklow and Dublin. A number of these isolated slab­lined burials such as Belladooan, Co. Mayo (Morris 1932), Dooey, Donegal (Duignan 1945; O’Riordain and Rynne 1961), Aghhalahard, Cong slab­lined grave (Raftery & Moore 1944) and Killaree and Sheastown, Co. Kilkenny are likely to date to around the 5th/6th/7thcenturies A.D. based on the form of their graves and on occasional grave­goods that might suggest an early Anglo­Saxon association (O’Brien 1993, 97). Other potentially early stone/slab­lined graves have been found at Ballybunion, Co. Kerry (O’Floinn, 1987, Excavations Bulletin), Ballysimon, Co. Limerick (Collins, 2001, Excavations Bulletin) and Margaretstown & Baltrasna, Co. Dublin (Stout 1991, Excavations Bulletin).

156

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 6: Early Medieval Burials and Cemeteries

Isolated lintel graves have been excavated at Dromkeen East, Co. Kerry (Bennett, 1985 Excavations Bulletin), Drumbaragh, Co. Meath (Cahill 1988, Excavations Bulletin), Carrowsteelagh, Co. Mayo (Cahill 1990, Excavations Bulletin) and The Fisherman’s Grave, Lackan, Co. Sligo (Buckley 1991 Excavations Bulletin). O’Brien (2003, 67) has suggested that lintel graves originally evolved from 5/6th century stone/slab­lined burials and were a significant form of burial rite, mostly found in ecclesiastical contexts, from the 7/8th century A.D. These sites were reported as isolated lintel burials in the excavations bulletin, so it is always possible that some could represent solitary graves of Christians buried away from ecclesiastical contexts in the early medieval period. However, it is clear that the great majority of these excavations did not examine the area around the reported disturbance which revealed the stone/slab­lined or lintel burial so it is more likely that they formed part of a larger early medieval cemetery.

The ancestral dead: Interpreting Iron Age/early medieval transitional and early medieval burial practices
Burials in the landscape: natural landmarks and ferta cemeteries: hill­tops, gravel ridges and waterways It is interesting that some transitional Iron Age/early medieval cemeteries have a propensity to be located on hill­tops, gravel ridges and close to important boundary markers. Hill­tops and low rises above the landscape appear to have been significant locations for Iron Age/early medieval transitional inhumation cemeteries as is indicated at Kiltullagh, Co. Roscommon; Kilgowan, Co. Kildare; Corbally, Co. Kildare; Raystown, Co. Meath; Johnstown, Co. Meath; Colp West, Co. Meath; Claristown, Co. Meath; Westreave, Co. Dublin and Knoxspark, Co. Sligo. Prominent gravel ridges also appear to have been significant with a number of sites located on such places, including Ardnagross, Co. Westmeath; Ballysadare, Co. Sligo and Boolies Little, Co. Meath. Waterways may have also been another topographical location that was a focus of burials in this period. O’Brien (1992, 133) has noted that Colp West (Inber Colpdi) was located near the mouth of the River Boyne in a mythologically and historically important area. O’Brien (1997, excavations bulletin) also noted that Ballymacaward, Co. Donegal was located on the northern bank of the River Erne which was an important boundary in the early historic period. Eamonn Kelly has recently pointed out that many Iron Age bog bodies have a tendency to be found along tribal and baronial boundaries. The antiquity of these divisions is still a matter of debate although it is worth pointing out that both Kiltullagh and Johnstown straddle the boundaries between the counties – and presumably local baronies ­ of Roscommon/Mayo and Meath/Kildare respectively. It is evident then that these potentially pagan Iron Age/early medieval ferta cemeteries displayed an interest towards pronounced topographical points of the landscape such as hill­tops, ridges and waterways which were likely operated as important boundaries that were imbued with significant mythological and ancestral meaning. Who was buried? The burial rite It is then clear that pre­existing funerary monuments were an important determining factor in the location of burial sites from the 5­7th century A.D. O’Brien (2003, 66) has noted that east­ west extended inhumation skeletons containing no grave­goods and enclosed within slab­lined cists was an important burial rite from the 5­7th century A.D. She notes that these types of burials are typically found inserted into or around these pre­existing funerary monuments. Slab­ lined cist burials have been excavated at a number of the above sites including Betaghstown, Claristown 2, Boolies Little and Knowth, Co. Meath, Castle Upton, Co. Antrim, Kiltullagh, Co. Roscommon and Ballymacaward, Co. Donegal among other places. It is evident in some cases that these were often the earliest (i.e. in the historic period, there were Bronze Age and iron Age burials there) burials inserted into prehistoric monuments as was the case at Ballymacaward, where fifth century slab­lined inhumations were later succeeded by unprotected burials dating to around the 7th century A.D.

157

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 6: Early Medieval Burials and Cemeteries

O’Brien (2003, 67) has suggested that high­ranking, probably Christian, individuals, were interred in and around these prehistoric monuments among (their putative) pagan ancestors in this period. That the amount of slab­lined cist burials excavated at these sites and dating to this period is generally low in number supports this hypothesis. This act undoubtedly served to reinforce the link between themselves and the indigenous ancestors to create a claim of sovereignty to the land. One good example was at Ballykeel South, Co. Clare, where a stone­ lined cist dating to the fifth century was interred close to a Standing Stone. The archaeological record also confirms the presence of east­west extended inhumation burials containing no grave­goods and dating to this period. The earliest burials at Johnstown, Co. Meath were unlined as were a number of others at Betaghstown, Co. Meath (Eamonn Kelly, 1977­79, Excavations Bulletin­ E814) and Cooleeshalmore, Co. Kilkenny (Neary, 2003) among other places. Other sites containing unprotected burials that may date to this period include Maddens Hill, Kiltale, Co. Meath, Ballinlough, Co. Laois (O’Brien 1993, 133) and Bellinstown, Co. Meath (Lynch, 2002, excavations Bulletin). It is evident then that this type of burial (i.e. unlined graves) was largely contemporary with the stone/slab­lined cist burial. In some cases, however, as at Ballymacaward, Co. Donegal, fifth century slab­lined inhumations were later succeeded by unprotected burials dating to around the 7th century A.D. (Elizabeth O’Brien 1997 & 1998, Excavations Bulletin­ 97E0154). They cannot however be used as a realistic indicator for the burial of a less high­status individual. The location of the burial­place of the general populace in this period is still unclear. Early medieval Anglo­Saxon burials and contacts O’Brien (1993, 2003) has also highlighted some strong similarities between some of the Irish burial archaeological record and those of the Anglo­Saxons in England around the 7th century A.D. She has documented the historical evidence for contacts between the two peoples in the form of raids, religious studies in Ireland and Irish missionary activity. It is evident that a number of accounts refer to Anglo­Saxon ecclesiastics leaving to study among the Irish, as was the case with a certain Egbert who together with Aethelhun and other figures resided at the Irish monastery of Rath Melsigi, identified today as Clonmelsh, Co. Carlow in the mid 7th century (O’Brien 1993, 94). A number of other ecclesiastical sites such as Glendalough, Co. Wicklow and Killegar (Cell Adgair), Co. Wicklow have also revealed possible Anglo­Saxon connections while another Anglo­Saxon figure, Berichter, is commemorated on an early cross­slab at Tullylease, Co. Cork and is remembered at St. Berrihert’s Kyle, Co. Tipperary. Finally, O’Brien (1993, 95) has also noted that the Anglo­Saxon King, Egfrith, lead an attack on the district of Brega (Meath) in the territory of the Southern Uí Neill in A.D. 685 when a number of captives were taken. It is well known that contacts with both Gaul/Merovingian Francia and Anglo­Saxon England was responsible for a cross­fertilization of artistic, iconographic and decorative ideas which combined Celtic, Germanic and Romanic elements from the 7/8th centuries A.D. (O’Brien 1993, 96). O’Brien (1993) has suggested that we must also consider another form of archaeological evidence in the form of burials and grave­goods, to further understand the extent of Anglo­ Saxon influence and contacts in Ireland in this period. O’Brien (1992) has noted that the dominant burial rite from the fourth century A.D. to the present is that of east­west extended supine inhumations, with no grave­goods either in unprotected dug graves, graves outlined with stones or lined with slabs, with or without covering stones. She has noted then that clothed burials or those accompanied by grave­goods, ear­muffs or other features such as wooden biers should be subjected to closer scrutiny. O’Brien (1993, 96 & 97) has noted a crouched clothed burial at Betaghstown, Co. Meath that contained a number of grave­goods including penannular omega types brooches. These brooches were worn in a fashion – one on each shoulder – as in Anglo­Saxon dress, implying that the burial is in the Anglo­Saxon tradition. She has further documented further possible enigmatic burials often containing grave­goods with Anglo­Saxon associations at a ringfort at

158

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 6: Early Medieval Burials and Cemeteries

Raheenamadra, Co. Limerick (Stenberger 1966); Aghalahard, Cong, Co. Mayo (Raftery & Moore 1944, 171­2); Killaree, Co. Kilkenny and Sheastown, Co. Kilkenny and inside the cemeteries at Dooey Co. Donegal (O’Riordain & Rynne 1961, 58­64) and Westreave and Kilshane, Co. Dublin. She has also noted that a grave at Levitistown, Co. Kildare was found to contain burnt grain: a pagan Anglo­Saxon practice that is recorded historically and discovered elsewhere in England. A later possible Anglo­Saxon burial was also excavated at Mayfield, Co. Waterford in advance of the Bord Gáis Cork­Dublin Pipeline 1986 (O’Donnell, 1986 excavations bulletin). A small stone­ lined burial pit was excavated which contained a small amount of cremated bone, a bronze strap­tag comparable to similar 9th century Anglo­Saxon types ornamented in the Trewhiddle style as well as a vertical sided pot. The site remains enigmatic and it is unclear if it represents the burial place of an Anglo­Saxon or even Viking along the bank of the River Suir in county Waterford. Finally, O’Brien (1993 & 2003) has suggested that a number of very rare penannular burial enclosures such as Westreave, Colp West and Greenhills could attest to further early Anglo­ Saxon influences in places in Ireland that are known to have had historical contacts with these people. While, it is clear that one could argue that this type of monument represents a ring­ ditch with Irish prehistoric antecedents, it is nevertheless worth bearing in mind, particularly as the great majority of these sites have been excavated in eastern counties like Meath. This is a subject of interest, whatever the agents behind such burial practices; whether they be the ongoing cultural contacts and exchange of ideas and practices between Ireland and Britain or actual Saxon immigrants into Ireland.

Early medieval ‘settlement/cemeteries’ – the enigmatic role of burial grounds within settlements
Re­introduction ­ settlement/cemeteries size and morphology In Chapter 3 above, we have already described and discussed the evidence for what we have termed ‘settlement/cemeteries’ (and we provide an Appendix of Settlement/Cemeteries below), which others have termed cemetery/settlements and other names The terminology is unimportant for the moment (although we prefer settlement/cemetery given that the evidence for daily life and practice is so strong on many sites), but what is important is the archaeological identification of an phenomenon whereby people buried their dead in virtually the same places as where they lived and worked (which of course is similar to the practice in monastic burial grounds, so may not be as dramatic as we think). Chapter 3 provides sufficient detail for this EMAP review, but it would be important to look at this evidence again here in this chapter on burial practice. In fact, these settlement/enclosures are very closely related to the sites discussed in this chapter, emphasising how difficult it can be to separate the ‘living and the dead’ as James Joyce wrote, in early medieval Ireland. What are these sites like? Early medieval ‘settlement/cemetery’ enclosures are typically enclosure complexes defined by a series of enclosing banks and ditches, ranging from 40­100 m in diameter, with an average diameter of 50­70m make them approximately similar in size to many other early medieval enclosures – whether they be ringforts or larger enclosures like Killickaweeny, Co. Westmeath. Unlike other settlement enclosures, they also produce a fair amount of burials, datable to between the 5th­12th century AD (or later). Burials may be principally located in a smaller enclosure at one part of the site, but it can be more complicated as burials are also found in ditches, near entrances and throughout the enclosure. Unusually, early medieval settlement/cemeteries such as Raystown, Co. Meath have produced much evidence for farming and economy (water mills, ditches and corn­drying kilns), while Faughart Lower also produced at least one souterrain. Early medieval farming activities is also evident at sites like Parknahown, Co. Laois, where corn­drying kilns are found in the vicinity.

159

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 6: Early Medieval Burials and Cemeteries

The ‘classic’ early medieval ‘settlement/cemetery’ sites that have emerged, many in recent years, include Gallanstown, Co. Dublin; Augherskea, Co. Westmeath; Treenbaun, Co. Galway; Corbally, Co. Kildare; Raystown, Co. Meath; possibly Marlinstown, Co. Westmeath; Parknahown, Co. Laois and possibly Castlefarm, Co. Meath (although only a few burials are known from that site). Chronology Some early medieval settlement/cemeteries have early origins and are then abandoned. Others have early origins and are then used throughout the early medieval period. Enclosed settlement/cemetery sites appear to have emerged in the Late Iron Age/early medieval period, principally through the construction of an early enclosure or the re­use of a ring­ditch around which a later larger enclosure was built. Some of these sites fall out of use, but it would not be true to regard settlement/cemeteries as a phenomenon of the earlier part of the period. A review of the transitional Iron Age/early medieval burial evidence in this chapter has suggested that most of these sites fell out of use by the 7th century A.D. during the growth of the cult of relics. Unenclosed cemeteries, with no associated settlement evidence, like Westereave and Colp West also evolved from ring­ditches and continued to provide a foci for burial until approximately the 8th century A.D. Other early medieval unenclosed cemeteries, with no settlement evidence, and historical associations with ecclesiastical sites have been discovered at Kilshane, Co. Dublin, Ardnagross, Co. Westmeath and Betaghstown, Co. Meath and appear to date roughly from the 5/6th centuries­9th centuries A.D. although a further example at Mount Gamble continued to be used till the 12th century A.D. Early medieval settlement/cemetery sites appear to have had a broadly similar chronology to that of many of these unenclosed cemetery sites. The dating provided so far from enclosed cemetery and settlement sites suggest that they were also largely occupied between the 5/6th­ 9/10th century A.D. though a number of sites remained in use until the 11/12th century and even beyond. The length of occupation varies. Johnstown 1 for example was dated between the 4­16th century A.D. while most of the other significant settlement/cemetery sites like Faughart Lower, Millockstown, Corbally, Mount Offaly and Raystown tend to date from around the 4/5th to the 10/11th century. Some of the less significant sites were found to have a shorter lifespan as illustrated at Cherrywood where an early 6/7th century cemetery appears to have given way to a subsequent Viking settlement. A number of sites, including Johnstown 1 and Gneevebeg, also appear to have been re­used as cillin sites in the post medieval period indicating that the sites continued to be understood as sacred places within the landscape. The Relationship between the Cemetery and Settlement It is often presumed that because these sites contain both settlement and cemetery evidence that both activities are then contemporary with each other. This is true in some cases, but not all. The amount of burial and settlement evidence uncovered at many of these sites makes it likely that these activities took place either intermittently or at different times during the early medieval period. Johnstown 1 revealed burial evidence from the 4­16th century A.D. while Mount Gamble and Faughart Lower also revealed extensive cemeteries that are likely to have been used throughout the early medieval period. Burial however appears to only represent one phase or part of a history of some other ‘cemetery/settlement sites. A number of the sites including Marlinstown, Balriggan, Corkagh Demesne, Gallanstown, Cherrywood, Corbally and Coldwinters have revealed a lot less than fifty burials at each site. While this could be due to the fact that only parts of the site were excavated, it could also suggest that burial was very intermittent or only represented one phase of these enclosures histories. In contrast, at both Raystown and Castlefarm indicates burial across the chronologies of the sites. It could be suggested that the main period of burial at some of these cemetery/settlements took place approximately from the 6­9th century A.D. O’Brien (2003, 67) has suggested that lintel type burial became an important form of burial from the 7/8th century A.D. She has noted that a lintel cemetery excavated during Phase 3 at Millockstown returned dates of A.D. 660­960 Cal. (Manning 1986, 135­81). She has also noted that lintel burials were excavated during Phase 6 at Mount Offaly as well as seventh­tenth century contexts at the ecclesiastical site of

160

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 6: Early Medieval Burials and Cemeteries

Moyne, Co. Mayo and Reask, Co. Kerry. Similarly excavations at Ninch have revealed a large number of lintel burials which appears to have succeeded a ringfort and which date to roughly the same period while lintelled burials have been dated to the final phase of the cemetery at Balriggan. It is likely then that a number of these sites with a complex phasing of settlement and burial evidence saw cemeteries being constructed during the latter history of these sites. While sites like Ninch and Millockstown do appear to have had early origins, burial does not appear to have been undertaken until around the 7/8th century A.D. Ear­muffs and pillow stones have also been recovered at a number of sites including Mount Offaly and Cherrywood while one single example was found at Lismore/Bushfields and a number were recovered at the unenclosed cemetery at Kilshane, Co. Dublin. O’Brien (1993, 98) has suggested that those recovered from Kilshane attest to 7th century Anglo­Saxon influences at the site. Ear­muffs however can date from all periods of the early medieval period as attested at Mount Offaly where all phases of the cemetery revealed evidence for them. 76% of the 38 burials at Cherrywood contained ear­muffs. The cemetery was contained within an enclosure 43m in diameter and was dated by O’Neill (1999, Excavations Bulletin) to approximately the 6/7th century A.D. The earliest burials at Faughart Lower were inserted into an area 15 m by 15 m in diameter and contained a large number of stone lined and capped long cist burials. The later burials were however all interred within simple unprotected burials. Like the simple, unlined graves excavated from beneath the burial mound at Johnstown 1 or the burials interred within the ring­ditches at Corbally and Raystown, these stone­lined examples are likely to be early in date. There is then great variation in the extent and longevity of burial at these settlement/cemeteries. Some sites like Cherrywood appear to be early in date and have only been used for a short period of time (6/7th centuries). Cemeteries containing lintelled cemeteries at a number of sites may date principally to the 7­10th century however while burial­ grounds at a few sites including Mount Offaly and Johnstown were used throughout the early medieval period. It appears that a cemetery succeeded a phase of earlier settlement at a number of sites including Millockstown, Ninch and Faughart Lower while periods of settlement succeeded earlier cemeteries at Ninch and Cherrywood. The phase of milling at Raystown was largely dated to the 7­10th century while burial evidence had a longer period of use dating from the 5­10th century A.D. suggesting that agricultural activity increased in importance in the latter history of the site. Souterrains are also a feature of the later phases of a number of sites including Mount Offaly, Ninch, Millockstown, Raystown and Faughart Lower suggesting further evidence for settlement activity in the 9/10/11th centuries A.D. Early medieval settlement/cemeteries – some emerging research questions A classic term used in post­processual archaeology is ‘contingency’, meaning that every population group experiences historical and cultural processes differently. Some social groups prosper, while others suffer – and every archaeological site has been created by unique circumstances and historical events. Early medieval settlement/cemeteries are different from each other, because they were used by different peoples whose fortunes waxed and waned across centuries. We need to appreciate the complexity and diversity in the chronology and character of these sites that we have dubbed settlement/cemetery sites – and be wary of classifying them as a ‘type’ of archaeological site. Notwithstanding this, there is a range of questions that we can begin to ask. Why did some people either bury their dead beside them – or live on a place previously used as a burial ground – or bury their dead in a place previously used as a dwelling place? We should probably be aware that the boundaries between life and death may have been permeable and for a society used to death in all its forms, death may have held the terrors that it does today, where it is pushed to the edge of our experience and our landscapes. However, the question remains; how did people regard these places and why did people bury their dead there, as opposed to in neighbouring ecclesiastical cemeteries (at Raystown, Co. Meath, there are probable early medieval church sites not too far from the site)? This is an interesting archaeological phenomenon and we should probably be slow to rush to judgement before all the evidence is in.

161

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 6: Early Medieval Burials and Cemeteries

Early medieval ecclesiastical burial grounds – the emerging role of church graveyards
Background Despite the various practices outlined above, Irish society was gradually converted to Christianity from the fifth century AD onwards, and the conversion of aristocracy and the common people shifted burial practices by at least the 7th century AD. Yet it is clear the ‘Pagan’ practices and beliefs persisted. The writings of ecclesiastical scholars like Tírechan and Muirchu of Armagh and Adomnán of Iona make clear their antipathy to the continued practice of burial within circular ditched enclosures described as ferta cemeteries during the 7th and even 8th century. In other words, people buried their dead in a range of ways. Hughes (1966) originally argued that it was not until the seventh century AD that the church was sufficiently integrated into Irish society to enjoy an influencing role over the burial practices and beliefs of the great majority of the people on the island. It was during this period that the church sought to establish formal consecrated Christian burial­grounds to attract patronage and burial from the secular community. This attempt to increase the status of Christian burial grounds was intimately linked to the growth of the cult of saints. The importance of long­dead saints that had reputedly established monasteries in the fifth and sixth centuries was strengthened in the seventh century through the translation of their remains or the enshrinement of their relics (O’Brien 1992, 136; Ó Carragáin 2003, 134). This latter process was closely linked to the establishment of consecrated burial grounds, a relationship highlighted by the use of the word reliquiae or ‘remains of saint’ to denote a cemetery or ‘reilig’ (Doherty 1984, 53; Ó Carragáin 2003, 147). Ecclesiastical cemeteries appear then to have developed by the seventh century A.D. There is continuing debate about who was buried at these sites; were they the burial places of ecclesiastical and a Christian elite (See Etchingham 1999; Swift 2003) or were ecclesiastical cemeteries more widely used by the general populace? Furthermore, how did the character of ecclesiastical sites change over time and can we examine the differentiation of status in these cemeteries through examining the character of burial cross­slabs? Firstly, we should examine another significant area of research ­ the origins of these sites and their potential relationship with earlier ferta cemeteries. The origins of Christian ecclesiastical cemeteries and their relationship with earlier ferta cemeteries The foundation date of ecclesiastical cemeteries is still a matter of debate. It is likely that the majority were formally organized from the seventh century A.D. when the church made a concerted effort to promote this form of burial practice. However, it is clear that ecclesiastical cemeteries existed perhaps from the late fifth century though the forms of these early sites is not yet completely clear. One of the earliest cemeteries excavated thus far was at Scotch Street on the summit of Armagh hill, Armagh where the possible remains of ‘Temple na Ferta’ was uncovered (Lynn 1979; McDowell 1985, Excavations Bulletin). A cemetery of upwards of 60 east­west inhumations, one of which was interred within a wooden coffin and marked out by wooden posts, was uncovered. Ó Carragáin (2003) has suggested that the unique coffin demarcated by two wooden posts might represent evidence for a translation of a saint’s corporeal remains. A radiocarbon determination for one grave returned a date spanning the mid fifth­mid seventh century (cal. A.D. 430­640) (Edwards 1990, 130). It is instructive to note that Lynn also excavated a Neolithic ring­ditch 11m in diameter at the site in 1979. Taking this into consideration, as well as the obvious place­name element ‘Temple na Ferta’ and the early dates

162

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 6: Early Medieval Burials and Cemeteries

of the cemetery, it is possible that we have evidence here for the Christianisation of a pagan ferta cemetery used potentially by ecclesiastics in these early years. Ó Carragáin (2003, 140) has made the suggestion that Armagh, like Canterbury sought to imitate the topography of Rome by establishing St. Patrick’s at the summit of Armagh hill and surrounding it with a number of reliquary churches which were extramural in function. Could the foundation of the principal liturgical building of St. Patrick’s cathedral at the summit of the hill have also amounted to a conscious break with the prehistoric pagan past from which Temple na Ferta could potentially have developed? It is worth noting that the ecclesiastical site at Reefert at Glendalough has been interpreted as meaning Riogh­Fheart (Corlett & Medlycott 2000, 161), ’the ferta of the kings’? Lorcan Harney (2006) has suggested that Reefert may represent an early high­status or royal cemetery at Glendalough that then evolved into an extramural church when the cathedral was constructed in the main monastic complex at the lower lake (Harney 2006). Further interesting examples where potential continuity between the late Iron Age and the early medieval period can be found at the ecclesiastical sites of Durrow, Co. Offaly and Omey, Co. Galway. Durrow is another example where an early cemetery was located in close proximity to the ecclesiastical site. O’Brien (1992, 133) has noted that a cemetery of extended unprotected inhumations were uncovered within a circular enclosure (25­30m in diameter) c.200m south­ east of the ecclesiastical enclosure at Durrow. Further burials were also uncovered 100m northeast of the site. Radiocarbon dates suggest however that burials at Durrow were ninth century AD in date. An ecclesiastical cemetery located on a potential Late Iron Age/early medieval transitional cemetery that in turn succeeded Bronze Age activity was uncovered on Omey Island (O’Keeffe, 1992 & 1993, Excavations Bulletin). A number of burials were uncovered containing beads of blue and red glass which could, as the author postulated, date ‘close to the interface between paganism and Christianity’ (O’Keeffe 1993, Excavations Bulletin). The site appears to have developed into an important ecclesiastical site containing a number of leachta and a lintel cemetery that continued to be used up to the twelfth century. Another example of an ecclesiastical cemetery being founded close to a transitional Iron Age/early medieval burial site was excavated at Killtullagh Hill (Cill Tulach – ‘Church of the burial mound’; tulach being translated as burial mound) that straddles the boundaries of Cos. Roscommon, Mayo and Galway. Early excavations focused on the transitional Iron Age/early medieval cemetery (McCormick 1995; McCormick 1994, Excavations Bulletin; Coombs & Maude 1996, Excavations Bulletin). More recent excavations by Coombs, Maude, Robinson & Gregory (1998, 1999 & 2000, Excavations Bulletin) focused on the adjacent early medieval cemetery that was found to contain a possible early wooden structure beneath the medieval church ruins. A last, very tentative example of a possible prehistoric monument being re­used in a nearby ecclesiastical context can be found at Derrynaflan monastery, Co. Tipperary. Following the discovery of the famous Derrynaflan hoard, a number of rescue excavations were undertaken by the National Museum first by Mary Cahill and then Raghnaill Ó Floinn to recover missing pieces. A small ring­barrow, c.6m in diameter and 10m to the north of the medieval cemetery was excavated as it was close to the area where the hoard was recovered. Two pits which contained small quantities of charcoal, cremated bone and unburnt animal bone ­ one inside and one outside the ditch – were interpreted as possible undisturbed burials (Ó Floinn 1985, Excavations Bulletin). The excavations bulletin contained no further information about these burials but it is at least possible that they could be early or even transitional in date though caution must be expressed due to the lack of substantive evidence. It is evident that some of these examples, particularly those at Durrow (although 9th century in date) and Derrynaflan are based on very tentative evidence. However, they serve to throw up some interesting questions concerning the spatial proximity of Ferta cemeteries to formal consecrated ecclesiastical burial­grounds. These examples such as Killtullagh Hill or Armagh suggest that some significant 5th/6th century cemeteries with possible prehistoric origins may

163

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 6: Early Medieval Burials and Cemeteries

have been Christianized by the ecclesiastical authorities in the early medieval period. It could also be suggested that the presence of a ring­barrow adjacent to an ecclesiastical cemetery is just a coincidence and that simple topographical rather than ancestral or historical considerations may have determined the location of some ecclesiastical sites. What is needed then is a systematic examination of the location of both ferta and reilig cemeteries to understand why some were situated in close proximity to each other while in other cases, a determined and conscious decision was made to found a church in a new site. Early Medieval Ecclesiastical Cemeteries It has been argued that ‘burial near the bones of the saint’ became a substitute for ‘burial near the bones of the ancestors’ during the 7/8th century A.D. (O’Brien 1992, 136; Ó Carragáin 2003, 147). It appears that the ecclesiastical authorities may have been largely successful in persuading people to be buried in formal consecrated burial­grounds from the 8th century although there is growing evidence for continuing internment in ancestral ferta through the early medieval period as discussed above. One of the defining characteristics of an ecclesiastical site was an enclosure that served to symbolically demarcate the boundary between the dead and the living; and the holy and unholy ground. Indeed Doherty (1985, 57) has suggested that Irish ecclesiastical sites sought to model themselves upon the idea of the city of refuge (civitas refugii) from the bible and by clearly demarcating the settlement into areas of varying sanctity. This resulted in the ‘creation of an idealised form, a schema, which allowed a monastic site to have a holy of holies at the core, around which were areas of sanctuary that decreased in importance the further they were from the centre’ (Doherty, 1985, 57). The cemetery and ecclesiastical buildings was situated inside the holiest core of the settlement. O’Brien (2003, 67) has argued that the standard burial rite by the seventh/eighth century was that of extended east­west inhumation usually but not always necessarily wrapped in a shroud and interred in lintel and/or unprotected dug graves, located in ecclesiastical cemeteries. The lintel grave of the 7th/8th century appears to have evolved from the slab and stone­lined cists which date principally to the 5­7th centuries A.D. EMAP survey and excavated early medieval ecclesiastical cemeteries The EMAP survey has identified that a total of 188 ecclesiastical sites with early medieval historical origins were excavated between 1970­2002. A further 42 ecclesiastical sites whose early medieval origins could not also be established were also excavated. A total of 80 excavations were undertaken in this period that uncovered burial evidence of varying amounts inside these ecclesiastical sites. With the exception of 3 sites, they all came from ecclesiastical sites with known historical or archaeological early medieval origins. A total of 77 out of 188 (41%) of excavations at definite early medieval ecclesiastical sites then revealed some form of burial evidence comprising disarticulated human bone as well as unprotected and protected dug graves.

Significant Excavated Ecclesiastical Cemeteries Significant early medieval cemeteries were excavated at St. Brendan’s, Ardfert, Co. Kerry (Fionnbarr Moore 1989­92, Excavations Bulletin; Martin Reid 1995) and two undocumented sites at Butterfield, Rathfarnham (Judith Carroll 1997, Excavations Bulletin­ 97E0140) and at Dunmisk (Ivens 1988). The last two are believed however to be ecclesiastical in origin.
Large cemeteries were also excavated at Ardree, Co. Kildare (Matthew Seaver 2000, Excavations Bulletin­ 00E0156); Skeam West, Co. Cork (Claire Cotter 1990, Excavations Bulletin); Illaunloughan, Co. Kerry (Claire Walsh & Jenny White Marshall 1992­95, Excavations Bulletin­ 92E0087); Reask Church (Thomas Fanning 1972­75, Excavations Bulletin), Inishmurray, Co. Sligo (Jerry O’Sullivan 1999, Excavations Bulletin­ 99E0381); St. Brendan’s, Clonfert, Co. Galway (Claire Walsh & Alan Hayden 2001, Excavations Bulletin­ 01E0877); St.

164

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 6: Early Medieval Burials and Cemeteries

Fechin’s, Omey Island, Co. Galway (Tadhg O’Keeffe 1992 & 1993, Excavations Bulletin­ 92E0053); St. John's Point, Co. Down (Brannon 1980); St. Michael le Pole, Co. Dublin (Margaret Gowen & Kieran Campbell 1980­84, Excavations Bulletin­ E217); St. Patrick's Rock, Cashel (Brian Hodkinson 1992 & 1993, Excavations Bulletin­92E0202); St. Peter’s Church, Co. Waterford (A.Gittings 1986­1988, Excavations Bulletin­ E343; Alan Hayden 1988, Excavations Bulletin­ E435 & Maurice Hurley & Ben Murtagh 1989, Excavations Bulletin) and St. Tassach, Raholp, Co. Down (K. Neill 1989, Excavations Bulletin). Other significant cemeteries have been excavated at Gallen, Co. Offaly (Kendrick 1939); Derry, Co. Down (Waterman 1967) and more recently at a mainly medieval cemetery at Ballykilmore, Co. Westmeath (Channing and Randolph­Quinney 2006, 115), while excavations of human remains have also been carried out on early monastic sites at Clonfad, Co. Westmeath (Stevens 2006) and also at a probable early medieval ecclesiastical enclosure at Killeany, Co. Laois (excavated by Kenny Wiggins of ACS, and recently reported by Niall Kenny 2007).

Ecclesiastical Cemeteries and Burial Rites Burial rites in ecclesiastical cemeteries began to become more standardised. Unprotected burials comprise the majority of the evidence recovered from ecclesiastical cemeteries. Lintel burials and graves containing ear­muffs and very occasionally pillow­stones were also a feature of many burials. Lintel burials have been dated to the seventh/eighth centuries A.D. or after (O’Brien 67). Ear­muffs are difficult to date because they were used in a variety of early contexts as illustrated at Cherrywood (John O’Neill 1998, Excavations Bulletin­ 98E0526) and as from a number of early medieval levels at the settlement/cemetery at Mount Offaly, Co. Dublin (Malachy Conway 1998, Excavations Bulletin­ 98E0035). Earmuffs can therefore be found across the early medieval period. The Excavations Bulletin reports have also revealed a small number of instances of burials in ecclesiastical cemeteries that were stone/slab­lined. It is difficult to be certain if the authors were referring to what were actually lintel burials in these instances so no discussion will take place about this potential evidence until full excavation reports have been consulted.
High status recumbent slabs have also been recovered from a large number of significant early medieval ecclesiastical sites particularly at Clonmacnoise and Gallen, Co. Clare, Iniscealtra, Co. Clare, Glendalough, Co. Wicklow, Nendrum, Co. Down, Inishmurray, Co. Sligo, the Aran Islands, Co. Galway, Kilpeacan and Kilberrihert, Co. Tipperary and Tullylease, Co. Cork (Lionard 1961). A number of high status burials at Iniscealtra and Glendalough were lined with slab that project over the surface. They were then covered with recumbent slabs, many of which were decorated with incised and carved crosses. Small socket­holes were present at the head or foot of the graves and would have held upright crosses (Lionard 1961, 150). These burials tend to date to after the 8th century and may represent the burial places of high status ecclesiastics and secular individuals. In other words, burial in churchyards is probably the dominant practice after the eighth century – if not early. Undoubtedly, there is huge potential for researching this topic in much more detail. Is it possible to discern patterns in the planning and practice of burial in church graveyards? Are there zones of particular activity? Are there burials of more or less important people? Did graveyards expand and change across time – how do burials relate to other features; such as saint’s shrines, churches, entrances, cathedrals, cross and high crosses? Most importantly, is there archaeological evidence for other activities in church graveyards – such as metalworking, fairs and markets, or are these exclusively ritual spaces?

Viking/Norse furnished burial practices
Background In recent years, Harrison’s (2001) and Ó Floinn’s (1998) research and publications have enabled new insights into Viking or Norse burials, these being ‘defined as those containing individuals, buried according to traditions, which are recognizably Scandinavian in inspiration and which

165

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 6: Early Medieval Burials and Cemeteries

date from the ninth and tenth centuries’ (Harrison 2001, 61). Furnished Viking burials have been found across Ireland since the 19th century, although the details recorded by antiquarians can be patchy. Harrison (2001, 63) has noted that the distribution pattern of Viking graves in Ireland differs remarkably to that in Scotland, Cumbria and the Isle of Man where the vast majority of burials are located in isolated single graves. In early medieval Ireland in contrast, 80% of known Viking/Norse graves have been excavated from within five kilometres of the Dublin city centre. A total of 75% or (c.60% of all Irish graves) were found to have come from the two cemeteries of Kilmainham and Islandbridge. Altogether, it has been suggested that there are approximately 80­90 burials from the Dublin evidence (O’Floinn 1998, 142): a figure that can be slightly increased to due to excavations. This suggests that a country­wide figure maybe somewhere between 90­100 burials. Viking Burials in Viking/Hiberno­Norse Dyflin The concentration of Viking burials in the area around the Dublin city centre attests to the significance of this site in the 9/10th centuries A.D. The four Viking cemeteries of Kilmainham, Islandbridge, Castleknock to the west of Dublin city and Palace Row on the north side have been discovered since the 19th century (O’Floinn 1998, 132; Harrison 2001, 65). Discoveries of isolated Viking burials have been made at College Green, Parnell Square, Cork Street, Bride Street and Kildare Street, Dollymount Strand and Donnybrook (Alyesbury Road) from the 19th century. These have been augmented by excavations at Ship Street Great and Stephen Street, Dublin (Simpson 2002) which revealed a single ninth century Viking male with accompanying grave­ goods adjacent to the church of St. Michael le Pole and St. Peters to the south of the subsequent walled Hiberno­Norse town. Four further Viking burials dating to around the 9th century A.D. were discovered during excavations again by Linzi Simpson at South Great George’s Street in 2003 (http://www.mglarc.com/projects/viking_dublin/south_great_georges_street.htm). The site was located just 200m east of Ship Street Great on the southeastern rim of the Black Pool which the town of Dublin takes its name from. A further ninth­century Viking furnished grave was finally excavated at Golden Lane, Dublin immediately outside the possible ecclesiastical enclosure at St. Michael le Pole’s church in 2005 by Edmond O’Donovan (2005). Simpson has suggested that the combined evidence attests to the burial of high status Viking warriors around the southern edges of the Black Pool to the south of the confluence of the Liffey and Poddle in the ninth century (http://www.mglarc.com/projects/viking_dublin/conclusion.htm). The distribution of 9/10th century Viking burials then suggests the presence of a number of cemeteries in the environs of the subsequent Hiberno­Norse settlement at the confluence of the Liffey and Poddle as well as a number of ninth century high­status Viking warriors spread out along the southern banks of the Blackpool. Viking/Norse burials in Dyflinarskiri A number of unusual burials have been discovered in the regional hinterland of Dublin known in the historical sources as Dyflinarskiri (Harrison 2001, 65­66). Burials containing the remains of humans and horses have been recorded at Athlumney near Navan, Co. Meath and at an unknown site between Milltown and Newbridge, Co. Kildare. An iron spear­head was found at the upper level of a prehistoric burial mound at Croghan Erin, Co. Meath, while an iron axe­ head was found at Barnhall near Leixlip (Lax hlaup or Salmon’s Leap) near a possible Viking outlying settlement. Excavations in 2004 by Icon archaeology near the early medieval ecclesiastical site of Finglas (Fionn Gall) in north Co. Dublin revealed a ninth­century Viking female burial with accompanying Scandinavian oval brooches confirming the presence of Vikings in this area.

166

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 6: Early Medieval Burials and Cemeteries

Viking/Norse burials in coastal and rural Ireland Outside this area, further swords have been discovered at Tybroughney, Co. Kilkenny and Murgesty, Co. Tipperary and may represent other furnished Viking burials. A furnished Viking grave was also discovered at Eyrephort, Co. Galway while two other potential burial sites, dating to the 10th century, were excavated at False Bay, Co. Galway. They were laid with their heads to the west; a tradition not found in Christian graves and were found to date to a slightly later period than a possible Viking house and settlement ((Gibbon & Kelly 2003; O’Sullivan & Breen 2007, 121). A further potential Viking burial was discovered near Rinnarraw Cashel along the northwest coast at Kinnegar Strand, Lough Swilly (Comber 2006). Recent excavations at Woodstown 6 in advance of the N25 Waterford Bypass have revealed a Viking furnished burial immediately outside the ditched enclosure on the south banks of the River Suir. The greatest concentration of Viking burial evidence outside Dublin can be found along the northeast coast in the counties of Antrim and Down. Here a number of potential burials have been discovered at Leger Hill, Larne & Ballyholme, Co. Antrim and St. John’s Point Church, Co. Down. A possible cemetery has also been excavated at Rathlin Island (Harrison 2001, 66). Viking/Norse Burial Rite Extended inhumation in unlined graves appears to have been the dominant rite of Viking burial in Ireland. Grave goods are common, and of course in ‘furnished burials’ are there by definition. It is possible that the cist at Mayfield along the banks of the River Suir could represent the internment of a Viking or as mentioned above, Anglo­Saxon. No skeleton was found within the cist though some cremated bone appears to have been discovered (O’Donnell 1986). Burials also appear to have been located in flat cemeteries as opposed to mound burials or even Viking boat burials as has been discovered in Scandinavia and the Isles of Scotland. A possible ship burial was however excavated at Ballywillin, Co. Antrim (Edwards 1990, 189) but there is now some certainty due to the discovery of Edwards III coins (O Floinn 1998, 146). A possible re­use of a prehistoric mound for a Viking burial can be found at Croghan Erin, Co. Meath although the evidence is less than clear. A further possible mound burial was once extant at College Green although the monument does appear to conform to any recognizable prehistoric monument examples (Harrison 2001, 74). A large ‘sepulchral mound’ was excavated in the 19th century at Donnybrook, Co. Dublin (Hall 1978). It contained a furnished Viking burial accompanied by two other inhumations in a mound that contained 600­700 Christian burials and has been regarded in the past as a burial in a mass grave of victims of Viking raids. O’Brien (1992) in a paper in Medieval Archaeology has subsequently re­appraised this evidence and it is likely that it simply represents the burial of a Viking individual in an earlier or contemporary ‘Irish’ burial ground. Viking Burial and ‘Irish’ ecclesiastical Sites Some Viking/Norse burials appear to display some Christian influences. It is worth noting the concentration of Viking burials around a number of ecclesiastical sites including St. Michael le Pole’s and St. Peter’s in Dublin city centre, Finglas, north Co. Dublin and St. John’s Point, Co. Down which throws up interesting ideas about the relationship between these churches and the pagan Viking authorities in this period. It appears that Christianity may have emerged as the dominant religion of the Hiberno­Norse by the 11th century when a number of churches including Christchurch at Dublin and Waterford were founded. 167

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 6: Early Medieval Burials and Cemeteries

The living and dead in early medieval Ireland: some future research areas
The people of early medieval Ireland – in life and death The emerging archaeological evidence for burial in early medieval Ireland then is characterised by diversity and variety in both burial rite and context. The traditional description of the entire period as ‘Early Christian’ is perhaps then a misnomer, in that it fails to reflect the real chronological, cultural and ideological complexity lying behind the older and the newly emerging archaeological data. There is now a large corpus of excavated data that suggests that people were interred in quite a variety of different ways between the 5th­12th centuries A.D, or throughout the early medieval period. At an early stage, between the 4th­6th centuries AD, there is a sense of people burying their dead in familial or ancestral burial grounds, occasionally involving small annular enclosures, mounds, standing stones, ring­ditches and other features. These early graves often are slab­ lined, but not always. Some burial places become abandoned; others are used over long periods. Some burial places become the focus for settlement, industry and agriculture – the ‘settlement/cemeteries’ discussed in the settlement chapter above. Some of these places remain a focus for burial throughout the period, indicating that it is not always a question of ‘early’ or ‘later’ practice. Early medieval churches also become a focus for burial practices – but not all the population is buried in them. Furthermore, the burial evidence from ‘settlement/cemetery’ sites as well as known Viking burials all points to a variety of other contexts in which people continued to be buried outside the authority of the church during the early medieval period. There are a number of important implications of this new set of evidence. EMAP’s analysis of the published and unpublished data points towards a complex maelstrom of burial practices in the Iron Age/early medieval transitional period. A few questions can be posed: ! ! Can we identify regional archaeological variations in the burial practices across the island from the 5­7th centuries A.D.? Does the distribution of distinctive burials in such monuments such as the very rare ‘pennanular’ enclosure and the more common ‘annular burial enclosure’ attests to Anglo­Saxon influences in eastern Ireland in particular during the 7th century A.D. or do these monuments have a common origin in the Irish prehistoric funerary tradition? How long did early ferta cemeteries continue to be used through the early medieval period and who were being buried in these places and were they Christian? What is the evidence for unenclosed cemeteries in the early medieval period and can they be described as a separate site type? What was context in which enclosed ‘settlement/cemetery’ sites evolved from both ring­ ditches and enclosures?

! ! !

EMAP’s archaeological review also suggests a slow and often complex period of conversion from paganism to Christianity ! What is the evidence for the Christianisation of pagan ferta during the emergence of the cult of the relics in the 7/8th centuries A.D?

168

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 6: Early Medieval Burials and Cemeteries

! !

How did the character of ecclesiastical cemeteries through the early medieval period; how were they organised and laid out – and what else were they used for? Who was being buried in ecclesiastical cemeteries in the early medieval period?

The increasing corpus of ‘Pagan’ and Viking burial evidence has also raised issues concerning ! ! ! The possible survival of ‘Pagan’ burial practices in caves and other contexts well into the Christian era The location of Viking burials in relation to ecclesiastical sites The influence of Christianity in the 9/10th century and the process of conversion of the Hiberno­Norse to Christianity?

It is also clear that the living often lived with the dead in early medieval Ireland – and we need to explore how cemeteries were used as places in the landscape. ! How were burial places, ecclesiastical cemeteries and ‘settlement/cemeteries used across time – are there chronological patterns or does each site have its own unique history of burial practices? Were cemeteries used for other purposes; crafts, industry; ceremony; economic and political actions?

!

Finally, there is also a subject of enormous importance that has not been touched on here. In these early medieval burials and cemeteries, we have uncovered a potentially very large population of human skeletons from over a thousand years ago, of huge significance for osteology and cultural biology. This is a ‘body’ of archaeological evidence that could be hugely informative about early medieval population and demographics; patterns of gender, age and childhood mortality; questions of diet and health and the foods they people ate (or didn’t during famine); problems of disease and illness – including the endemic plagues and diseases referred to in early medieval historical sources, and how people’s lifestyles and physical efforts were reflected in their skeletons. Given the interest in identity and ethnicity, there is also much to be done and clarified in terms of genetics, immigrant populations and the ‘origins of the Irish’. Early medieval cemeteries should enable us to explore the very lives and bodies of the peoples of early medieval Ireland.

169

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 7: Early Medieval Agriculture and Economy

Chapter 7. Early medieval agriculture and economy
Introduction
Early medieval Ireland, between 400­1100 AD was an overwhelmingly rural landscape, with individual farmsteads (raths and crannogs), field­systems and routeways through a highly managed agricultural landscape. In this rural landscape, farming was the constant in people’s daily lives. Most of the community, especially the ordinary and unfree members of society, such as the low­status commoners, hereditary serfs and slaves, would have spent most of their lives at work in the fields ­ herding cattle, sheep and pigs, ploughing, sowing and harvesting crops or building and repairing field­walls. In the home, the daily lives of men and women would also have been dominated by domestic activities relating to agriculture, whether this was in terms of preparing milk and cheeses, grinding grain for flour, smoking or salting meats and other foods for winter storage or spinning and weaving wool. However, agriculture was not only important in subsistence terms, it was also the key element in the organisation of early Irish society. Whether they were a lord or a slave, most people would have depended for their social status, subsistence and livelihood on the agricultural produce of the land. Kinship and community, social status and gender roles – these were all organised around the patterns of land­use and agricultural labour. For these reasons, agriculture and economy have to be seen as key aspects in the study of early medieval Irish society.

Sources of evidence
The evidence for early Irish agriculture is wide ranging, and includes archaeology, palaeoenvironmental studies and early Irish history. A multi­disciplinary approach can help to reconstruct full picture of farming in the landscape. Sources for early Irish agriculture include: ! Early Irish law tracts, typically dated to c.700 AD (seventh to eighth century), that provide information on such aspects as land value, social status and cows, labour organisation, aspects of fishing, milling, bee­keeping, etc. Saint’s lives that provide information on general farming practices, on daily diet and provide revealing anecdotes about daily work. The saint’s lives, dated to 7th century (Latin lives) and 11th century (Latin and Irish) often provide descriptions of ploughing techniques. Annals, originating in 7th century, with contemporary records by late 9th to early 10th century, tend to be less useful about farming, but they do provide occasional information on climatic events, such as storms, famines, cattle murrains and abundant harvests. Landscape archaeological evidence for farming – ringforts, enclosures, field­systems, kilns and mills – and artefacts including agricultural tools and equipment, such as plough irons, querns and other items; all these indicate the organisation of agricultural labour. Plant macrofossil evidence for tending and growth of crops including deposits of wheat, barley, oats and rye. This palaeoenvironmental evidence can also be used to trace diet and evidence for crop processing. Faunal remains that provide evidence for livestock and herd management and the role of cattle, pigs, sheep, goats and other animals in the farming economy; in dairying,

!

!

!

!

!

170

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 7: Early Medieval Agriculture and Economy

beef and pork production and in the exploitation of other animal products (hides, tallow, bone, etc). ! Palynological evidence for woodland clearance and the expansion in early medieval agriculture that we find in the 4th and 5th centuries AD, a period of expansion that comes after centuries of inactivity and woodland regeneration. This clearance of the woodlands was probably the major impact on the Irish landscape. Irish woodlands were never to recover again, as agriculture and pastoralism afterwards kept the landscape open. The introduction of dairying in the 5th­6th century, and the introduction of new plough technology in the 7th and 10th century were also to enable farmers to open up new areas and to produce agricultural surpluses.

Re­inventing agriculture in early medieval Ireland
Livestock and Dairying The 7/8th century law tracts emphasised the importance of cattle in the early medieval economy. These sources graded both the fertility of the land and the status of a farmer based on the number of cattle they owned (Edwards 1990, 56). It appears that cattle were the medium in which social duties and privilege of both clients and their lords were manifested and affirmed. Cattle were a key element in early medieval Irish society and economy. They also seemed to have been central to the identity of a people who lived in a damp, mild, grassy island, perfectly suited to pastoral farming. Cattle bones dominate the faunal assemblages of excavated ringforts and crannogs. Legal texts, literature and mythology all indicate the importance of cattle, in a social and symbolic sense. Cattle were used as a means of grading the fertility of land (land was worth so much milch cows). Wealth and status was not measured in ownership of land, but in control of cattle herds. The early annals also frequently refer to deaths of cattle during winter, hinting that it was seen as a catastrophe. There is also very strong archaeological evidence for the importance of cattle. They dominate most bone assemblages recovered from early medieval settlement sites. Cattle usually comprise about 50% of MNI numbers from settlement sites, although pig, sheep and goat were also clearly kept. Cattle were primarily kept in early medieval Ireland not for meat, hides or other products, but for the purposes of dairying, for milking. The introduction of dairying into Ireland in the 5th to 6th century AD was a major revolution in Irish farming practice. Dairying had clear advantages for a small­scale, rural community. Dairy cattle provide 3 times calories and 4 times protein of beef cattle. It provided a predictable source of proteins and fats, as well as a range of products which could be stored over the winter. In a dairy herd, it is possible to predict that a cow will produce a number of calves, as well as milk at regular intervals. What is the archaeological evidence for dairying? The evidence is largely based on detailed analyses of cattle bone recovered from settlement sites. In particular, Finbar McCormick has carried out detailed scientific studies since the 1980s of cattle bone from several early medieval settlement sites, Moynagh Lough, Lagore crannogs and more recently in a massively significant study of a high­ status early medieval settlement site on top of the Neolithic passage tomb at Knowth (McCormick and Murray 2007). These studies gave us our first good idea of the organisation of early medieval dairy herds. The cattle herds were managed so as to maintain the numbers and quality of dairy cows. Calves were at first kept alive to encourage lactation, and then the male calves (and some female calves) were slaughtered at 1.5 years age to avoid them eating scarce fodder over the winter. These calves were probably first driven to settlements, where they would have been slaughtered for their meat. A few castrated calves, or bullocks were also kept for meat or for use as draft animals in pulling ploughs or carts. The cows continued to produce milk, and at the end of its productive life, they too were slaughtered. In fact, archaeological studies of cattle bones indicate that the composition of the dairy herd on archaeological sites closely corresponds with the dairy herd described in the early Irish laws. In early Irish laws, a typical

171

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 7: Early Medieval Agriculture and Economy

cattle herd of a strong farmer (mruigfer) is stated to have included 2 bulls, 44 cows (24 rented from lord) and 4 oxen for ploughing. The archaeological evidence from Lagore and Moynagh Lough for the composition of the early medieval dairy herd (71% female) mirrors almost exactly the dairy herd described. Cattle herding in early medieval Ireland was a sophisticated, complex system oriented around the production of both domestic requirements and a surplus food stock that was used as part of the social and economic ties between lord and client farmer. Early Irish laws describe in detail the investment by lords in the agricultural economy. Essentially, Lords would loan out a fief or rath of cattle to their client farmers. These client farmers would then repay the lord at the end of the year, with yearling calves, food and other products. Cattle were therefore of prime importance, both in terms of social status and the measurement of wealth, and in terms of the valuation of land. The introduction of dairying had a significant impact on early medieval society. It enabled some individuals to begin amassing capital wealth and power, through granting of cattle to client farmers. Some authors have proposed that the development of dairying may have lead to the transition from reciprocal, gift­giving society to a one more based on feudal values of relationship between lord and vassal. Archaeology of crop cultivation More recently, McCormick and Murray (2007) have recently suggested that an increase in the importance of arable farming was part of the factor in the abandonment of ringforts towards the end of the period. In fact, there is abundant evidence for the importance of cereal crops in early medieval economy. It includes palaeobotanical evidence for wheat, barley and oats, as well as the archaeological evidence of field­systems (perhaps), plough irons (shares and coulters), sickles, and other agricultural tools. We also have the evidence for the domestic or small­scale processing of wheat, barley and oats in the form of rotary quern­stones found on settlement sites. Most importantly, we also have significant evidence for large­scale processing of grain, with corn­drying kilns and large horizontal water­mills. Clearly, then arable production was a significant aspect of early medieval farming practice. Indeed, some historical geographers (such as Matthew Stout) have argued that there was a dichotomy in farming practices of secular and ecclesiastical society. Stout has suggested that monastic populations were primarily engaged in arable production, as part of a large­scale exploitation of agricultural resources. Others, such as Michael Ryan, argue (on the good basis of archaeological evidence) that pastoral and arable farming went hand in hand amongst both secular and monastic populations. Evidence for cultivation can be revealed through a range of archaeological features and material­culture. This consists of evidence for plough, ridges and furrows, milling, corn­drying kilns and a range of items used in cultivation such as sickles. This data can shed valuable light on the transformation of the agricultural economy through the early medieval period. Interpreting early medieval agriculture There is emerging evidence then for early medieval agriculture within the archaeological record. McCormick (1995) has argued that dairying was the principal catalyst when the ringforts was chiefly occupied in the second half of the first millennium A.D. He has argued that the introduction of dairying in the mid first millennium A.D. led to a growth in population which in turn caused the expansion of agriculture and the increase in tillage production in the later centuries of the early medieval period. It has been observed by Kerr (2007) that platform ringforts have a tendency to date to the mid eighth­mid tenth centuries A.D. that is slightly later than the dates proposed by Stout (1997) for the traditional field ringfort. Kerr has used this evidence to also argue that the construction of platform ringforts may attest to the increasing importance of an arable­orientated economy in the later early medieval period. The general view then is that an economy based upon dairying and enclosed settlements eventually gave way to one in which unenclosed settlement and an arable­orientated economy predominated.

172

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 7: Early Medieval Agriculture and Economy

It is likely to be more complex as both forms tillage and livestock was used in tandem with each other through the early medieval period. Furthermore, it has been proven that dairying was an important feature of the British agricultural scene from the mid fifth millennium B.C (Copley et al. 2005). This offers possible evidence that it may have also been a common feature in Ireland during prehistory. This evidence could challenge the view that dairying was sole agent in the emergence of a cattle­based economy around ringfort sites in the second half of the first millennium A.D. It also challenged the view of a simple shift from cattle based economy to one in which was arable­orientated. It has been noted in the discussion of souterrains that many were found to be associated with crop husbandry items including querns stones, sickles and other items. It is also the case that ringforts have also revealed substantial evidence for the practicing of tillage across the country. What are required now are discriminatory studies linking evidence for different crop husbandry and livestock economies (e.g. faunal evidence, kilns, mills, sickles etc.) with dated monuments and structures such as ringforts, settlement/cemeteries, crannogs, souterrains and unenclosed settlements. Stratigraphical information from excavations could also shed information about the types of agricultural items and faunal evidence being uncovered in different dated phases of monuments like ringforts and settlement/cemetery sites. We then may be in a position to understand the diversity and complexity of patterns of agriculture occurring in different contexts through the early medieval period. Such studies in tandem with environmental evidence might then be in a position to examine regionality of agricultural and economic practices across the island through the early medieval period.

EMAP and the evidence for the plough in early medieval Ireland
It has been previously suggested that the introduction of the heavy coulter plough from Roman Britain was responsible for the expansion of the agricultural landscape at the start of the early medieval period that is attested in the pollen record (Mitchell 1986, 143­4 & 153­4). More recent studies of ploughing technology and Irish farming have however shown that the coulter plough may not have been a feature in Ireland until the Viking Age at least (Ryan 2001, 31). The ploughshares preceding the pre­Viking age were instead small and symmetrical and would have been used to arm a scratch plough (Ryan 2001, 31). Therefore the introduction of the plough coulter was not responsible for the decline in forests across the landscape through the early medieval period. It is evident that there was a concerted attack on forests to create new pastures and arable land in the early medieval period (Ryan 2001, 35). The EMAP survey has revealed the existence of some new evidence for crop cultivation in early medieval Ireland. Examples of plough shares include a light triangular shaped example from Lecanabuaile, Co. Kerry that may have been associated with an earlier ard “wooden” scratch plough. Further plough shares have been recorded at Lagore and Whitefort, Co. Down while an example at Dundrum Castle may represent a coulter ploughshare (Edwards 1990, 62). The EMAP survey has revealed further evidence for ploughshares and sock. An iron plough sock was excavated at Boolies Little, Co. Meath (Sweetman 1982) where a souterrain was constructed after an cemetery fell out of use. A plough coulter was found at the possible Viking Longphort at Athlunkard, Co. Limerick that is likely to date to the 9/10th centuries supporting the argument for a later date for this implement. An iron plough share dating to the 10th century as well as two quern stones was excavated at a cashel and souterrain at Ballyegan, Co. Kerry (Martin Byrne 1991, Excavations Bulletin). A sickle was excavated at a univallate ringfort at Poulacapple, Co. Antrim (J. Reynolds 1974, Excavations Bulletin). There is also very limited evidence in the early medieval archaeological record for the iron­shod spade that was used to cultivate land unsuitable for a plough. One such example was excavated at Ballinderry 2 crannog (Gailey 1968; Edwards 1990, 62).

173

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 7: Early Medieval Agriculture and Economy

EMAP and the archaeological excavation of ridge and furrows
Previous Studies Excavated ridges and furrows can also be used as another indicator for evidence for early medieval ploughing. Excavations at Cush, Co. Limerick have revealed a number of ringforts potentially associated with a number of rectangular fields that run along the hillside up the ditches of the monuments. The banks were delineated by U­shaped ditches. A block of ridge and furrow made by a heavy plough with a fixed mouldboard was recorded at Cush running approximately east­west across part of the rectangular enclosure (Fowler, P.J. 1966­67). Edwards (1990, 56) has noted that parallels for the irregularity of the ridges as well as their narrow width of 1.8­3.05m can be found at Gwithian, Cornwall that was dated to the 10/11th century A.D. EMAP survey and ridge and furrows By their nature, the excavations bulletin reports would not generally contain information about data such as excavated ridges and furrows. Taking this into consideration, the survey has established that 10 sites that contained some evidence for potential early medieval ridges and furrows. A fragment of a lignite bracelet was recovered from cultivation furrows at a settlement/cemetery site at Augherskea, Co. Meath that contained the burials of 187 inhumations (Edmond O'Donovan & Peter Kerins 2001, Excavations Bulletin­ 01E1102). Early medieval ridge and furrow was also excavated at an early medieval settlement landscape at Ballyconneely and Ballygirreen, Co. Clare (Thaddeus Breen 2000, Excavations Bulletin­ 00E0284). Pieces of shale bracelet, a glass bead and an iron knife blade were found in their fill. Further potential sites with cultivation evidence were revealed at the upland transhumance settlement at Ballyutoag, Co. Antrim (Williams 1984), outside a souterrain at Ferganstown & Ballymackon, Co. Meath (Hanley 1999, Excavations Bulletin), at an unenclosed settlement beneath Maynooth Castle (Hayden 1996 & 1999, Excavations Bulletin­ 96E391) and at a large significant enclosed settlement at Rosepark, Balrothery, Co. Dublin (Ronan Swan; Judith Carroll 1999, Excavations Bulletin­ 99E0155). Other tentative examples are listed in the appendix. Table 43: Excavated Ridge and Furrow 1970­2002
NAME Augherskea County Meath Company Margaret Gowen Valerie J Keeley Year 2002 2000 EMAP Class Feature Significance Significant Significant

Cemetery & Settlement Site Ridge and furrow Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Ridge and furrow Ridge and furrow Ridge and furrow Ridge and furrow Ridge and furrow Ridge and furrow Ridge and furrow

Ballyconneely Clare & Ballygirreen, AR47/51 Ballyutoag Antrim

N I Historic Monuments 1981/1982 Early Medieval Settlement Branch Landscape Eachtra ACS 1999 2002 Enclosure Enclosed ecclesiastical site

Significant Significant Significant Significant Highly Significant Significant

Ferganstown Meath & Ballymackon Kill St Lawrence Maynooth Castle Rosepark, Balrothery St. Ciaran, Mainistir Chiaráin, Inis Mor Waterford Kildare Dublin Galway

Archaeological Projects 1996/1999 Unenclosed Habitation Site Arch­Tech; Judith Carroll 1999 Enclosure

University of California, 1996/1997/ Enclosed ecclesiastical site Berkeley 1998/1999

St. Ruadhan's, Tipperary Lurgoe, Derrynaflan

National Museum

1983/1984/ Multi­Phase settlement 1985/1986/ 1987

Ridge and furrow

Significant

174

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 7: Early Medieval Agriculture and Economy

Early medieval horizontal and vertical mills
Previous Studies Milling activity has been the focus of some attention by scholars since the 19th century. The discovery of mills has been reported in a number of instances in the later 19th and first half of the 20th century. A.T. Lucas’s (1953) ‘The Horizontal Mill in Ireland’ was the first paper to examine in detail the construction and operation of the many water mills discovered and recorded by the National Museum (Brady 2006). In recent years, dendrochronological dating has transformed our knowledge about the amount of early medieval mills. Rynne (1989, 30) was responsible for challenging the accepted view that the vertical water mill was first introduced to Ireland by the Cistercians. He re­examined Lucas’s previous work and suggested that structures at Little Island, Co. Cork and Morrett, Co. Laois actually represented the remains of vertical water mills. Rynne (1998) has further examined evidence for the craft of milling in the Munster area in particular while he also published a revised base­line list of early medieval mills. Brady (2006) has provided the most recent study of early medieval mills in Ireland, building on the previous work of Rynne (2000). His survey lists sites where ‘indisputable structural remains have been identified and reasonably well dated, be they intact mill wheels, base plates, flumes, paddles, mill races, dams, or parts thereof’ have been discovered. A total of 97 sites were identified, the vast majority proving to be early medieval in date. Vertical water­wheeled mills only comprise 9 of these sites and the majority of these are medieval in date with the exception of notable examples including Little Island 1, Co. Cork, Morrett, Co. Laois and recently Johnstown 1, Co. Meath (Clarke & Carlin forthcoming). The vast majority represent the remains of early medieval horizontal mills although there are some examples where the type of mill could not be established. 43/97 mills have been closely dated. It was found uniquely that 13/43 sites could be dendrochronologically dated to A.D. 800­ 849. The vast majority of the dated mills were found to belong to the period from A.D. 700­950 suggesting that milling was an important feature of the economy in this period. Two major areas of mill construction were observed along the Nore Valley extending into Tipperary and in the general Cork area. The distribution is then clearly southern and southeastern although a number of milling complexes are also beginning to emerge in the Meath area such as Raystown (Seaver 2006). A growing number of tidal mills have been recorded in Ireland and include Nendrum, Co. Down, Knocknacarragh, Co. Galway, Tahilla, Co. Kerry, Donaghmore, Co. Cork; Little Island, Wallingstown, Co. Cork, Killoteran, Co. Waterford, Great Island, Co. Wexford, Ballymascanlan, Co. Louth (Brady 2006). The mill at Killoteran, Co. Waterford has been recently excavated and returned two calibrated radiocarbon dates of AD 410­650 & A.D. 340­600 (Murphy and Rathbone 2006). It is hoped to date the site accurately through dendrochronology but has the potential to represent Ireland’s oldest mill. The EMAP survey of excavations carried out between 1970­2002 has revealed little more to add to this concerning early medieval water mills. EMAP has found that 13 sites were excavated in this period that contained evidence for early medieval water mills (See Appendix). Nine of these sites were horizontal mills, three were tidal and one was vertical. Seven of these sites were excavated since 1999. The majority of mills do not appear to have been excavated but discovered and recorded in the later 19th and 20th century by Museum archaeologists. The data collected by Brady (2006) represents the most update and comprehensive information in this area of research. Brady (2006) has noted the potential in comparatively assessing the distribution of mills with other evidence for agrarian technology. Recent studies have confirmed that the coulter plough only emerged in the Viking period and that it is likely that the scratch or ard plough predominated before this date. Brady (1993) has also found that plough irons are particularly predominant in the northeast and north­central part of the country. We still have little

175

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 7: Early Medieval Agriculture and Economy

knowledge the about these mill sites within their agrarian landscape context. How predominant were tidal mills? We also still do not have a great understanding about the scale and organization of the agricultural economy across the country. Excavations at sites such as Little Island, Co. Cork, Nendrum, Co. Down and Raystown, Co. Meath suggest the presence of large scale milling complexes yet how common were these places across the country through the early medieval period. We also do not completely understand the range of contexts in which milling was undertaken. Were important monasteries and settlement/cemeteries acting as important production centres and areas of exchange or was this type of activity more localized and small­scale undertaken at the level of the prosperous Boaire recorded in the early medieval law tracts. These research topics will help focus attention on the character of the early medieval economy and the redistribution of trade and wealth.

Early medieval corn­drying kilns
Background There have been surprisingly few specific archaeological studies of corn­drying kilns in Ireland although a vast quantity has been excavated over the last forty years due to development and road construction projects. (Monk & Kelleher 2005) have provided the first overview assessment of the archaeological evidence for Irish corn­drying kilns while a further provisional chronology of kilns types has also been discussed by Jonathan Kinsella (2007b) in an unpublished ACS report. Function Corn­drying kilns were used to reduce the moisture content of harvested grain before storage as well as to facilitate its threshing and milling, particularly in damp areas of the country (Monk & Kelleher 2005, 77). They were in use from the prehistoric period till the late 19th century along the fringes of Atlantic Europe until other forms of power such as electricity were developed to undertake these tasks. At its most basic form, kilns principally consist of a firing area that was linked to a drying chamber through a flue. Hot air flowed flowed from the fire to the drying chamber. Experimental archaeology on key­hole shaped kilns has established that a number of factors such as the length and shape of the flue between the fireplace and drying chamber, the weather conditions, the direction of the wind and the temperature of the air effect the proper functioning of the kiln (Monk and Kelleher 2005, 101­4). Kiln Types Archaeological kiln types have been defined by their shape in plan. Kinsella (2007, 2) has suggested that kilns can be broadly broken up into five groups comprising oval or sub­oval shaped kilns, figure of eight kilns, Dumb­bell kilns, Keyhole­shaped or tobacco­pipe kilns and L or comma­shaped kilns. Early medieval kilns – some chronological issues There are currently problems with establishing a chronological framework for the development of kiln types in Ireland. The lack of fully published excavated reports and dating evidence are two significant obstacles. The quality of information about the shape and form of the kiln is often also an issue as well. Another problems are that when radiocarbon dates are available, the context and material used to provide a sample is often not stated (Monk and Kelleher 2005, 105; Kinsella 2007b, 4). It is clear then that the chronological frameworks outlined below must be treated cautiously as we are in the infancy of research in this subject. It has been noted that most excavated key­hole kilns tend to date to the later and post medieval periods (Monk & Kelleher 2005, 105). Monk and Kelleher (2005, 105) have noted that the figure of eight kilns and dumb­bell kilns ‘were in evolutionary terms, earlier than the key­ hole types’. They have noted that figure of eight kilns were found to be associated with a

176

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 7: Early Medieval Agriculture and Economy

succession of horizontal mills at Raystown that dated from the seventh­tenth centuries A.D (Seaver 2006). Kinsella (2007b) has suggested that there is some evidence now to propose that figure­of­eight kilns dated to a tighter time­frame from the fourth­seventh centuries AD. He has also provisionally suggested that oval and sub­oval shaped kilns may date to the Iron Age and have been the precursors for the slightly later figure­of­eight and dumb­bell types. He has also felt that ‘both types of kiln may have functioned contemporaneously for a short period until it was realised perhaps that the figure­of­eight kiln functioned more efficiently’. Kinsella (2007b, 6) has noted that radiocarbon dates for oval or sub­oval shaped kilns from Colp West, Co. Meath, Solsborough, Co. Tipperary and Johnstown, Co. Meath have returned dates from the middle Iron Age to approximately the 7th century A.D. Seventeen kilns were excavated at Colp West. Iron Age dates radiocarbon dates were returned for oval or sub­oval shaped kilns, in plan except for one figure­of­eight example. However, the remaining figure­of­eight kilns returned dates from the late Iron Age/early medieval transitional period up to approximately the seventh century A.D. Oval and sub­oval Kilns also produced radiocarbon dates between the fifth and seventh centuries from primary contexts at Solsborough, Co. Tipperary. Kinsella has suggested that both oval kilns were gradually replaced by the figure­of­eight and dumbbell types though it is likely that they functioned contemporaneously during the late Iron Age/early medieval transitional period. Dumb­bell and figure of eight kilns are principally viewed by Kinsella as dating from around A.D. 400­700. He notes examples from Raystown, Co. Meath and Glebe/Laughanstown, Co. Dublin, where radiocarbon dates suggest use between the fourth and seventh centuries A.D and cites other potential but undated examples at Corbally, Co. Kildare (Tobin 2003, Excavations Bulletin) and Jordanstown, Co. Dublin (Tobin 2002, Excavations Bulletin). It has been observed by Kinsella (2007, 7) that both Seaver (2005) and Murphy and Clarke (2001) have noted that many figure­of­eight kilns predate the ringfort enclosures at Laughanstown/Glebe and Colp West. Monk and Kelleher (2005, 106) have argued that the keyhole kiln can be broadly dated to the later medieval and post medieval periods. Radiocarbon dates from a number of recent excavations at Leggetsrath West, Derrinsallagh and Killeany, Co. Laois (Kenny 2007) have found that these kilns may have also operated in the latter part of the early Middle Ages (Kinsella 2007, 8). EMAP survey and early medieval kiln excavations The survey undertook a provisional count of all of the kilns that dated and also which could potentially date to the early medieval period. It has already been stated elsewhere that the results sent to the excavation bulletin are often provisional in form and do not contain exact information about the amount and type of kilns or available dating evidence. Nevertheless a review of information from the excavations bulletin was undertaken which collected both information for the number and type of corn­drying kilns which dated to the early medieval period (A.D. 400­1169) as well as those which could potentially date to the same period. It was found that approximately 28 sites had evidence for early medieval corn­drying kilns. The total number of kilns excavated at these sites approximately amounted to 59. Table 44: Excavated Corn­drying kiln Types 1970­2002

Sites Kiln Number

Key­Hole 6 13

Dumb­Bell 1 1

Unidentified 20 41

Figure of Eight 1 4

177

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 7: Early Medieval Agriculture and Economy

Figure 31: Corn­drying kiln Types 1970­2002

Excavated Early M edieval Drying Kilns 1970-2002

Figure of Eight

Kiln Type

Unidentified

Dumb-Bell Total Kilns Key-Hole 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Sites 40 45

Number of Kiln Types

The survey also found that upwards of approximately 58 sites might also contain potential early medieval Kilns. The total amount of kilns excavated at these sites was approximately 97. It is obvious that some and perhaps many of these sites may eventually be found not to be early medieval in date. Table 45: Excavated Possible Early Medieval Corn­drying kilns 1970­2002 Figure Eight 7 26 of Unidentified 35 53 L (Comma) 6 6

Sites Kiln Number

Key­Hole 9 11

Oval/Rectangular 1 1

178

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 7: Early Medieval Agriculture and Economy

Excavated Possible Early Medieval Drying Kilns Types 19702002
L (Comm a) Unidentified

Kiln Type

Figure of Eight Oval/Rectangular Key-Hole 0 10 20 30 40

Total Kilns Sites

50

60

Number of Kiln Types

Figure 32: Excavated Possible Early Medieval Corn­drying kilns 1970­2002

Discussion of EMAP analyses of kilns It is intended here to give a succinct review of the type and date of kilns that have been reported as dating to the early medieval period. Those which could potentially date to the early medieval period have been excluded from the study as it will have to be established at a later stage in the project whether they are in fact early medieval in date. The distributions of these early medieval kilns are clearly eastern with the counties of Dublin, Meath, Louth and Kildare constituting the great majority of the excavated sites. While milling was likely to have been of significance in these eastern counties, it is evident that the bias in modern development may have affected this distribution. From the total number of 28 sites that contained early medieval kilns, only 8 of these were found to have reported the associated type. An hour­glass shaped kiln (Dumb­bell type) was excavated near the ecclesiastical site of Ballyman, Co. Dublin (1983 & 1984, Excavations Bulletin­ E182; Med. Arch. 28, 255­6; 29, 214) and was dated to the fifth century A.D. Excavations at Whiterath 2, Co. Louth in advance of the M1 Dunleer­Dundalk Motorway revealed a double banked ringfort containing a souterrain (Cóilín Ó'Drisceoil 1999, Excavations Bulletin­ 99E0485). A key­hole pit was also excavated. Provisional interpretations suggested that it may date to the 9/10th century A.D. on the basis of associated artefacts. Excavations at Ballyegan, CO. Kerry revealed a stone­lined key hole shaped kiln 4m to the north­west of the cashel. A 9/10th century plough share as well as rotary querns was also excavated. The kiln could potentially date to around the same period. (Martin Byrne, 1991 ­ Excavations Bulletin). Similarly other likely early medieval key­hole shaped kilns were excavated at the important multivallate enclosed settlements at Ballynacarriga 1 & 2, Co. Cork (Daniel Noonan 2001, Excavations Bulletin­ 01E0224) and Ninch, Laytown (James Eogan & Martin Reid; Cia McConway 2000­2002, Excavations Bulletin­ 98E0501). Both these sites contained souterrains and extensive evidence for early medieval iron and agricultural evidence dating from approximately the 5th century A.D. onwards. The final phase of activity mentioned in the report concerning a Ninch, Laytown dated to the 10/11th century A.D. supporting the idea that these kilns are early medieval in date. A possible Key­hole shaped Kiln was excavated at Cherrywood, Co. Dublin (John Ó'Néill 1999, Excavations Bulletin­ 99E0523). It was found in an early occupation phase that appears to have

179

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 7: Early Medieval Agriculture and Economy

succeeded a 6/7th century inhumation cemetery but dated to a period before the potential Viking houses were constructed in the 9/10thcentury A.D. The evidence for dated examples for early medieval kilns as reported in the excavations bulletin is remarkably low. The actual amount is however likely to be a great deal later because many of these excavation reports were submitted when radiocarbon dates were pending. It must be concluded that we will only have a complete picture about the chronological development of Irish early medieval kilns when the excavations reports which contain detailed information about radiocarbon dates as well as the shape and form of the kilns are consulted.

Early medieval field systems and enclosures
Background It is clear that the early medieval agricultural landscape was highly organised, with field­ systems laid out by banks and ditches, wooden fences or stone walls. Archaeologists have recorded possible field systems or enclosures that were associated with early medieval monuments since the early twentieth century. Few excavations have ever been undertaken to establish their dates and potential association with these monuments. Aerial photography by Norman and St. Joseph (1969, Pl. 35) have recorded very small irregular fields radiating from a destroyed ringfort at Rathangan, Co. Kildare (Edwards 1990, 53). A great example of extant cashels with associated irregular field walls can be found at Corrofin, Co. Clare while a complex containing two earthen ringforts and an adjacent round hut with a curvilinear field systems has been noted at Ballynashee, Co. Antrim on the fringes of the Antrim plateau, together with a pair of conjoined ringforts and a rectangular house foundation nearby (Edwards 1990, 53). Further examples of ringforts potentially associated with field systems were recorded at Cush, Co. Limerick (Edwards 1990, 56) and Oldcastle, Co. Meath (Aalen 1970, 211). It has traditionally been thought that these field­systems are only well­preserved in parts of the country, such as in the Burren, Co. Clare such as at Corofin, Co. Clare (or Ballykinvarga), where palimpsests of field­systems surround early medieval cashel. Early medieval fields are also known from marginal upland areas, such as The Spectacles and Cush, Co. Limerick or at Ballyutoag, Co. Antrim. It has been suggested that it is possible to deduce from the different sizes or shapes of fields; the different functions to which they might have been put. Thus, the small square fields found at The Spectacles, Co. Limerick and around other settlement sites may have essentially been small garden plots, cultivated by hand using spades and used for growing vegetables or lesser crops. At a larger­scale, the larger elongated fields such as at Cush, Co. Limerick may have been ploughed and used for growing large fields of wheat, barley and oats. It is a striking feature of modern Irish archaeology that an array of early medieval field systems have been investigated in recent years. Although frequently giving no surface expression, large scale geophysical surveys and excavations have uncovered many field systems of early medieval date. These fields vary in shape, size, location and associations and often demonstrate the re­cutting of ditches, the enlargement or sub­division of fields and sometimes the abandonment of farms as ditches silted up or became otherwise derelict. It is evident that the size and character of these field systems or enclosures could provide valuable information about how people organized their landscapes in terms of tillage and cattle­based economies. It could also inform us about how people used both upland and lowland landscapes for different agricultural purposes over time. This could bring to light information about the practice of booleying in early medieval Ireland. It is also possible that concepts such as privacy and private ownership could also be explored in terms of analysing how the landscape was organized spatially over time. It could inform about how different types of land was used in commonalty and private ownership for different agricultural purposes over times.

180

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 7: Early Medieval Agriculture and Economy

Upland and Lowland Field Systems Perhaps one of the most exciting areas of field system research concerns how agricultural economies were organized and arranged around both upland and uplands landscapes. Edwards (1990, 46 & 47) has noted evidence for field systems with associated settlements at Ballynaveooragh along the slopes of Mount Brandon, Co. Kerry and Beginish Island, Co. Kerry (Kelly, 1956). One significant example of the use of both uplands and lowland has also been discovered at ‘The Spectacles’, Lough Gur, Co. Limerick (Ó Ríordáin 1949; Edwards 1990, 47). Four small rectangular fields with associated unenclosed buildings were excavated and may have been used principally for tillage. A system of larger field systems and a semi­circular enclosure was located further up the hillside and may have been the location where the livestock was pastured. A significant group of early medieval buildings was excavated at Bray Head, Valentia Island, Co. Kerry from 1993­2001 (Alan Hayden 1993, Excavations Bulletin­ 93E0121, 94E119, 97E278 & 01E0814; Claire Walsh 95E166, Excavations Bulletin). The buildings appear to have been generally unenclosed in the early medieval period until they were replaced by field systems and cultivation activity dating to the late medieval period. Field survey and excavations have also revealed important evidence for a possible upland transhumance village at Aughnabrack, Ballyutoag on the northwest slopes of the Belfast Mountains (Williams 1984). The site consisted of two large conjoined curvilinear enclosures with a group of circular hut platforms around the perimeter, a series of adjacent fields and a third smaller enclosure to the north (Edwards 1990, 46). Upwards of 23 hut sites were surveyed during the study. The excavated huts largely date to around the 8th century A.D. They could have housed upwards of 100 people. Comparable upland sites in Antrim have also been discovered at Browndod, Killylane and Tildarg (Williams 1983, 239­245). Field survey and excavations have also uncovered field systems dating from the Neolithic period onwards at Parknabinnia, Roughan Hill, Co. Clare (Carleton Jones 1995, Excavations Bulletin­ 95E061). Early medieval occupation evidence was also uncovered in the form of pieces of iron and very small blue glass beads and animal bone. Possible early medieval rectilinear field systems were observed beyond the area of excavation. EMAP survey and field systems and unenclosed settlements Large industrial, gas road infrastructural projects are now uncovering field systems with/without associated unenclosed and enclosed settlement evidence across the whole country in more recent years. Significant early medieval agricultural landscapes have been discovered at Marshes Upper, Co. Louth and Carrigoran, Site 18, Co. Clare. Excavations at Marshes Upper revealed evidence for a number of unenclosed souterrains, structures, corn­drying kilns, ironworking sites and rectangular field systems dating from the Late Iron Age through the early medieval period. A hoard of 8 Hiberno­Norse coins with a deposition date of AD. 995­1000 was recovered from the fill of one souterrain (Paul Gosling 1980­84, Excavations Bulletin; Matt Mossop & Robert O’Hara 2002, Excavations Bulletin­ 02E0008, 02E0233, 02E0234 & 02E0201). Excavations at Carrigoran, Site 18, (100x110m), Co. Clare revealed six main phases of activity (Fiona Reilly, Thaddeus Breen & Billy Quinn, Excavations Bulletin 1998­2000­ 98E0337, 98E0426 and 98E0338). Phase 1 revealed evidence for unenclosed early medieval structures as well as evidence for tillage production. The site then went temporarily out of use before phase 3 witnessed the construction of several early medieval small stone­walls and ditched fields. Evidence for both ironworking and tillage production was uncovered. A Class E bone comb artefact was found dating to the 9/10th century A.D. The site then went out of use and the field systems were destroyed in the medieval period. A final potential example of an early medieval field system with associated unenclosed settlement was excavated at Ballygeale 1, Co. Limerick in advance of the N20/N21 Adare to Annacotty Bypass (James Eogan & Sinclair Turrell 1999, Excavations Bulletin­ 99E0341). A

181

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 7: Early Medieval Agriculture and Economy

possible circular building, c. 10m in diameter, a well and a number of hearths were excavated. An undated field system was excavated 200m away from this settlement in 1999 99E0342. A number of pits and ditches were excavated. A number of hearths were also excavated and the pits contained charcoal suggesting industrial activity in the area. The date of the circular building is uncertain. EMAP survey, field systems/Enclosures and associated monuments Excavations in recent years has increased our knowledge about the relationship of early medieval settlement sites to field systems. Excavations at Corbally Co. Kildare revealed extensive evidence for enclosures and linear field systems associated with a large enclosure as well as widespread indications for extensive arable production. Similar evidence has been found at other significant sites at Ninch, Laytown, Co. Meath, Rosepark, Co. Dublin and Balgatheran 1, Co. Louth. Other contexts include Castle Upton, Templepatrick, Co. Antrim where a penannular ring­ditch containing two early transitional stone­lined burials (c. 5/6th century A.D.) was adjacent to a number of early medieval ditches. See table for other potential examples.

NAME Corbally Ninch, Laytown Castle Upton, Templepatrick Glebe, Site 43, Tully Phrompstown 2 Ballyegan Glebe St. Colum mac Cremthainn, Iniscealtra (Holy Island) Kilnamonagh, Abbeytown Rosepark, Balrothery Balgatheran 1 Ballyegan Carrowkeel

County Kildare Meath Antrim Dublin Dublin Kerry Wicklow Clare

Company Margaret Gowen ADS ADS Valerie J Keeley Freelance UCC Margaret Gowen UCD

Year 2001/2002 2000/2001/2002 1996/1997/1998 2000/2001/2002 2002 1991 2002 1970/1971/1972/1 973/1974/1975/19 76/1980 1989 1999 2000 2000 2000

EMAP Class Multi­Phase settlement Multi­Phase settlement Iron Age/early medieval burial site Ringfort Ringfort Cashel & Souterrain Ecclesiastical Site Enclosed ecclesiastical site

Monument Field System/enclosure Field System/enclosure Field System/enclosure Field System/enclosure Field System/enclosure Field System/enclosure Field System/enclosue Field System/enclosure

Significance Highly Significant Highly Significant Significant Highly Significant General Significant Uncertain Highly Significant

Galway Dublin Louth Kerry Galway

OPW FAS Scheme Arch­Tech;Judith Carroll Valerie J Keeley ADS North West Archaeological Services Freelance CRDS

Enclosed ecclesiastical site enclosure enclosure Ringfort Cashel

Field System/enclosure Field System/enclosure Field System/enclosure Field System/enclosure Field System/enclosure

General Highly Significant Highly Significant General Uncertain

Newrath Blackhall Big, Dunboyne

Kilkenny Meath

2002 2002

Ringfort Ringfort

Field System/enclosure Field System/enclosure

Uncertain No significance

Table 46: Monuments with associated Field Divisions/Enclosures Isolated field systems/enclosures Recent excavations are also revealing evidence for potential early medieval activity in the form of ditches, banks and material­culture. Excavations at Grange near Clondalkin, Co. Dublin revealed a number of curving ditches were excavated in the townland of Grange and Kilmahuddrick near the early medieval monastery (Cia McConway 1996, Excavations Bulletin­ 96E273). Animal bone, metal knives and worked lignite fragment were found. A one sided decorated bone comb gave a terminus ante quem of the 11/12th century suggesting that this feature is early medieval. A pit containing iron slag was also found nearby and post holes and stake holes were associated with this feature.

182

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 7: Early Medieval Agriculture and Economy

Excavations at Balriggan 1, Site 15 (100x100m) Co. Louth revealed possible ditches, pits and a possible stone­lined grave (Shane Delaney 2002, Excavations Bulletin­ 02E0373). Among the finds were a rotary quern fragment, flint­end scraper and crude­bucket shaped pottery, possibly souterrain ware. Excavations at Clonmoney West, Site 42C, Co. Clare revealed a number of walls, one of which returned a radiocarbon date of 1600­1340 BP (AD 350­610) from a charcoal sample taken from beneath it (Deirdre Murphy 2001, Excavations Bulletin­ 01E0242). Whetstones, an Edward III coin (1344­51) and a decorated rotary quern fragment were recovered from the wall. A copper­ alloy pin and a polished stone axe were recovered from beneath the wall. Excavations were undertaken at Trim Castle, Co. Meath from 1995­98 as part of the conservation of the castle (Alan Hayden 1995, 1997 & 1998, Excavations Bulletin­ 95E77). A small number of pits and flint artefacts were discovered which may date to the prehistoric period. A number of early medieval levels of occupation were also uncovered. An early medieval structure was found to represent a large oval animal corral with an entrance in its east side. It was superseded by a metalled surface. They are likely to be early medieval in date. The 1172 ringwork succeeded this settlement. It contained a timber framed building, an early granary and hearth and was found to be associated with the earliest phase of Anglo­Norman occupation. A possible example was excavated at a drystone built field system at Ballynacragga, Area 7, Co. Clare in advance of the N18/N19 Ballycasey­Dromoland Road Scheme (Billy Quinn 200, Excavations Bulletin­ 98E0333). A rotary quern stone was found during top­soil stripping. The date of the field system is uncertain. Finally, excavations at Ardclone, Co. Kilkenny revealed a hearth, located on a backfilled ditch, that contained animal bone, bone bead with a carved motif and a piece of blue glass (Patrick Neary 2000, Excavations Bulletin). The hearth was dated to the10/11th century A.D. (1080±50 BP). There is then, growing evidence for early medieval field systems/enclosures that were associated with unenclosed and enclosed settlement sites across the island. Traditionally, evidence for early medieval field systems were revealed only in upland marginal locations in counties like Kerry, Clare and Antrim. However, new discoveries have been made during large scale infrastructural projects in more recent years in more lowland and heavily cultivated eastern counties such as Meath, Dublin and Louth. These new discoveries could have important repercussions on how we understand and view the extent and pattern of field enclosure across the entire country through the early medieval period.

Early Medieval Burnt Mounds
Previous Studies Burnt mounds or Fulacht Fiadh are one of the most frequently excavated archaeological monuments in Ireland. A huge number of these sites have been excavated in recent years due to development and road scheme projects. They are typically identified by a horse­shoe shaped mound of burnt and broken stones with an associated trough and hearth and are frequently found in close proximity to water. It was first suggested by O’Kelly (1954) that they were used as temporary shelters and cooking places by roving bands of hunters for the purpose of boiling meat. The wood­lined trough was brought to boiling point by dropping stones, previously heated on an adjacent hearth. After the meat was boiled within the heated water, the heat­ shattered stone were removed from the trough and thrown nearby where a burnt mound would eventually form (Edwards 1990, 65). Other alternative suggestions for their function has been sweat baths or saunas as well as monuments for the undertaking of a range of industrial activities including brewing (See Quinn & Moore 2007), textile and leather processing.

183

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 7: Early Medieval Agriculture and Economy

It was originally suggested by O’Kelly (1954) that the fulacht fiadh may have been used from the Bronze Age to the 16th century A.D. Radiocarbon dates more recently have suggested that the vast majority are in fact Bronze Age in date. There is only limited evidence to suggest that they may have been used in the early medieval period. Edwards (1990, 66) has noted that the law tracts and an early 10th century document known as Cormac’s Glossary record the use of terms such as fulacht fiadh and fulacht fian (cooking place of a roving band of warriors). Only one possible example of an early medieval fulacht fiadh was noted by Edwards (1990, 66) at Catstown, Co. Kilkenny. Here two radiocarbon dates returned the very different dates of 800­ 390 B.C. and A.D. 680­980. EMAP survey and some potential early medieval burnt mounds The EMAP survey has identified a number of other potential examples (See Appendix). A potential site was excavated at Ballinrobe in advance of the Ballinrobe Sewerage Scheme (Gerry Walsh 1994, Excavations Bulletin­ 94E017). An iron sickle was excavated from inside the burnt mound material possibly suggesting that the monument dated to a period when iron was in use. Nearby fulachta fiadh revealed animal and deer bone. Excavations at Cloongownagh, Co. Mayo revealed a fulachta fiadh in advance of the N4 Rockingham­Cortober Road Project (Deirdre Murphy 1998, Excavations Bulletin). Excavations revealed an important first­ fourth century A.D. unenclosed settlement. A small fulacht fiadh was dated to the 4th century A.D. to the south of the site near the bog. The site was then enclosed when a ringfort was built. An unusual archaeological feature was excavated at Kilmurry 2, Co. Wicklow (Matt Mossop 2001, Excavations Bulletin­ 01E1134). Heat shattered stones and charcoal were found in a number of hearths and pits near a river. One pit was dated to AD 1000­1240 while a hearth was dated to A.D. 900­1160. The purpose of this enigmatic site is uncertain. Excavations at Parksgrove, Site 1, Co. Kilkenny revealed an ironworking site with an associated possible burnt mound in the western flood plain of the river Nore (Paul Stevens 1999, Excavations Bulletin­ 99E0388). The ironworking site consisted of a furnace bowl, slag and charcoal. A small spread composed of fire­cracked stone and charcoal rich soil and silt was identified 8m to the north of the ironworking site. It was not established if it represented a separate burnt mound or the continuation of a feature associated with the ironworking site. Stevens concluded that ‘it cannot be ruled out that this is a separate burnt mound or Bronze Age fulacht fiadh site’. Excavations were undertaken at Castle Street/Quay Street, Dungarvan (Dave Pollock 1996 & 1997, Excavations Bulletin­ 96E0378) and revealed a fulacht fiadh that was described as being riddled with later clay pits. A calibrated date of AD 540–660 (2 sigma range) was derived from associated charcoal (UB­4159). It was not said if the charcoal was from the fulacht fiadh or later clay pits. These represent only tentative examples for the evidence of burnt mounds in the early medieval period. It is clear that this type of monument dates principally to the Bronze Age period. The EMAP survey did not undertake a systematic survey of Burnt mound data from the excavations bulletin. These examples represent only those that were discovered unintentionally during the review of the early medieval archaeological evidence so it is likely that further tentative or definite early medieval examples may have been excavated.

Early medieval trackways in wetlands
Previous Excavations In the last number of years, excavations and survey have revealed a large number of trackways in wetland and bogland contexts. For many years, Bord na Mona has exploited the central 184

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 7: Early Medieval Agriculture and Economy

raised bogs in Ireland to generate electricity with the effect of reducing the height and size of these boglands. Evidence for trackways and settlement activity has been discovered intermittently but no systematic study of the archaeological potential of these wetlands was ever undertaken. The first systematic study of the archaeological potential of a bogland was undertaken by Barry Raftery (1996) at the Mount Dillon Bogs in Co. Longford from 1985­91. Excavations were undertaken initially at the large Iron Age trackway known as Corlea 1 but it soon became apparent that a large collection of other brushwood and wooden toghers were present in the face of drains in the vicinity. The discoveries of this complex of trackways lead to the subsequent establishment of the Irish Archaeological Wetland Unit (IAWU) in 1990. Since then they have conducted a survey of the raised bogs owned by Bord Na Mona and have published a number of their studies. In the last few years, excavations have also been undertaken by a number of commercial companies, particularly Archaeological Development Services (ADS) and during the Lisheen Mine Archaeological Project by Margaret Gowen from 1996­1998 (Gowen, Phillips & O’Neill 2005). EMAP survey and early medieval trackways EMAP undertook a review of the wooden trackways excavated from 1970­2002 (See Appendix). Radiocarbon and dendrochronological dates for the majority of excavated trackways are not provided in the excavation bulletin reports as they are often pending at the time of submission. Conor McDermott, formerly of the IAWU has established a comprehensive list of dated trackways. He has provided EMAP with information on excavated trackways that returned early medieval dates (A.D. 400­1170). EMAP also examined the evidence from the Excavations Bulletin reports and it was possible from both sources to establish a list of a very provisional list of excavated wooden trackways from 1970­2002. The majority of excavated wooden trackways dated to the early medieval period were recovered in wetland contexts. A total of 23 excavation licenses found 20 EMAP defined sites that were found to contain wooden trackways that dated to the early medieval period. 6 wooden trackways were found to have been excavated within the Hiberno­Norse urban towns. A further wooden trackway platform was excavated at the ecclesiastical site of Dromiskin, Co. Louth. The remaining 16 excavation licenses from 13 EMAP sites were excavated from wetland contexts. It is likely that the figure of excavated trackways is somewhat greater as radiocarbon and dendrochronological dates were often pending at the time of submission. It is also the case that many early medieval trackways were recorded instead of being excavated and were therefore beyond the boundaries set for this project. The vast majority of the excavated wooden trackways recovered from wetland contexts were discovered in Offaly with other examples being found in Tipperary and Cavan. A number of cobbled/metalled trackways and earthen trackways were also recorded within the EMAP database. The cobbled/metalled trackways were recovered within the Hiberno­Norse urban towns as well as at the ecclesiastical sites of Ardcarn, Aghavea and Clonmacnoise. A small number of earthen trackways that also appeared to date to the early medieval period were also noted. Research Areas This research into the amount and character of early medieval trackways is clearly in its infancy. It is likely that the amount of early medieval wooden trackways is far greater as dates for most were not available to be examined. It is clear then that a systematic review of the different wetland projects will be required to establish an accurate figure for the amount of excavated early medieval wetland trackways. It will then be necessary to appraise the character of these brushwood and wooden trackways to understand how they were constructed and used over time. What places did these trackways link together and what were the functions of the different sites?

185

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 7: Early Medieval Agriculture and Economy

Cobbled/metalled trackways in both urban and rural contexts were undoubtedly an important feature of the early medieval archaeological record yet have also never been systematically analysed. Future detailed studies of excavation reports will be required to understand the character and context of these trackways in principally urban and important ecclesiastical and settlement sites.

Early medieval coastal and estuarine fishtraps
Background Early medieval historical sources indicate that the seashore was potentially a place of intense activity (O’Sullivan and Breen 2007). Early Irish laws dating to the seventh and eighth century discuss rights to inshore and offshore sea­fishing, the ownership of seaweed and driftwood, while the saints lives describe the work of fishermen, the moving back and forth of boats and ships and occasionally the hunting of marine mammals. The seventh­century Life of Columba clearly states that the monks of Iona were trapping seals, and these were probably butchered for skins and meat. Their bones have been recovered from early medieval coastal sites at Church Island and Inishkea. Whalebone has been found on early medieval sites such as Raheens, Co. Cork, Rathmullan, Co. Down, Inishkea, Co. Mayo and Lough Faughaun crannog, Co. Down. Although it is possible that these were hunted, it seems more likely that they represent the use of accidentally stranded animals. Indeed, early Irish documentary sources claimed that during the reign of a just king, unusually beneficial things occurred. It is probably for this reason that in AD 753, the Annals of Ulster note that a whale (with three gold teeth) was cast ashore at Bairche in Ulster, during the reign of Fiachna son of Aed Rón, king of Ulster. In contrast, for AD 827, there is a reference to a ‘great pig­slaughter of sea­pigs (probably porpoises) by the foreigners’ on the coast of Ard­Cianachta (in modern Co. Louth, on Ireland’s east coast). This could again simply represent the opportunistic slaughter of a large group of stranded animals, but it may also imply hunting out at sea using boats and harpoons. Certainly, the fact that they refer to it at all and the use of the term ‘foreigners’ indicates that the Irish annalists found this to be a unique and extraordinary event, perhaps indicating too that whale and seal hunting was something that was more an activity practiced by Scandinavian peoples. By the eleventh century AD, the Muslim geographer al – ‘Udrhi noted that the Irish hunted young whales between the months of October and January. Obviously, some of these activities on the seashore would leave little trace. On the other hand, recent intertidal archaeological surveys on the Shannon estuary and Strangford Lough have revealed physical traces (in the form of fishtraps and mills) of what we might call maritime taskscapes, landscapes of marine­ oriented labour that were intended to provide both food and income to local populations. Early medieval fishtraps Perhaps amongst the most striking discoveries in Irish archaeology of recent years have been the early medieval coastal fish traps found on the Shannon estuary and Strangford Lough (O’Sullivan 2001a, 2003, 2005). Medieval fish traps were artificial barriers of stone or wood built in rivers or estuaries to deflect fish into an opening where they could be trapped in nets or baskets. In coastal and estuarine waters, fish tend to move up the shore with the flooding tide and drift back down with the ebbing tide, being attracted by feeding in the shallow water and by the nutrients in freshwater streams and rivers moving into the estuary. Thence, it is possible to trap them by erecting fish traps across these routes, with ebb­weirs catching fish moving down with the ebbing tide and flood­weirs catching fish moving up the shore with the flooding tide. Upon encountering these barriers, the fish would tend to move along the fences into the trapping mechanism, from where they could be removed later. The fish traps typically consisted of two (or more) converging vertical fences or walls, thus forming a large V­shaped structure. At the apex or ‘eye’ of the two fences there would be a woven wicker basket supported on a framework, a net, or a rectangular or curvilinear 186

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 7: Early Medieval Agriculture and Economy

enclosures of wooden posts or nets. However, medieval fish traps vary significantly in location, form, size, and style of trapping mechanism, depending on the relative size of the catch intended, the foreshore topography and current conditions and the customs and practices of local fishermen. Indeed, it is now clear that there is a significant local and regional variation in the use of fish weirs around medieval Britain and Ireland. Early medieval fishtraps on Strangford Lough The Strangford Lough fish traps are located around the shores of this sea lough, but are mostly concentrated in Grey Abbey Bay and around Chapel Island in the north­east part of the Lough. At least fifteen wooden and stone­built fish traps have been recorded and the wooden traps in particular have been radiocarbon dated to between the eighth and thirteenth centuries AD. Strangford Lough would have had a range of fish species, including salmon, sea­trout, plaice, flounder, mackerel, cod, grey mullet and skate with large numbers of eels in the abundant kelp growth. The Strangford Lough fishtraps were ebb­weirs, intended to catch fish drifting down with the falling tide. They usually have two long stone walls or wooden fences that converged in a V­shape to a point on the lower foreshore. This means that at every low tide they were exposed for about two to three hours, and while they enclosed a large area of foreshore, their owners and users had sufficient time to remove the fish and repair the structures. The Strangford Lough wooden fish traps have fences measuring between 40m and 200m in length and are more or less V­shaped in plan. The fences were made both of single lines of posts and complex arrangements of paired posts thus creating an inner and outer fence. Post­ and­wattle panels could have been carried out to the traps and slotted between these paired uprights and pinned in position using bracing props and horizontal pegs. Wooden fish traps at Cunningburn and Gregstown, near Newtownards also had stone walls along the base of the fence to protect them from erosion and undercutting. At the 'eye' of the converging fences, baskets or nets were probably hung on rectangular structures. The wooden fences would have deteriorated quickly and needed periodic repair. It is obvious that a significant amount of labour was required for their construction. Thousands of hazel, ash and oak poles and rods would have been felled, trimmed and hauled out from the neighbouring woodlands. At Chapel Island, a large wooden fish trap has provided a radiocarbon date of AD 711­889. It has a lower, 'flood fence' 147m in length running parallel to the shore and a second, shorter fence running up towards the island. Archaeological excavations suggest that it was the subject of frequent repairs or that there was an attempt to make the fences 'fish­tight' through the use of hundreds of closely­spaced posts. Interestingly, there is archaeological evidence for settlement on the island, including a possible church structure within a promontory enclosure defined by a substantial bank and ditch. Traces of stone field­walls can also be seen on the nearby slopes. The Chapel Island fish traps may have been linked to the regionally significant early medieval monastic centre of Nendrum, Co. Down which is located on an island across the lough. In Grey Abbey Bay, 1.5km to the east, three wooden traps and four stone traps have been recorded. At South Island, a large V­shaped wooden trap crosses a tidal channel. This structure measures over 100m in length, was constructed of at least 500 posts and has a rectangular structure and possible basket at the eye. It has provided two separate radiocarbon dates of A.D. 1023­1161 and A.D. 1250­1273. Similar V­shaped wooden traps found elsewhere in the bay have produced radiocarbon dates of A.D 1037­1188 and A.D. 1046­1218. The traps may have used nets, baskets or rectangular pounds, post­and­wattle enclosures inside of which the fish remained until removed. The Strangford Lough fish traps were clearly in use in the bay throughout the Middle Ages. Some of the large wooden and stone fish traps may have been the property of the Cistercian community of Grey Abbey, which was founded in 1193 AD. It is known that the early Cistercian communities were determinedly self­sufficient and the use of fisheries in the bay probably intensified after their arrival.

187

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 7: Early Medieval Agriculture and Economy

The Strangford Lough stone­built fish traps are broadly similar in size, form and orientation. They typically measure between 50m and 300m in length, 1.1m in width and probably stood between 0.5m to 1m in height. Fish could have swam over them on a flooding tide but would be trapped behind the wall during the last hours of the ebbing tide. The stone fishtraps are variously V­shaped, sickle­shaped and tick­shaped in plan, mainly depending on the nature of the local foreshore. Large numbers of heavy beach boulders would have been collected from the foreshore for their construction. The stone­built fishtraps would have needed repair after winter storms, no doubt a difficult task with barnacles on the rocks and only several hours available for work. The massive physical scale and form of the Strangford Lough fishtraps probably indicates a local response to the broad, sandy beaches of the lough, although it is also clear that these were intended to literally harvest all of the fish out of this part of the lough. Early medieval fishtraps on the Shannon estuary On the Shannon estuary, in south­west Ireland, archaeological surveys have revealed evidence for several medieval wooden fishtraps, dated to between the fifth and the thirteenth century AD. The Shannon estuary fish weirs tend to be small, V­shaped post­and­wattle structures (with fences 20­30m in length) with basket traps, hidden away within the narrow, deep creeks that dissect the estuary’s vast expanses of soft, impenetrable muds. Despite being relatively small, they would have been undoubtedly effective as even a small barrier in these creeks could have literally sieved the water of all fish moving around with the tides. They were oriented to catch fish on the flooding or ebbing tide and could in season have taken large catches of salmon, sea trout, lampreys, shad, flounder and eels (the latter in October­November). The earliest known fish trap is a small post­and­wattle fence (c. 8m in length) on the Fergus estuary, Co. Clare (a tributary of the Shannon estuary), dated to AD 442­664 (one of the earliest in these islands). This was probably part of a fish trap that would have been used by the inhabitants of early medieval ringforts (enclosed settlements) on the low hills adjacent to the estuary. Early medieval fish traps have also been located on the mudflats of the Deel estuary, Co. Limerick (which flows into the upper Shannon estuary). Deel 1, dated to A.D. 1037­1188 is a small V­shaped fishtrap, oriented to catch fish on the flooding tide with two converging post­and­wattle alder wood fences measuring over 30m in length. A cluster of posts at the apex of the two fences probably represents the surviving remains of a trap. It may have been associated with nearby settlements on the neighbouring land, including early medieval ringforts and other earthworks. There are other, later medieval fishtraps on this foreshore (see below), that provide intriguing evidence for local continuity of size, form and location, suggesting that they essentially replaced each other between the eleventh and the late fourteenth century AD. Indeed, recent studies of early medieval fishweirs around the coastline of Britain and Ireland also indicates that there can be strong continuities of form over centuries. Anglo­Saxon fish traps on the estuaries of the Essex coastline were built, repaired and reactivated through the sixth to eighth centuries AD. Similarly Saxon and Norman fish traps on the Severn estuary indicate local continuities of form, so much so that it might be suspected that the fishtraps themselves acted to preserve local memories of good fishing grounds. This broader perspective also reveals that early medieval fishtraps were most in use in these islands in the seventh century AD, and also again in the thirteenth to fourteenth centuries AD, presumably relating to some social and cultural processes such as population growth and perception of fish as an economic resource.

Conclusions
EMAP has revealed that there has been a significant amount of discoveries of new archaeological evidence for agriculture in early medieval Ireland. The general character of early medieval agriculture; the role of dairying; the role of arable crops and the place of farming in early Irish society have all been reconstructed from archaeological, environmental and historical evidence. 188

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 7: Early Medieval Agriculture and Economy

However, EMAP has also demonstrated the good evidence for early medieval field­systems and enclosures, for kilns and mills, for trackways and fisheries and other features. It could be argued the well­known revolutions in early Irish farming could now be matched with a revolution of the scale and intensity of settlement and land­use in the Irish landscape and the real role of farming in social life and practice.

189

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 8: Early Medieval Crafts and Technology – a focus on ironworking

Chapter 8. Early medieval crafts and technology – a focus on ironworking
Introduction
Crafts and industry were crucially important elements of early medieval Irish society The identification and extraction of raw materials, the various stages of craft production and the distribution of artefacts through trade and exchange, and finally the use, repair and abandonment of objects can all be traced in the archaeological record and also influenced the character and organisation of settlements and landscapes. The role of crafts and industry can be seen in the character and lay­out of settlement sites, routeways and activity areas in the wider landscape, as well as the practical and social organisation of work within dwellings. It should be recognised that crafts and industry in early medieval Ireland, like settlement, agriculture and other activities, would have been organised in social terms – especially in terms of gender, rank and status. Certainly, the early Irish sources attest to the relative status and importance of different crafts. For example, the early Irish laws indicate that carpenters, copper­workers and smiths were all of high­status, occasionally having a similar honour­price to that of lower grade of nobility, while in contrast, comb­makers were of quite low social status and were scoffed at by the jurists who compiled the laws. It is also the case that manual labour had to be avoided if you were above a certain social rank. Ironworking was the only early medieval industry that was systematically analysed for this EMAP phase. Evidence for non­ferrous metalworking or other craft technologies such as textile production were not examined in detail due to issues with the quality of the data in the excavation bulletin reports. It is certainly true that a much wider range of crafts were practiced on most settlement sites, such as woodworking, leather­working and bone­working, but these are not easy to trace in Excavations bulletin. Instead, we will examine the evidence for iron­ working, which seems to have ranged in complexity and scope, from small­scale local production to more specialised activities.

Previous studies of early medieval iron working
Background There have been few systematic studies of early medieval Irish ironworking. The first major publication of on the subject was B.G. Scott’s (1990) Early Irish Ironworking. It examined the evidence for the transition to iron in the later prehistoric period and the development and consolidation of this technology in the Iron Age and in the earliest phases of the early medieval period. He was one of the first to examine the potential evidence for smithing, smithing and mining and the artefacts and technology used behind these processes. Both Scott (1990, 157) and Edwards (1990, 86) were one of the first to recognise the problems of previous Irish metallurgical studies on important early medieval sites that often failed to make a distinction between smithing and smelting furnaces or failed to collect slag in a systematic way. Our current understanding of early medieval metallurgy is then based on a few specific sites all of which are potentially in need of re­evaluation. Development­led excavations in the mean time, particularly along the NRA road schemes, have revealed unparalled evidence for early medieval ironworking on a previously unknown scale, some of which now is beginning to be examined and published. Metallurgical specialists such as Tim Young and Effie Photos Jones are also now engaging with the excavated evidence to produce new paradigms and reports that will transform out understanding of early Irish iron­working.

190

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 8: Early Medieval Crafts and Technology – a focus on ironworking

However there has still been no specific study of Irish iron working or metallurgy to date that has systematically assessed and reviewed the significance of all this new archaeological evidence. New evidence has also emerged for early medieval charcoal pits and kilns although our understanding of the character and role of these features in early medieval iron working is still obscure. In terms of the technological processes then, there is currently a lack of understanding concerning the evidence for the sourcing of iron ore, the structure and form of charcoal kilns, smithing and smelting hearths and the range of artefacts used behind these processes. There is also a want of knowledge concerning the scale of iron production, the distribution networks behind the circulation of iron ore, the location places of high status forges and the status, power and relationship of the Blacksmith to local political rulers. The Technological Process Iron is ! ! ! ! produced through a process in which involved Sourcing Iron Ore Producing Charcoal Separating ore from the iron bloom using charcoal (Smelting) Refining and hammering out impurities (Smithing)

Sourcing and mining Iron Ore There is currently a complete lack of knowledge and evidence for the initial extraction of iron ore for industrial purposes from its primary context. There was some evidence for the extraction of iron ore from surface outcrops near Garryduff I ringfort, Co. Cork (O’Kelly 1963, 103). Few other sites with the exception of the copper mines at Ross Island, Co. Cork (William O'Brien 2004) has revealed evidence for early medieval mining across the island. It is believed however that bog iron was the principal source of iron in early medieval Ireland as evidence from the ringfort at Cush, Co. Limerick (Ó Ríordáin 1940), the ringfort at Mullaghbane, Co. Tyrone (Harper 1972) and iron ore evidence at Reask (Fanning 1981), Co. Kerry suggests. Charcoal Production Carefully constructed small pits in which timbers were placed against a central vertical post c.1m high who were then covered by straw, bracken and layers of earth and turf were built to turn the timbers into charcoal. Charcoal was created ‘by carbonising smouldering wood in an oxygen­limited environment; the amount of air was carefully controlled so that the wood was roasted but not burnt’ (Carlin forthcoming). Smelting The charcoal was then used for the smelting of bog iron ore as it was through burning charcoal within a furnace that iron ore and other impurities was extracted to form iron bloom and liquid slag. Smithing After the smelting process, the produced bloom was further refined, reheated and hammered in a smithing hearth to remove excess slag and impurities not previously separated during the smelting phase. Slag was a by­product and consequence of both smelting and smithing processes. Microscopic analysis of the slag can yield important information about whether smelting or smithing was undertaken at the site.

EMAP and excavated early medieval ironworking evidence
Excavated Sites The excavations bulletin was the principal source of information for this stage of the EMAP survey. It is clear however that the bulletin reports are interim in nature and at the time of submission have not got information about the excavated number, type and date of hearths and furnaces available at hand. While information may occasionally have been given about the type of furnaces excavated etc., it was decided to collect just basic data about the approximate

191

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 8: Early Medieval Crafts and Technology – a focus on ironworking

or exact (if given) number of industrial hearths/furnaces and other associated ironworking residues (slag) or artefacts indicative of the practice. The principal objective of this stage of the project was to then establish an approximate number of sites and licenses that contained evidence for early medieval ironworking and also to begin to understand and examine the contexts in which these practices were taking place. The next stage of the project will involve consulting excavation reports to establish the dates of many of these recorded sites and to identify evidence for information about the technological process including smelting, smithing and mining. The most basic objective was to establish an approximate number of early medieval sites and licenses that contained evidence for early medieval ironworking. It was found that 292 licenses contained evidence for early medieval and potential early medieval ironworking. They were embedded within 249 EMAP defined sites. It must be said that the evidence for ironworking was quite diverse varying from the discovery of a limited amount of iron slag to highly significant industrial centres. While a total of 249 sites have been collected in the database, it is perhaps likely that the actual number that contains early medieval ironworking will be more likely a figure of c. 150­200. Publication of recent excavations are then currently transforming and driving our understanding of the technology and processes employed in early medieval metallurgy. Excavated charcoal producing pits Charcoal producing pits are one of the most understudied areas in Irish early medieval archaeology. Edwards (1990, 87) mentioned one possible early medieval charcoal producing pit at the ecclesiastical site of Reask. It was found associated with a series of five small bowl furnaces set into the floor of a disused clochan. In more recent years a range of isolated hearths and charcoal pits which have the potential to transform our understanding about the character of early medieval metallurgy have been excavated in advance of road and gas pipe schemes. Little is completely known about these sites that have been described as ‘charring hearths’, ‘pit steads’ and ‘charring pits’ (Tylecote 1990, 225; Hull & Taylor 2006, 31). Excavations along the M4 Kinnegad­Enfield­Kilcock Motorway Scheme Contract 1 (ACS 2002) have yielded charcoal kilns at Ardnamullan 1 (AD 720–960) and also (AD 1020–1250), Newcastle 2, (AD 1050–1100) and Hardwood 3 (AD 720–960) in county Meath (Carlin forthcoming). It has been observed that many metallurgical sites had evidence for multi­phase activity. Hardwood 3, for instance returned radiocarbon dates for metallurgy in the Iron Age (360–60 BC), early medieval (AD 720–790) and medieval/post­medieval (AD 1440–1640) periods. It suggests that these areas were deliberately selected due to their particular natural resources and topographical location and were sporadically revisited across this wide time­ frame (Carlin forthcoming). A potential charcoal producing pit was also excavated at Curryhills, Site 1, Prosperous, Co. Kildare in advance of the Clane­Prosperous Water Supply Scheme (Martin Byrne 2000, Excavations Bulletin­ 00E0064). The pit was irregular in plan and compared to other examples was also small measuring only 1.74m x 1.14m. Excavation of the feature revealed charred material consisting of ash and charred/burnt wood fragments as well as in situ burning. It was subsequently dated to A.D. 1005­1185. Excavations quite recently in advance of the N21 Limerick­ Tralee Road have also discovered evidence for early medieval charcoal production pits (Site AR05) in the townland of Kilmaniheen West on the border of Limerick and Kerry (Hull & Taylor 2006). The pits, with one circular exception, were rectangular and oval shaped and displayed intense evidence for in situ burning and charcoal­rich deposits at the base. Radiocarbon determinations were made from charcoal from two pits which returned calibrated dates of A.D. 810­840/ A.D. 860­1030 and A.D. 990­ 1160 (Hull & Taylor 2006, 31). Hull and Taylor (2006, 32) have also observed that other

192

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 8: Early Medieval Crafts and Technology – a focus on ironworking

rectilinear shaped charcoal producing pits have been excavated at Ballycorrick, Clondagad, Co. Clare, Kilquane, Co. Clare and Aghamore, Co. Mayo. They have also reported that a similar site excavated at Barefield, Co. Clare (Casey 2004) was dated to the 11/12th centuries A.D. Approximately 37 further sites have been described as potential early medieval charcoal producing pits within the EMAP database (See Appendix). These examples typically consist of pits containing evidence for charcoal as well as often in situ burning. Many of these sites were excavated along the recent Bord Gáis Pipeline Project to the West (Margaret Gowen 2002). No radiocarbon dates were available for these sites so it is likely that some are not early medieval in date. It is also entirely likely that some of these sites may well be proved to have a different function other than that of a charcoal producing pit. It is likely that some charcoal producing pits were located in close proximity to the smelting and smithing furnaces. Edwards (1990, 87) has described a potential charcoal pit associated with five small bowl furnaces at the ecclesiastical site of Reask. It has also been noted by Hull and Taylor (2006, 32) that an ironworking complex at Knockbrack was excavated only 2.6km to the southwest of the charcoal producing pits at Kilmaniheen West. While these Knockbrack metalworking complex was radiocarbon dated to the 6/7th centuries A.D and therefore not contemporary with the 9­11th century A.D. charcoal producing sites, it nevertheless confirms the presence of an ironworking industry in the area in the later first millennium A.D. (Hull and Taylor 2006, 32). Excavations equally along the M4 Kinnegad­Enfield­Kilcock Motorway Scheme Contract 1 revealed early medieval furnaces in the townland of Hardwood where examples of early medieval charcoal producing pits were discovered (Carlin forthcoming). A number of other potential early medieval charcoal pits were also found associated with evidence for metal/ironworking and are described under the latter term (See Appendix). The EMAP Survey and Smelting and Smithing One problem with the excavation reports was that they did not often distinguish between excavated smelting and smithing furnaces as these reports were written when excavation was often ongoing. It is also evident that it is only in recent years with the development of new scientific techniques that archaeologists are beginning to appreciate the importance of in­depth analysis in this subject. Another problem was that it was sometimes difficult to establish whether a hearth was industrial or domestic in function. The current EMAP database then did not make any distinction between a smelting and smithing furnace though such a distinction is envisaged for the project at a further stage in its lifetime. Taking all these factors into consideration, it was found that approximately 139 sites contained evidence for potential industrial hearths/furnaces. It was found that approximately 191 sites contained evidence for ironworking residues (slag) as well as ironworking artefacts and structures (clay tuyère fragments, hammer scales and crucible fragments etc.). These are very provisional figures and are useful only at this stage of the project to establish approximate figures for excavated sites. Evidence for Smelting and Smithing Smelting furnaces are often revealed as simple shallow, depressions or bowls in the ground. It is difficult to reconstruct their original form however because they were often dismantled to remove the iron bloom or slag or perhaps even re­used for smithing or copper­alloy melting (Edwards 1990, 87). The best indicator for a smelting furnace is the presence of ‘furnace bottoms’ that represented the hardened slag that had sunk to the base of the furnace during the separation of the slag from the bloom. Clay tuyères were used to funnel air into a furnace to increase its temperature was also another important associated item used during the smelting process. Another indicator of a smelting furnace is that it produces far greater quantities of slag that a smithing furnace which focused principally on hammering out excess impurities not completely removed during the smelting process. Edwards (1990, 87) has cited examples of smelting furnaces at Garryduff 1, Co. Cork, Ballyvourney, Co. Cork and Ballyvollen,

193

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 8: Early Medieval Crafts and Technology – a focus on ironworking

Co. Antrim. A total of 30 smelting furnaces were excavated along the M4 Kinnegad­Enfield­ Kilcock Motorway Scheme Contract 1, most of which were early medieval in date (Carlin forthcoming). There is less archaeological evidence for smithing furnaces. The diagnostic tools of this activity consist of anvils, hammer scales, unfinished tools and sometimes bellows. Two early medieval anvils were noted by Edwards (1990, 88) at the royal site of Clogher, Co. Tyrone and Garryduff 1, Co. Cork. 12 smelting furnaces as well as a number of other potential examples were excavated along the M4 Kinnegad­Enfield­Kilcock Motorway Scheme Contract 1, most of which were early medieval in date (Carlin forthcoming). Many sites have revealed evidence for both smelting and smithing and examples includes Johnstown 1 and Killickaweeny along the M4 Kinnegad­Enfield­Kilcock Motorway Scheme Contract 1 as well as an unenclosed early medieval ironworking complex at Knockbrack in advance of the N21 Limerick­ Tralee Road (Hull & Taylor 2006, 19). Distribution of Excavated Sites 29 counties contained sites with evidence for early medieval or potential early medieval ironworking. The site with the most evidence was Dublin followed by Meath, Cork and Limerick with a number of other counties such as Antrim, Clare, Kerry, Kildare and Louth following closely behind. The counties with the most sites were then again located in the northeastern region of Leinster as well as the southwestern and western counties in Munster. A cursory review of the data shows that approximately 92 sites were excavated in advance of road, Bord Gáis and sewerage/drainage schemes. A further 81 sites were excavated in advance of development and residential developments. 42 sites were revealed during research and conservation projects while the reset were excavated for a number of other reasons. The figures illustrate the particular importance of a number of schemes such as the ‘Bord Gáis Pipeline to the West project and the excavations along both the M1 and M4 in revealing sites with potentially exciting new archaeological information. Table 47: Excavated Ironworking Evidence Per County 1970­2002
County Antrim Armagh Clare Cork Derry Donegal Down Dublin Fermanagh Galway Kerry Kildare Kilkenny Laois Ironworking Evidence 12 4 13 18 3 2 10 35 5 7 13 14 6 2 ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ County Limerick Longford Louth Mayo Meath Monaghan Offaly Roscommon Sligo Tipperary Tyrone Waterford Westmeath Wexford Wicklow Ironworking Evidence 17 1 12 7 19 1 2 1 3 7 8 11 9 3 3

194

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 8: Early Medieval Crafts and Technology – a focus on ironworking

Figure 33: Excavated Ironworking Evidence Per County 1970­2002

Excavated Ironworking Evidence Per County 1970-2002
Wicklow Wexford Westmeath Waterford Tyrone Tipperary Sligo Roscommo Offaly Monaghan Meath Mayo Louth Longford Limerick Laois Kilkenny Kildare Kerry Galway Fermanagh Dublin Down Donegal Derry Cork Clare Armagh Antrim 0 5 10 15

County

Number of Sites

20

25

30

35

40

The context of early medieval ironworking The majority of ironworking evidence then has been excavated on ecclesiastical and enclosed settlement sites. Important ironworking evidence has also been recovered on ‘settlement/cemetery’ sites and in Viking urban contexts. There has however been a growing body of evidence for isolated ironworking sites and charcoal pits discovered along road/Gas pipeline schemes and large scale development projects. Table 48: Excavated Ironworking Evidence and Site Categories 1970­2002
Site Category Agricultural Cemetery/Burial Charcoal Pit Ecclesiastical Ironworking Site Miscellaneous Multi­Phase Site Settlement Enclosure Settlement Landscape Settlement/Cemetery Unenclosed Site Viking Urban Number 4 4 27 58 37 2 13 57 12 11 4 21

195

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 8: Early Medieval Crafts and Technology – a focus on ironworking

Excavated Ironworking and Site Categories 1970-2002
Miscellaneous Viking Urban Settlement/Cemetery Ironworking Site

Site Category

charcoal Pit Multi-Phase Site Settlement Enclosure Settlement Landscape Unenclosed Site Ecclesiastical Cemetery/Burial Agricultural

0

20

40
Number of Sites

60

80

Figure 34: Excavated Ironworking and Site Categories 1970­2002

The economic and political context of early medieval ironworking So then, what were the significance, scale and character of the ironworking at these sites? Were most people engaged in ironworking during their daily lives or was the activity a preserve of the well to do and wealthy? Where did these activities take place and what was the status of the Blacksmith? It is likely that ironworking was undertaken by people of different status within a variety of different contexts as the above graph suggests. It is likely that ironworking occurred in a range of contexts. It is likely that ironworking was done by local people at a very low intensity to meet basic subsistence needs. The second and third contexts occurred at high status/royal sites and important ecclesiastical sites where iron working was undertaken by smiths in tandem with other specialised activities such as copper and glass production. Isolated ironworking sites and modest settlements: The ironworking of the lower classes? Basic subsistence levels of ironworking are likely to have been undertaken on the settlements of the semi­free and lowest grades of free­men in the early medieval period. It is also likely that many isolated ironworking sites containing a small number of hearths, furnaces and associated charcoal pits were visited periodically by local farmers to meet their basic subsistence needs. The site at Knockbrack, Co. Kerry could represent one example where small scale ironworking complex with evidence for both smelting and smithing was undertaken (Hull & Taylor 2006, 20). Similar sites were discovered along the M4 including Hardwood 3 and Rossan 4 where there were evidence for contemporary smelting and smithing furnaces. (Carlin forthcoming). Some ironworking sites may have been sited to exploit bog ore. Potential examples include Shallon 1 & 3, Co. Meath excavated along the M1 road scheme (Ian Russell 2001, Excavations Bulletin­ 01E0195). It revealed an Iron Age/early medieval transitional ironworking site (cal. AD 240­540) comprising an oval furnace with associated slag. Nearby, a small metalworking dump was recovered comprising a flint blade, nineteen fragments of flint debitage and seventeen fragments of a possible clay tuyère.

196

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 8: Early Medieval Crafts and Technology – a focus on ironworking

Excavations at Tullaghedy, Co. Tipperary in advance of the N52 Nenagh Bypass Road revealed 3 fulachta fiadh, one of which contained evidence for subsequent smelting and metalworking (Richard O’Brien 1998 & 1999, Excavations Bulletin­ 98E0540). A large quantity of iron slag, iron nails, burnt and unburnt animal bone and a ring headed pin were discovered in this later phase of activity. These examples illustrate that small­scale ironworking were often undertaken at a low level of intensity in marginal places near iron ore and fuel resource most likely by small farmers to meet their basic subsistence needs. Limited ironworking at a very low level of intensity many have also been undertaken on modest ringforts and cashels. Excavations at a large number of ringforts, cashels and crannogs have revealed limited ironworking evidence often represented by the discovery of a small quantity of slag or perhaps a number of furnace bottoms. Excavations at a univallate ringfort at Croom East and Sluggary Co. Limerick revealed a small quantity of iron slag (E. Shee 1974, Excavations Bulletin). Shee (1973 & 1974, Excavations Bulletin­ E131) also undertook an excavation at another Limerick ringfort at Sluggary. The excavation revealed a central building as well as slag, furnace bottoms, bronze­ring headed pin, bone comb and clay moulds which were found along this internal bank. Excavations at a small crannog at Sroove, Co. Sligo revealed some domestic artefacts and a limited evidence for slag indicative of ironworking (Christina Fredengren 1997­ 99, Excavations Bulletin­ 97E0209). It has been suggested by Fredengren (2002) that such crannogs may have been the homesteads of the poor. Iron Production and the Well­to do Farmer It is likely that the homesteads of the better­off farmer or free­man were engaged in ironworking at a higher level of intensity. Carlin (forthcoming) has cited a number of examples including Lisnagun, Co. Cork (O’Sullivan, Hannon and Tierney 1998) and Coolcran, Co. Fermanagh (Williams 1985) where evidence for small­scale ironworking as well as domestic activity has been uncovered on a number of ringfort settlements. Excavations at Scrahane 1, Co. Kerry also revealed considerable evidence for ironworking on a ringfort (Mary O’Donnell 1997 & 1998, Excavations Bulletin­ 96E0153). Extensive amounts of slag and industrial waste were discarded into the ditch of the ringfort. Extensive evidence for smelting was uncovered in a number of areas inside the ringfort. Excavations at a raised ringfort at Altanagh, Co. Tyrone revealed a considerable amount of ironworking evidence in the northern portion of the site (Brian Williams 1986). Two bowl furnaces were found and contained charcoal, slag and a shard of coarse pottery. A stone pavement appears to have served as a working area for four simple bowl furnaces on its west side. Strong evidence for ironworking including slag, hammer scale and furnace bottoms were found in phase 2. The site is then likely to have contained both evidence for smelting and smithing. It is then likely to have been a ringfort of a modestly well­ off family with a means greater than that of families living at a basic subsistence level but likely not at the same level found at high status sites. Excavations at a raised ringfort at Dunsilly, Co. Antrim were undertaken by Tom McNeill (1974 & 1975, Excavations Bulletin). It was revealed that the ringfort was re­used as a motte in the later 12th century. A series of phases of buildings were excavated and a number of hearths, furnace bottoms and a quantity of slag were recovered. Excavations at a large coastal enclosure at Shandon, Dungarvan, Co. Waterford revealed several hearths, an ironworking area and pits containing traces of iron and copper production (Deirdre Murphy & Stuart Elder 2001 & 2001, Excavations Bulletin­ 00E0442). The site had potentially Viking associations. Excavations at a bivallate ringfort (62 meters diameter) at Lisleagh 1, Co. Cork with stratified evidence for a series of buildings, structure, defences as well as trade, craftworking and intensive levels of ironworking (Monk 1980­84, Excavations Bulletin­ E218).

197

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 8: Early Medieval Crafts and Technology – a focus on ironworking

Evidence for smelting and smithing furnaces as well as textile production and other activities have been excavated at a well­documented enclosure at Killickaweeny, Co. Kildare. It has been suggested that the enclosure represents the ‘home of one or more generations of a wealthy farmer family such as a bóaire as described in the early medieval law tracts’ from the 8­10th century A.D. (Walsh forthcoming). The excavation revealed clear evidence a central round house surrounded by two possible outhouses or workshops as well as the organization of the space into distinct for iron and textile production and animal corrals. A range of the enclosed ‘settlement/cemetery’ sites have also revealed often considerable evidence for ironworking through the early medieval period. Johnstown 1, Co. Meath is one striking example where seven different metalworking areas were discovered containing both smelting and smithing hearths (Clarke & Carlin forthcoming). While a massive quantity of slag was recovered from the site, it was found that this was probably due more to the longevity of the practice and the inefficiency of the low temperature furnaces that were used (Clarke & Carlin forthcoming). Ironworking was instead more intermittent and was perhaps undertaken at a scale similar to that at the nearby settlement at Killickaweeny, Co. Kildare. A number of other ‘settlement/cemetery’ sites including Mount Offaly, Cabinteely, Co. Dublin (Malachy Conway 1998 & 1999, Excavations Bulletin­ 98E0035) have also revealed evidence for significant ironworking evidence in some ways comparable to the above two sites. Specialised iron working: ecclesiastical sites, royal sites and Viking towns It has been suggested that specialised iron production by professional blacksmiths only occurred in association other specialised craftworking including glass and copper working at high status sites (Walsh forthcoming). Paul Steven’s excavations at Clonfad, Co. Westmeath uncovered examples of specialised metalworking and craftworking activities undertaken at an intensive level at this ecclesiastical site close to Lough Ennell. Tim Young’s specialist analyses have revealed that the scale of ironworking on the site indicates that ecclesiastical bells were being produced on the site (Stevens 2006; Tim Young pers comm). Excavations at Kilpatrick, Co. Westmeath (Swan, D.L. 1973­81, Excavations Bulletin­ E124) also revealed considerable evidence for ironworking and the potential production of a number of high status metalworking objects. Other ecclesiastical sites that have produced ironworking evidence include Downpatrick, Co. Down; Clonmacnoise, Co. Offaly; Tullylish, Co. Down (Ivens 1987); Glen Munire, Ballyman, Co. Dublin (O’Brien 1977­86, Excavations Bulletin­ E182); Dunmisk, Co. Tyrone (Ivens 1988) and Tully, (Glebe, Site 43), Co. Dublin (Matthew Seaver & Valerie Keeley 2000­2002, Excavations Bulletin­ 00E0758). Evidence for ironworking in association with a whole range of other activities including bronze, bone, antler, leather, textile and woodworking have been discovered in a large number of excavations within the Viking Urban towns. Examples in Dublin that have produced ironworking evidence include Fishamble Street II (Wallace 1974­79, Excavations Bulletin­ E172) and Winetavern Street (Brendan Ó Ríordáin 1970­72, Excavations Bulletin­ E81). The excavations in this part of Dublin may have exposed evidence for specialised areas in which different crafts were undertaken. It is possible, although still not confirmed, that ironworking was in some ways specialised in Viking towns in the latter half of the early medieval period. There is also good evidence for ferrous and non­ferrous metallurgy from the early medieval royal sites at Garranes, Co. Cork; Clogher, Co. Tyrone; Lagore, Co. Meath as well as Moynagh Lough crannog, Co. Meath. These sites are likely to have been of some status where both ironworking and other specialised activities such as glass production were undertaken in tandem with each other. An early medieval enclosure at Roestown, Co. Meath that was probably a high status site has revealed evidence for ferrous and non ferrous metalworking as well as possible glass working, which were all undertaken in tandem with each other (Kinsella 2007a, 15).

198

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 8: Early Medieval Crafts and Technology – a focus on ironworking

What is needed then is a systematic study to establish if these specialised activities undertaken in tandem with each other were restricted generally to important ecclesiastical sites, royal sites and Viking centres or instead was more widespread and common amongst the well­to do early medieval farmer. The status of the blacksmith in early Irish society Early Irish laws indicate that blacksmiths were high status individuals in Irish society, but they would also have worked under the protection and patronage of local secular or ecclesiastical authorities. Early Irish sources also indicate that the blacksmith was held in high esteem by community, occasionally figuring as a mythological figure. This high­status is common in many small­scale or traditional communities, due largely to the smiths role in transforming materials, through heat, violence and smoke. The blacksmith, unlike other craftsmen, would have been a permanent resident on a settlement site. Blacksmiths worked with large amounts of raw materials, at high temperatures and probably produced a wide range of goods for a large clientele (e.g. farm equipment, weaponry, domestic vessels). The blacksmith’s forge was therefore an important place in the landscape. Excavations at a small crannog at Bofeenaun, Co. Sligo revealed few finds except for large quantities of iron slag and furnace linings (Aonghus Moloney & Margaret Keane 1992, Excavations Bulletin). O’Sullivan (2004) and Van de Noort and O’Sullivan (2006) have suggested that specialized ironworking may have being undertaken by early medieval blacksmiths in these marginal places of the landscape. Excavations at Dooey, Co. Donegal have also revealed a coastal dwelling place in which extensive evidence for the production of iron and bronze objects as well as dye extraction activities were found. It has been suggested by O’Sullivan & Breen (2007, 119) that the site may have been the work­place of a high status blacksmith and have been used as a beach­market for traders moving down the North Atlantic seaways between Northwest Ireland and Scotland. While it is likely that the majority of ironworking was being undertaken on high status settlements and ecclesiastical sites, it is possible that specialized ironworking may have been undertaken in certain marginal sites, many of which have been described above as the ironworking sites of the poor. More work is then required to establish if other marginal sites could represent specialized ironworking centres or were instead just visited periodically by local people with a lower means of living? Examining these research questions will help establish the character of the economy and patterns of trade and commerce in the early medieval period.

199

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 9: Early Medieval Trade and Exchange – a focus on pottery

Chapter 9. Early medieval trade and exchange – a focus on pottery
Introduction
In early medieval Ireland, trade and exchange was a significant social relationship as well as a means of distributing various goods through the community. The most easily identifiable form of trade and exchange involved the importation of exotic pottery, glass and weaponry. Our best archaeological evidence for this long distance trade is largely provided by imported pottery – and apart from native souterrain ware pottery was not common in Ireland during the period ­ brought from western Britain, northern France and Germany (Frankish and Merovingian Europe), as well as from the western sea­board of France. It tends to be found on high­status settlements (e.g. Garranes ringfort, Lagore and Moynagh Lough crannogs) and on ecclesiastical or monastic enclosures, even relatively small sites (Kilpatrick, Co. Westmeath). The pottery was not itself the main focus of trade; almost certainly it was a by­product, discarded after its contents (wines or dyes) were used. However, it is likely the pots themselves were perceived as high­status goods, being a symbol of wealth. There are also occasionally objects imported from further afield, such as the eastern Mediterranean, including glass, pottery, weaponry and textiles. The imported western European and Mediterranean pottery has been studied in detail by Charles Thomas in a number of papers published in Medieval Archaeology, and more recently by Ewan Campbell and by Ian Doyle. The types of imported pottery found on early medieval settlement sites includes pieces of Roman Samian ware, imported eastern Mediterranean Red Slip Ware (A­ware), amphorae pottery (B­wares), imported French kitchen vessels (E­ware). Thomas has proposed that this pottery was imported in two main phases, in the early 6th century and between the 6th and the 7th century AD.

EMAP and Excavated Pottery Types 1970­2002
The EMAP survey collected information from the Excavations Bulletin 1970­2002 about the distribution and type of native and imported pottery that were used from the fifth to twelfth centuries A.D. The table and graph below illustrates the results. The first part of this discussion examines the evidence for native manufactured pottery in the form of souterrain ware. The second part examines the evidence for the importation of foreign ceramics into Ireland from A.D. 400­700 in the form of A, B and E wares. The final short section lists the other miscellaneous imported wares that have been mentioned in the excavation bulletin reports. Ham Green pottery was also another type of ware that was used in the 12/13th century A.D. and was principally found in the major Hiberno­Norse towns. It has been excluded from the table and graph below. Table 48: Licenses and Sites with Early Medieval Pottery Ware 1970­2002 Pottery Ware A Ware B Ware Bii Ware E ware F Ware (old term) Souterrain Ware Coarse Hand­made Ardenne Ware Exc. License 1 12 3 23 1 99 13 3 Site 1 12 3 23 1 88 13 3

200

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 9: Early Medieval Trade and Exchange – a focus on pottery

Merovingian Vessels Northern French Ware Normandy Ware Saxon Stamford Ware Unidentified Ware

2 4 5 1 9

2 4 5 1 9

Excavated Pottery Ware in Exc. Bulletin Reports 19702002
Unidentified Ware Saxon Stamford Ware Normandy Ware Northern French Ware Merovingian Vessels Ardenne Ware Coarse Hand-made Souterrain Ware F Ware E ware Bii Ware B Ware A Ware
Site Exc. License

Pottery Ware

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Number of Sites and Licenses
Figure 35: Licenses and Sites with Early Medieval Pottery Ware 1970­2002

Native Souterrain Ware
Background Souterrain ware is the only native pottery known to be have been manufactured in early medieval Ireland. It has been known to have a northeastern distribution in the early 20th century when H.C. Lawlor suggested that it was a product unique to the ‘Cruithnenans’ or Picts. Souterrain ware vessels are principally flat­bottomed and have splayed or cylindrical walls (Ryan 1973, 620). The pottery is hand­made and a characteristic feature is the abundant evidence for grass­marks from the firing of the pottery on beds of chopped grass or straw. Ryan (1973, 626) has noted the difficulties in dating souterrain ware accurately and suggests that it was in use from the 6­7th century­12th century A.D. Previous Surveys and EMAP surveys Ryan (1973) collated a list of sites that revealed souterrain ware pottery. He found that ninety one definite examples could be found where souterrain ware was recovered from a site. The sites comprised 42 ringforts, 12 souterrains, eight crannogs, four monastic sites, two hill forts, one promontory fort and 22 other sites from caves, sand hills and other unidentified places.

201

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 9: Early Medieval Trade and Exchange – a focus on pottery

The EMAP survey identified 99 excavation licenses that contained souterrain ware pottery from 88 sites from 1970­2002. Ryan’s (1973) list does not include five examples mentioned in the excavations bulletin from 1970­1972. Adding both lists together and subtracting the few mentioned by both between 1970­1972 gives (91 + 88 ­6) = 173 identified sites. Taking into account that some sites like Armagh or Downpatrick for instance may actually be mentioned in both lists, a more realistic and approximate figure of c. 150 sites could be suggested which have been recorded as containing souterrain ware up to the year 2002. This figure could be pushing towards 200 due to subsequent investigations since 2002. It must also be noted that the excavations bulletin reports have described the discovery of coarse hand­made pottery (13 sites) and pottery whose type was not identified (9 sites) at a number of early medieval places. Many of these sites are located in early medieval rural settlement and ecclesiastical contexts that could suggest that some are actually examples or variations of souterrain ware (See Appendix). Distribution Souterrain ware pottery is particularly prevalent in the counties of Down and Antrim. Ryan (1973, 631) has however observed that this distribution could also have been effected by the intensive early medieval excavations undertaken in this area under the auspices of the Northern Ireland Historic Monuments Branch. In 1973 when Ryan published his article in souterrain ware only one site at Killegar, Co. Wicklow as well as a possible example at Reask, Co. Kerry had produced evidence for souterrain ware outside the general area of the Kingdom of the Ulaid in East Ulster and North Louth. The EMAP survey identified definite souterrain ware from 99 excavation licenses that were contained within 88 sites. They have a slightly broader distribution than that noted by Ryan (1973) with some examples from Meath also prevalent. Souterrain ware pottery has also been found from late 11th/early 12th century levels in Viking Dublin (Edwards 1990, 74). Table 49: Quantity of Sites Per County containing identified Souterrain Ware 1970­2002 County Armagh Down Antrim Derry Louth Tyrone Fermanagh Meath Dublin Total Sites 8 19 34 8 11 3 2 2 1 88

202

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 9: Early Medieval Trade and Exchange – a focus on pottery

Souterrain Ware Per County Reported in the Excavations Bulletin 1970-2002
Armagh
9% 39% 1 3%

Down Antrim Derry Louth
3% 2% 2%

Tyrone Fermanagh Meath Dublin

22%

9%

1 %

Figure 36: Quantity of Sites Per County containing identified Souterrain Ware 1970­2002

Souterrain ware pottery has also been found from late 11th/early 12th century levels in Viking Dublin as well as at Lagore and Moynagh Lough, Co. Meath none of which were mentioned in the excavation bulletin reports (Edwards 1990, 74). It is likely that there are many other examples that have not also been reported in the excavations bulletin. Furthermore souterrain ware pottery has been massive quantities of souterrain ware pottery has been discovered from settlement/cemetery sites at Faughart Lower, Balriggan, Co. Louth and Johnstown 1, Co. Meath in recent years. These discoveries suggest that souterrain ware may have also been a feature of sites in the greater Meath area. So did Souterrain ware then have a wider distribution than previously thought! Was souterrain ware pottery excavated at southern and western sites but was not reported or noted or was it related to the confederation of the Ulaid as Ryan (1973) postulated and Edwards (1990, 74) supported. This research question will have to be further examined.

Early Medieval Imported Pottery c. 400­700 A.D.
Luxury red­slipped bowls, amphorae and other wheel­made vessels known as A, B and E wares have also been recovered at a number of early medieval sites in Ireland (Edwards 1990, 69; Laing 2006, 141). They can be closely dated to a narrow period from the 5th­early 8th centuries A.D. and testify to contacts between the insular world and western France, the Mediterranean and North Africa. The most common types of these wares are discussed below. ! A wares are typically bowls and dishes in a brick­red fabric. Phocean Red Slip Ware also known as Late Roman C is one type of this A ware and was produced in the eastern Mediterranean. It was traded to Ireland, Britain and Spain from the mid­fifth­ mid sixth centuries A.D. North Africa Slip ware is another type of A ware produced near Carthage. It was imported to the insular world around the mid­sixth century (Laing 2006, 139). A ware pottery is generally rare in Ireland. They generally date to the fifth and sixth centuries A.D. B ware pottery has been divided into a number of kinds including Bi, Bii and Bv wares. They comprise a series of amphorae or storage jars with handles. They were probably mainly used for wine containers and appear to have also originated in the eastern

!

203

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 9: Early Medieval Trade and Exchange – a focus on pottery

Mediterranean. B ware pottery has been sometimes found accompanied by red­slipped wares (A­ wares) discussed above. ! E ware pottery is the most frequently discovered type of imported pottery in the Insular world. It comprises a series of cooking pots, bowls, jars, jugs and beakers (Laing 2006, 141). It is though to have originated in western Gaul and is believed to have been imported into the Insular world from A.D. 525­700. While B wares appear to have traded because they contained wines, it has been suggested that E ware was principally traded as a ceramic commodity (Doyle 1998, 93). E ware pottery appears to have replaced the other wares as the principal imported pottery in the late sixth and seventh century A.D.

Quantities E ware pottery is the most common ware in Ireland. Ian Doyle’s (1998, 93) research discovered that E ware pottery had been found in 40 Irish sites by the time of his article. The EMAP review of information from the excavation bulletin reports 1970­2002 has only slightly increased this number (See Appendix 1970­2002 list excavated sites). It is evident that pottery was not always reported in these bulletin reports. It is also the case that post­excavation work had not always been undertaken when the reports were submitted to the bulletin so it is very likely that imported ceramic wares have been identified subsequently in a number of other sites. Further sites which have revealed ceramic imports in recent years include an important enclosed settlement at Rosepark, Balrothery, Co. Dublin (Christine Baker & Rónán Swan; Judith Carroll 1999/2000, Excavations Bulletin­ 99E0155), an unenclosed habitation site with two souterrains at Markstown, Cullybackey, Co. Antrim (Cormac McSparron 2001, Excavations Bulletin­ AE/01/17), an early medieval complex at Ninch, Laytown, Co. Meath (James Eogan & Martin Reid; Cia McConway 2000­2002, Excavations Bulletin­ 98E0501) and at the Dunnyneil Islands, Strangford Lough, Co. Down (Finbar McCormick & Philip MacDonald 2002, Excavations Bulletin­ AE/02/90). B ware pottery shards are the next most frequent type in Ireland. It slightly predates E ware and principally dates to the late fifth­mid sixth century A.D. B ware type pottery have been found on at least 13 sites. Important secular settlement sites which have revealed B ware include Clogher, Co. Tyrone; Garranes, Co. Cork; Garryduff 1, Co. Cork; Gransha, Co. Down and Cathair Fionnúrach, Ballynavenoor, Co. Kerry (Erin Gibbons 1994, Excavations Bulletin­ 94E005) as well as the settlement/cemetery sites at Colp West, Co. Meath, Cherrywood, Co. Dublin and Mount Offaly, Co. Dublin. It is also frequently uncovered at ecclesiastical sites including Reask, Co. Kerry, Derrynaflan, Co. Tipperary, Inishcaltra, Co. Clare, St. Patrick’s Rock, Cashel, Randalstown, Co. Meath and Caherlehillan, Co. Kerry indicating the importance of wine for these ecclesiastical centres. (See Appendix for list of excavated sites 1970­2002). A­ware pottery is very uncommon in Ireland. It is typically represented by Phocean Red Slip Ware and North African Red Slip Ware. Thomas’s (1981) provisional list of imported ceramics contained no references to any Class A ware discovered thus far in Ireland. Only one example for Class A ware was found at the settlement/cemetery site at Mount Offaly, Co. Dublin (Malachy Conway 1998 & 1999, Excavations Bulletin­98E0035) which revealed a number of shards of Phocaean red slipware as well as B and E wares. Few sites have revealed evidence for F ware pottery shards in Ireland. One site described as revealing evidence for F ware in the excavation bulletin report was at the ecclesiastical site of Kilpatrick, Corbetstown, Co. Westmeath (D.L. Swan 1980­84, Excavations Bulletin­ E124). EMAP Results: Imported Ceramics (A.D. 400­700) from excavated sites 1970­2002 as reported in the excavations bulletin Table 50: Quantity of Sites containing Imported (A.D. 400­700) pottery wares

204

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 9: Early Medieval Trade and Exchange – a focus on pottery

Imported Pottery Ware (C.400­700) Phocean Red Slipware (A ware) B Ware Bii Ware E ware F Ware

Exc. License 1 12 3 23 1

Site 1 12 3 23 1

Imported Ceramics (c.400-700) as Reported in the Excavation Bulletin

57% 8% A Ware B Ware Bii Ware 29% 3% 3% E ware F Ware

Figure 36: Quantity of Sites containing Imported (A.D. 400­700) pottery wares.

Distribution It has been observed that ceramic imports have been found to be concentrated in the Greater Meath area, the Cork Harbour area (Doyle 1998, 101) as well as along the coast of County Down. Development­led excavations in the Dublin area have also increased our knowledge of foreign imported ceramics in this area near the two coastal islands at Lambay and Dalkey. The distribution is then clearly found spread along the eastern coast from Dublin­Down as well as at another significant pocket of activity along the southwest coast in the greater Cork city area. Some evidence for midland evidence can be found at a number of ecclesiastical sites including Kilpatrick, Co. Westmeath, Derrynaflan, Co. Tipperary, Lackenavorna, Co. Tipperary and Cashel, Co. Tipperary. High Status Settlements and Imported Wares It is instructive to note that B and E ware pottery are frequent discoveries on sites described as ‘settlement/cemetery’ such as Cherrywood, Co. Dublin, Ninch, Laytown, Co. Meath, Mount Offaly, Co. Dublin and Colp West, Co. Meath as well as on high status enclosed settlements at Roestown, Co. Meath, Rosepark, Balrothery, Co. Dublin, Lisleagh 1, Co. Cork, Garryduff 1, Co. Cork, Gransha, Co. Down and Cathair Fionnúrach, Ballynavenoor, Co. Kerry and the royal sites at Clogher, Co. Tyrone, Garranes, Co. Cork. These sites have frequently discovered evidence for both ferrous and non­ferrous metalworking as well as other specialised craft activities indicating their potential role in monopolising and redistributing prestige goods within the local landscape. The increasing discovery of imported ceramics at ‘settlement/cemetery’ sites supports the notion that these may have been significant political and economic centres during A.D. 400­700.

205

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 9: Early Medieval Trade and Exchange – a focus on pottery

Islands and Imported Ceramics It is also evident that imported ceramics are a feature of a number of coastal sites and islands indicating the role that these sites may have played in maritime trade in this period. The presence of ceramic imports at Lambay Island and at the significant centre at Dalkey Island also indicates a complex pattern of trade and re­use of Dublin islands in the early medieval period (Doyle 1998, 101). Excavations at an enclosure situated on the highest plateau of one of the Dunnyneil Islands, Strangford Lough, Co. Down also revealed evidence for E ware pottery (Finbar McCormick & Philip MacDonald 2002, Excavations Bulletin­ AE/02/90). The southern half of the enclosure was being destroyed by coastal erosion. It is possible that the site may represent some form of promontory fort that commanded the entrance into the Quoile estuary. Like Dalkey and Lambay as well as Iniscealtra Island, it may represent further evidence for the role of islands and coastal sites in enabling native social elites to control and monopolise the distribution and exchange of imported prestige goods. A similar function may have occurred at coastal promontory forts. B ware pottery shards have been discovered at Loughshinny promontory fort, Co. Dublin (Edwards 1990, 70). Other Wares and Vessels The EMAP review also recovered evidence for other wares and pottery types which have been recovered from early medieval contexts in Ireland. They include Merovingian vessels, Northern French wares and Saxon Stamford wares. Northern French wares, Ardenne Wares, Saxon Stamford Wares and Normandy wares have all been recovered in Viking urban contexts indicating that they represent later imported ceramics. Some examples of Ham Green ware that was used during the 12/13th centuries A.D. were also collected. It is likely that there are many other examples of these wares at other urban sites in the major Hiberno­Norse towns as bulletin reports do not always contain information about this type of evidence. A systematic re­ analysis of wares from these urban contexts would be required to establish accurate information about this type of data.

206

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 10: Conclusions and Future Challenges

Chapter 10. Conclusions and future challenges
Background
! The Early Medieval Archaeology Project, established in April 2007 with the support of Heritage Council and UCD Seed Funding support has shown how the character of the archaeological resource has been transformed in the years 1970­2002. EMAP’s research (amounting to a total of 7 month’s work), data capture, preliminary data analysis and first­stage archaeological interpretation presented in this report has shown that entirely new types and forms of early medieval archaeological sites have been discovered, investigated and recorded, that if made more fully available and integrated into archaeological research and publication will transform our understanding of this key period in Ireland’s past. EMAP has shown through its construction and analysis of a Microsoft Access database of 1,397 early medieval sites excavated (using 1,968 licenses) between 1970­2002 how the character of Irish archaeology itself has been transformed. The location, character and density of archaeological excavations have been changed, almost entirely due to the onset of development­led archaeological investigations since the mid 1990s. However, the pace and extent of these excavations have varied across the island and the distribution of different types of excavated sites is biased by several factors. EMAP has also shown that there has been immense research capacity building in the commercial sector, and the standards of quality and range of investigative and analytical methods and techniques being used in archaeological projects are now undoubtedly at their highest in the history of Irish archaeology. However, EMAP has also shown that the human and financial resources devoted to research and interpretations in the Universities, Museum and state sector have largely remained static in 1970­2002 (despite immense growth and pressures in all these sectors). However, despite a general perception of a ‘crisis’ in Irish archaeology of non­ publication, EMAP has shown that the problem may not be quite of the scale hitherto believed. EMAP suggests that of the 1,397 early sites excavated 1970­2002; only 74 would be considered to be ‘Highly Significant’; 202 ‘Significant’; 325 ‘General Significant’, 190 ‘Uncertain’ while 606 site excavations were of ‘No Archaeological Significance’. Obviously the grading of sites is subjective and more information will change these figures, but the key point is that this is not an insurmountable problem. Irish archaeologists, through a well­funded collaborative research programme such as EMAP (and other projects for other periods) could easily cope with the publication and dissemination of this new archaeological evidence. Future initiatives to exploit this early medieval archaeological data will require both a step change in the funding of research in these bodies, but also a new collaborative research culture in Irish archaeology across all sectors. EMAP has provided one example of how a funded programme of research can enable high­quality reviews and reports.

!

!

!

!

!

Settlement and landscape
! EMAP has demonstrated that a wide range of new early medieval settlement types have been identified as excavations move beyond the confines of traditional SMR sites and into the landscape. Of the EMAP site categories investigated, a total of 224 sites were ‘settlement enclosures’; 266 were ‘settlement landscapes’; 65 were ‘unenclosed’ and 7

207

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 10: Conclusions and Future Challenges

were ‘settlement/cemeteries (the Appendix on settlement/cemeteries also lists sites investigated since 2002). A total of 86 sites were in Viking/Hiberno­Norse towns. ! Early medieval dwellings and settlement activities were often situated within enclosures, typically but not exclusively, classic ringforts. In recent years, a much wider range of ‘settlement enclosures’ (e.g. ‘settlement/cemeteries, large enclosures, settlements within field enclosures, ecclesiastical enclosures) have been investigated that do not fit closely with modern categories of archaeological evidence, but reveal the varied and evolving character of settlement in the early medieval landscape. There is also evidence for local and regional variation; for the chronologies of continuity and change on sites and the potential shifting social, ideological and political factors behind the changing character of the cultural biographies of early medieval settlements. It would be important for future studies to bear this social and cultural variability in mind. Early medieval unenclosed habitation sites were also uncovered in 1970­2002, and in increasing numbers in recent years, across the island, of a range of different types and forms (e.g. early medieval houses in fields; early medieval occupation evidence 43 souterrains were associated with unenclosed settlement; there was also evidence for early medieval dwelling activities in caves, early medieval occupation at shell middens, etc). These sites offer new insights into the organization of early Irish society, the dispersion of settlement across the land and potentially the processes of historical and social change across the period, AD 400­1200. EMAP has show the scale and extent of investigation of urban archaeological deposits dating to the Viking Age/Hiberno­Norse periods in such major cities and towns as Dublin, Waterford, Cork, Limerick and Wexford, with their well­known contribution to our understanding of urban origins, enclosures and defences, settlement, trade and exchange, crafts and economy and relationships with wider political and rural hinterlands. Finally, a large corpus of early medieval buildings has been investigated 1970­2002. The EMAP database indicates that 480 buildings were excavated 1970­2002 on rural settlements and 566 Viking buildings. These could provide key insights into the social, economic and ideological organization of domestic and dwelling space.

!

!

!

Church
! EMAP has demonstrated that an increasing range of evidence has been uncovered that will enable scholars to trace how the introduction of Christianity transformed the Irish landscape over the early medieval period. Of EMAP’s site categories, a total of 218 were Church/Ecclesiastical’. New archaeological evidence has been uncovered to trace the function of ecclesiastical sites and how they related to settlement/cemetery sites, unenclosed cemeteries, ecclesiastical cemeteries and the wider landscape of secular settlement, travel and the economy. This EMAP report has focused on analyzing the known archaeological evidence for ecclesiastical enclosures, the character of the early church (5th­9th century AD), the evidence for wooden churches and structures and the evidence for agriculture, craftworking and trade. The EMAP database has also shown that there is growing archaeological evidence for the role of monastic enclosures in the growth of ‘towns’ in early medieval Ireland. Finally, EMAP has shown that this emerging archaeological evidence can be used to trace the character of pastoral care and the organization of ecclesiastical estates.

!

! !

208

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 10: Conclusions and Future Challenges

Burial
! EMAP has shown that there is significant diversity and variety in burial rites and contexts in early medieval Ireland. Of EMAP’s site categories, 49 were ‘Cemetery/Burial’; 7 were ‘Settlement/Cemetery’ and 218 were ‘Church/Ecclesiastical’. During the late Iron Age/early medieval transition period, between the 4th­6th century AD, early medieval communities were still burying their dead in a range of ancestral or familial burial grounds (including annular ring ditches; ferta; mounds, standing stones and other unenclosed sites. Such burials speak strongly of people’s sense of connection with the past and with particular places in the landscape and the range of beliefs and practices held to by the population. By the 7th­8th century, early medieval ecclesiastical enclosures around churches became the focus for burial of some, but not necessarily all, the population. It should be admitted to that burial in caves and other contexts argue for the survival of ‘pagan’ or at the least, other forms of Christian burial around the island, raising intriguing questions of religious identities. The 9th­11th centuries AD saw the re­introduction of ‘pagan’ burial rites and practices by Norse in Ireland, both in association with early longphort and the developed Hiberno­ Norse towns, but also in isolated rural locations. An intriguing range of evidence has also shown that ‘settlement/cemeteries’ (also known in the literature as cemetery/settlements) were used from the 5th­11th century, and were not always phases of use in settlement enclosures. At the least, all this evidence analysed by EMAP demonstrates that early medieval burial practices were ‘messy’ and contingent, as local communities responded to the deaths of their people in various ways. In a sense, we can trace strong evidence for changes in burial practice across time – but that the evidence cannot easily be categorized in to ‘early’ and ‘late’ practices. It should also be acknowledged, although outside the scope of the EMAP project, that these excavations provide a unique opportunity to investigate the demographics and populations of early medieval Ireland, the diet, health, diseases and ways of life of the people of early medieval Ireland.

!

!

!

!

!

Agriculture
! The character and organization of early medieval agriculture is comparatively well­ understood; the role of dairying and the role of arable crops and the place of farming in early Irish society have all been reconstructed from known archaeological, environmental and historical evidence. However, EMAP has revealed that there has been a significant amount of discoveries in 1970­2002, but particularly in recent years, for entirely new types of archaeological evidence for agriculture in early medieval Ireland. Of EMAP’s site categories, a total of 43 were ‘Agricultural (mills, kilns, fields) while much of the other site categories had evidence for agricultural activities. It could be argued the well­known knowledge of the ‘revolutions’ in early Irish farming could now be matched with a revolution in the understanding of the scale and intensity of settlement and land­use in the Irish landscape and the real role of farming in social life and practice. EMAP has demonstrated the increasing evidence for early medieval field­systems (at least 20 early medieval sites were associated with field systems) and enclosures of varying sizes, types and shapes; for souterrains, corn­drying kilns and water mills, for bog trackways and coastal fisheries and other features associated with economy and the land. EMAP has shown that there is growing data for the scale and extent of arable

!

!

209

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 10: Conclusions and Future Challenges

production. There is also potentially evidence that could be used to reconstruct the regionality of agricultural practices across the country.

Crafts and Trade & Exchange
EMAP focused briefly on two aspects in these sections; Ironworking (of EMAP’s site categories, 69 sites were ‘Industrial’ – mostly being ironworking sites) and Imported pottery. Undoubtedly, early medieval excavations in Ireland 1970­2002 have uncovered very large assemblages of early medieval artefacts, with the wider contextual evidence for resource procurement, technological skills and crafts; manufacturing processes and the distribution and uses of different types of wooden, leather, antler/bone, textiles, glass, copper­alloy, iron, silver, gold and other objects. The use, repair, discarding and abandonment of these objects has led to their identification in the archaeological record and thus it should be possible to re­invigorate the study of early medieval material culture assemblages, within their widest social, ideological, economic and cultural contexts. For example, an analysis of ironworking on early medieval sites enables an investigation of the scale and context of ironworking evidence and the social and ideological status of the blacksmith and the scale of ironworking at various types of sites. The importation of exotic pottery can be revealing about the changing social and cultural contexts of trade and exchange and the perception and role of ‘distant places and objects’ in early medieval society.

EMAP Stage 2: challenges for future data analysis and research
The pilot phase – stage 1 ­ of EMAP ran from 1st April­9th November 2007. Its primary objectives were to design a provisional EMAP database, undertake a rapid assessment of the early medieval archaeological evidence (1970­2002) and write a report describing the findings, identify areas of research and chart the future direction of EMAP and its database. EMAP has revealed the great potential and possibility of a long­term, 3­5 year research project that would culminate in the production of an online database of early medieval excavations and a series of research publications. The project could be achieved on a phased basis. ! Initially, it is necessary to focus on the design and re­organisation of the EMAP database. EMAP would then focus on placing early medieval excavated data for the years of 2003­2007 as well as the years 1930­1970 on the revised EMAP database. A further stage of the project would also see a shift to systematically reviewing existing literature and unpublished excavation reports to establish closer information about the excavated evidence on the database and ascertain if those sites described as ‘uncertain’ in the database date to the early medieval period. Parallel to these activities researchers would work on fixing data concerning the geographical location of the sites (e.g. townland, parish and barony location, eastings/northings and 6 inch map data) to enable the production and analysis of distribution maps and spatial data to investigate regional trends (e.g. is arable farming more focused on eastern Ireland? Are early medieval burial patterns distinctively different in the regions contiguous to Anglo­Saxon Britain?). Advanced stages of EMAP would focus on reviewing excavation reports, editing and rechecking database contents and completing the early medieval archaeological archive. Working with an ICT team and other institutions (e.g. Humanities digital archive in RIA) it should be possible to make EMAP available online and researchers could continue to update early medieval excavated material as they come available. EMAP could also focus on communicating the range of new archaeological discoveries from early medieval Ireland in a range of ways. Monographs, papers and reports could aim to make data available and to discuss the main findings, while the organization over the life of the project of symposia on key themes would also be important (e.g.

!

!

!

210

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Chapter 10: Conclusions and Future Challenges

settlement and landscape; agriculture and environment; territories and identities; crafts, technology and trade and exchange; death and burial; religious beliefs and practices) could then involve a wide range of scholars and investigators across the various commercial, museum, state and university/research sectors. In conclusion, Irish archaeologists have excelled in uncovering new data from early medieval Ireland and an extraordinary range of stories now need to be told about this time, place and its peoples. EMAP has laid out the bones of some of the stories – and has shown how we could begin to tell them.

211

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses
Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses
NAME
1 Hoey's Court, Werburgh Street 1­2 Exchange Street Upper, Temple Bar West 1­2 Exchange Street Upper, Temple Bar West 13 High Street, Wood Quay 13 High Street, Wood Quay 1­3 High Street, Wood Quay 14­15 Werburgh Street 14­15 Werburgh Street 16­18 Fishamble Street, Wood Quay 16­18 Fishamble Street, Wood Quay 17­18 Broad Street 19 Lord Edward Street, Wood Quay 19­21 High Street 19­21 High Street 20­25 Castle Street 20­25 Castle Street 20­25 Castle Street 23­24 Temple Lane;3­4 Crow Street, Temple Bar East 26 Killeenyarda, Holycross

County
Dublin

EMAP_Class
Viking Urban Settlement

Category
Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin

Environs of Significanc e
General

Year
1999/2 003

Compan y
Margaret Gowen

Exc. License
99E0228

Exc. Type
Testing

Route Scheme
Developme nt

Dublin

Viking Urban Settlement

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin

Significant

2001

Margaret Gowen

01E1161

Monitorin g

Developme nt

Dublin

Viking Urban Settlement

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin

Significant

2000

Margaret Gowen

00E0135

Testing

Dam/Reserv oir

Dublin

Viking Urban Settlement Viking Urban Settlement Viking Urban Settlement Viking Urban Settlement Viking Urban Settlement Viking Urban Settlement

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin

General

1993

UCC

93E0022

Monitorin g Testing

Developme nt Developme nt Developme nt Developme nt Developme nt Developme nt

Dublin

General

1989

OPW

Dublin

Significant

1989

Margaret Gowen Margaret Gowen Margaret Gowen ADS 99E0228

Rescue

Dublin

Significant

2000

Testing

Dublin

Significant

1999

99E0651

Testing

Dublin

Significant

1994

94E138

Testing

Dublin

Viking Urban Settlement

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin

Significant

1995

ADS

95E146

Monitorin g

Developme nt

Waterfor d Dublin

Viking Urban Settlement Viking Urban Settlement

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Waterford Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin

General

1999

ArchaeoG rafix Margaret Gowen

99E0004

Testing

Developme nt Developme nt

Significant

1994

94E103

Monitorin g

Waterfor d Waterfor d Dublin Dublin Dublin Dublin

Viking Urban Settlement Viking Urban Settlement Viking Urban Settlement Viking Urban Settlement Viking Urban Settlement Cemetery Site

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Waterford Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Waterford Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin Cemetery/Buri al

Significant

1993

Waterford Corporatio n Waterford Corporatio n Freelance Freelance Freelance Freelance

93E0002

Testing

Developme nt Developme nt Developme nt Developme nt Developme nt Developme nt

Significant

1993

93E0056

Rescue

Highly Significant Highly Significant Highly Significant Uncertain

1994 1994 1994 1993

94E177 94E066 94E003 93E0139

Rescue Testing Testing Rescue

Tipperar y

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

General

1999

26­29 Castle Street;20 Lord Edward Street 27­30 Parliament Street,

Dublin

Viking Urban Settlement

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin

Highly Significant

1992

Mary Henry Archaeolo gical Services Freelance

99E0224

Testing

Residential Developme nt

92E0077

Rescue

Developme nt

Dublin

Viking Urban Settlement

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin

General

1994

Margaret Gowen

94E133

Testing

Developme nt

212

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Temple Bar West 3 & 5 Barrack Street, South Bank 31 Richmond Court, Lambeg 32­34 Castle Street

County

EMAP_Class

Category

Environs of Significanc e

Year

Compan y

Exc. License

Exc. Type

Route Scheme

Cork

Viking Urban Settlement Early Medieval Artefacts Viking Urban Settlement

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Cork Miscellaneous

General

1999/2 000 1983

Sheila Lane N I Historic Monument s Branch Margaret Gowen;Ar chaeologi cal Projects Ltd Margaret Gowen

99E0650

Testing

Developme nt None

Antrim

Uncertain

Rescue

Dublin

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin

Highly Significant

1991/1 997

Testing

Developme nt

35 Parliament Street, Temple Bar West 4­5 High Street, Wood Quay 5­7 Exchange Street Upper;33­34 Parliament Street, Temple Bar West 5­7 Exchange Street Upper;33­34 Parliament Street, Temple Bar West 8­10 Exchange Street;1 Essex Gate, Temple Bar West 8­10 Exchange Street;1 Essex Gate, Temple Bar West 9 Arundel Square 9 Arundel Square 9­12 High Street, Wood Quay 9­12 High Street, Wood Quay Abbeyland;B lackcastle Demesne Adamstown

Dublin

Viking Urban Settlement

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin

General

1991

E635

Rescue

Developme nt

Dublin

Viking Urban Settlement Viking Urban Settlement

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin

General

1989

Margaret Gowen Margaret Gowen

Monitorin g Testing

Developme nt Developme nt

Dublin

Highly Significant

1993

Dublin

Viking Urban Settlement

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin

Highly Significant

1993

Margaret Gowen

93E0143

Rescue

Developme nt

Dublin

Viking Urban Settlement

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin

Significant

1998

Margaret Gowen

98E0198

Rescue

Developme nt

Dublin

Viking Urban Settlement

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin

Significant

1996/1 997

Margaret Gowen

96E040

Testing

Developme nt

Waterfor d Waterfor d Dublin

Viking Urban Settlement Viking Urban Settlement Viking Urban Settlement Viking Urban Settlement Kiln/Cereal cultivation site Undated ecclesiastical site Charcoal Pit

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Waterford Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Waterford Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin Agricultural

General

1997

Waterford Corporatio n Waterford Corporatio n Margaret Gowen Margaret Gowen Valerie J Keeley Freelance

97E137

Testing

Developme nt Developme nt Developme nt Developme nt Navan Inner Relief Road 2A Residential Developme nt Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Cappaneas ta­ Goatisland Phase 3) Residential Developme nt

General

1998

98E0091

Rescue

Significant

1989

Monitorin g E548 Rescue

Dublin

Significant

1990

Meath

Uncertain

1998

98E0590

Rescue

Wexford

Ecclesiastic al Industrial

No significance Uncertain

1998

98E0384

Testing

Adamswood , (BGE 3/62/5)

Limerick

2002

Margaret Gowen

02E0847

Rescue

Aghada Upper

Cork

medieval ecclesiastical site

Ecclesiastic al

No significance

2000

Aghadegna n Ringfort, Templemich ael

Longford Multi­Phase settlement

Settlement Landscape

Highly Significant

1991

UCC Archaeolo gical Services Unit Judith Carroll

00E0605

Testing

91E0055

Rescue

N4 Longford Road Improvemen t Scheme

213

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Aghadegna n Ringfort, Templemich ael Aghakilmore, Drumshanbo

County

EMAP_Class

Category
Settlement Landscape

Environs of Significanc e
Highly Significant

Year
1993

Compan y
Judith Carroll

Exc. License
93E0048

Exc. Type
Rescue

Route Scheme
N4 Longford Road Improvemen t Scheme Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Ballough to Kinnegad Phase 1A) A1/N1 Newry­ Dundalk Link Road Residential Developme nt Developme nt Quarry/Mine Residential Developme nt Unidentified Service Pipeline/Tren ch Developme nt Developme nt Developme nt

Longford Multi­Phase settlement

Leitrim

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2001

Aghakilmore, Drumshanbo

Leitrim

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2001

Aghamore

Westme ath

Metal/Iron working site

Industrial

Uncertain

2002

North West Archaeolo gical Services North West Archaeolo gical Services Margaret Gowen

01E0796

Testing

01E0796

Testing

02E0869

Rescue

Aghnaskeag h

Louth

Souterrain

Unenclosed

General

2002

Aghtaboy

Mayo

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastic al Cemetery/Buri al Miscellaneo us Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin

General

1998

UCC Archaeolo gical Services Unit Freelance

02E0314

Monitorin g

98E0505

Testing

Aglish

Kerry

Undated ecclesiastical site Cemetery Site Bullaun Stone

No significance Uncertain No significance Uncertain

2002

Freelance

02E0903

Testing

Ahena Aherla More

Mayo Cork

1998 2002

ACS Sheila Lane Margaret Gowen

98E0177 02E1001

Rescue Monitorin g Rescue

All Hallows Priory, Library Square, Trinity College All Saints Church, Mullingar All Saints Church, Mullingar All Saints Church, Mullingar

Dublin

medieval ecclesiastical site

1998

98E0150

Westme ath Westme ath Westme ath

medieval ecclesiastical site medieval ecclesiastical site medieval ecclesiastical site

Ecclesiastic al Ecclesiastic al Ecclesiastic al

No significance No significance No significance

2001

Freelance

01E0125

Testing

1999

Freelance

99E0127

Testing

1998

Allardstown

Louth

Souterrain

Unenclosed

No significance Significant

2001

National Monument s and Historic Properties, Dúchas ACS

98E0209

Testing

01E0105

Testing

Altanagh

Tyrone

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastical

1980/1 981 1998/1 999

N I Historic Monument s Branch UCC Archaeolo gical Services Unit Dominic Delany ADS Environme nt & Heritage Service, Belfast Northern Archaeolo gical Consultan cy CRDS 98E0371

Rescue

Residential Developme nt Farm Improvemen t Scheme Unidentified Service Pipeline/Tren ch Residential Developme nt Developme nt None

An Raingiléis, Ballywiheen church

Kerry

Enclosed ecclesiastical site

General

Rescue

Annatrim Church Antrim Antrim

Laois

Ecclesiastical Site Field Boundaries Field Boundaries Agricultural Agricultural

Ecclesiastic al

No significance Significant Significant

2000

00E0785

Testing

Antrim Antrim

2000 1998

Testing Conservat ion

Antrim

Antrim

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

General

1998

Testing

Developme nt

Archerstown

Westme ath Limerick

Early Medieval Settlement Landscape medieval ecclesiastical site

Settlement Landscape Ecclesiastic al

No significance No significance

2001

01E0981

Monitorin g Testing

Residential Developme nt Developme nt

Ardagh

2002

Ardamore

Kerry

Early Medieval Artefacts

Miscellaneous

Settlement Enclosure

General

1978

Mary Henry Archaeolo gical Services OPW

02E1321

Rescue

Developme nt

214

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Ardanaffrin Ardclone

County
Roscom mon Kilkenny

EMAP_Class
ringfort Unenclosed Habitation Site

Category

Environs of Significanc e
Settlement Enclosure No significance General

Year
1997 2000

Compan y
Freelance Uncertain

Exc. License
97E0347

Exc. Type
Testing Rescue

Route Scheme
Developme nt N24 Piltown­ Fiddown Road Improvemen t Scheme N24 Piltown­ Fiddown Road Improvemen t Scheme Residential Developme nt Uncertain

Unenclosed

Ardclone

Kilkenny

Unenclosed Habitation Site

Unenclosed

General

1999

Uncertain

99E0575

Monitorin g

Ardcrone

Kerry

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Agricultural

No significance Significant

2002

Eachtra

02E1482

Testing

Arddoyne

Cork

Mill

1996

Ardeelan Lower

Donegal

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2001

Ardkeerin, Riverstown Ardmore

Sligo

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Landscape Settlement Landscape Industrial

General

1999

UCC Archaeolo gical Services Unit Archaeolo gical Consultan cy Ltd. Freelance

96E176

Rescue

01E1139

Testing

Rossnowlag h Sewerage Scheme Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Quarry/Mine Quarry/Mine M4 Kinnegad­ Enfield­ Kilcock Motorway Scheme Contract 1 Residential Developme nt L18 Athy­ Carlow Road Realignment Residential Developme nt Developme nt Developme nt Developme nt N20/N21 Adare­ Annacotty Bypass Road Contract 1 Developme nt Residential Developme nt Telecom Éireann Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Ballough to Kinnegad Phase 1A)

99E0631

Testing

Westme ath Westme ath Westme ath Meath

ringfort

No significance Highly Significant Highly Significant General

2002

Freelance

02E1411

Testing

Ardnagross Ardnagross Ardnamullan 1

Multi­Phase settlement Multi­Phase settlement Charcoal Pit

1995 1995 2002

OPW OPW ACS

95E079 95E175 02E0114

Rescue Rescue Rescue

Ardraw, Killorglin Ardree/Ardre igh

Kerry

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastical

No significance Significant

2002

Eachtra

02E0788

Monitorin g Rescue

Kildare

Enclosed ecclesiastical site ringfort

2000/2 001/20 02 2001/2 002 1990

Valerie J Keeley

00E0156

Ardrew, Athy

Kildare

Settlement Enclosure Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Waterford Agricultural Agricultural Settlement Enclosure

No significance Highly Significant Uncertain Uncertain General

Sheila Lane Waterford Corporatio n Margaret Gowen Margaret Gowen ADS

01E0365

Testing

Arundel Square;Peter Street Ashbourne Town Centre Ashbourne Town Centre Ashfort

Waterfor d Meath Meath Limerick

Viking Urban Settlement Kiln/Cereal cultivation site Kiln/Cereal cultivation site ringfort

E527

Rescue

2002 2002 1997/1 998

02E0708 02E0266 97E0285

Testing Testing Rescue

Athlumney Church Athlumney Church Athlumney Church

Meath

medieval ecclesiastical site medieval ecclesiastical site medieval ecclesiastical site ringfort

Ecclesiastic al Ecclesiastic al Ecclesiastic al

No significance No significance No significance

2002

Margaret Gowen Freelance

02E1178

Testing

Meath

1994

94E114

Testing

Meath

1998

Freelance

Monitorin g

Attyterilla, Ruan

Clare

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2000

Attyterilla, Ruan Commons Augherskea

Clare

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2000

Meath

Cemetery & Settlement Site

Settlement/Ce metery

Significant

2001

North West Archaeolo gical Services North West Archaeolo gical Services Margaret Gowen

Testing

00E0172

Testing

01E1102

Monitorin g

215

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Augherskea

County
Meath

EMAP_Class
Cemetery & Settlement Site

Category
Settlement/Ce metery

Environs of Significanc e
Significant

Year
2002

Compan y
Margaret Gowen

Exc. License
02E1229

Exc. Type
Rescue

Route Scheme
Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Ballough to Kinnegad Phase 1A) Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Ballough to Kinnegad Phase 1A) Developme nt

Augherskea

Meath

Cemetery & Settlement Site

Settlement/Ce metery

Significant

2002

Margaret Gowen

02E0194

Monitorin g

Aughnamull an

Antrim

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

Significant

2000

Back Lane Back Lane;High Street Back Lane;Lamb Alley;High Street Backweston State Agricultural Laboratory Campus, Ballymadeer Backweston State Agricultural Laboratory Campus, Ballymadeer Bailey's New Street

Dublin Dublin

Viking Urban Settlement Viking Urban Settlement Viking Urban Settlement

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin

General General

1992 1991

Northern Archaeolo gical Consultan cy Margaret Gowen Dublin Corporatio n Margaret Gowen

Monitorin g

92E0005

Rescue Testing

Developme nt Developme nt Developme nt

Dublin

Significant

1996/1 997

96E300

Rescue

Kildare

Charcoal Pit

Industrial

Uncertain

2002

Margaret Gowen

02E0680

Rescue

Developme nt

Kildare

Charcoal Pit

Industrial

Uncertain

2002

Margaret Gowen

02E0531

Monitorin g

Developme nt

Waterfor d

Viking Urban Settlement

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Waterford

Significant

1999

Bakehouse Lane 11 Balbrigh, Trim

Waterfor d Meath

Viking Urban Settlement ringfort

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Waterford Settlement Enclosure

Significant

1990

UCC Archaeolo gical Services Unit Waterford Corporatio n ACS

99E0103

Rescue

Developme nt

E550

Rescue

Developme nt Telecommu nications Developme nt M1 Gormanston ­ Monasterboi ce Motorway M1 Gormanston ­ Monasterboi ce Motorway None

No significance

2001

01E0833

Testing

Balgatheran 1

Louth

Non­Circular Shaped Enclosure

Settlement Enclosure

Highly Significant

2000

Valerie J Keeley

00E0477

Rescue

Balgeen 4

Meath

Early Medieval Settlement Landscape

Settlement Landscape

General

2001/2 002

ACS

01E0742

Rescue

Ballaghkeera Westme n Little, ath Athlone, Lough Ree Ballicknahee, Offaly Clara Ballicknahee, Offaly Clara Ballina Tipperar y Offaly

longport

Settlement Enclosure

General

1982

UCC

Research

Iron age/early medieval burial Iron age/early medieval burial medieval ecclesiastical site ringfort

Cemetery/Buri al Cemetery/Buri al Ecclesiastic al Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastic al Settlement Enclosure

General

1998

ACS

98E0286

Rescue

Quarry/Mine

General

1998

ACS

Rescue

Quarry/Mine

No significance No significance No significance No significance

2001

Freelance

01E0864

Testing

Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt ReSsidential Developme nt R291 Sligo­ Rosses Point Road Realignment R291 Sligo­ Rosses Point road

Ballina, Ballycumber Ballinabarny

2002

Eachtra

02E0584

Monitorin g Monitorin g Testing

Wicklow

Ecclesiastical Site enclosure

1998

IAC

98E0448

Ballincar

Sligo

1999

Ballincar

Sligo

enclosure

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2000

Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore Archaeolo gical Services

99E0656

00E0139

Monitorin g

216

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME

County

EMAP_Class

Category

Environs of Significanc e

Year

Compan y
Unit, Oranmore

Exc. License

Exc. Type

Route Scheme
realignment

Ballinea, Jamestown Ballinphull, Cliffoney Ballinrannig Ballinrobe

Westme ath Sligo Kerry Mayo

Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Ecclesiastical Site Ogham Stone Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Undated ecclesiastical site Undated ecclesiastical site Ecclesiastical Site Ecclesiastical

Settlement Landscape Ecclesiastic al Ecclesiastic al Settlement Enclosure

No significance No significance No significance General

2001

Freelance

01E0455

Testing

Residential Developme nt Developme nt Developme nt Ballinrobe Sewerage Scheme Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt

2001 1991 1994

Freelance OPW Freelance

01E0603

Monitorin g Testing

94E017

Rescue

Ballintaggart

Cork

No significance Ecclesiastic al Settlement Landscape No significance No significance

1992

Margaret Gowen Freelance 01E0328

Testing

Ballintemple

Mayo

2001

Testing

Ballintemple, Tullaghobegl y

Donegal

2002

Ballintemple, Tullaghobegl y

Donegal

Ecclesiastical Site

Settlement Landscape

No significance

2002

Ballintotty Ballinvally

Tipperar y Meath

ringfort ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Routeway

Uncertain No significance General

1997 1999

Moore Archaeolo gical and Environme ntal Services Moore Archaeolo gical and Environme ntal Services ADS ADS

02E0909

Testing

02E1366

Monitorin g

Residential Developme nt

Rescue 99E0328 Monitorin g Rescue

N7 Nenagh Bypass Residential Developme nt Bord na Móna Archaeologi cal Mitigation Project Bord na Móna Archaeologi cal Mitigation Project N8 Glanmire­ Watergrasshi ll Road Scheme N8 Glanmire­ Watergrasshi ll Road Scheme N8 Glanmire­ Watergrasshi ll Road Scheme N8 Glanmire­ Watergrasshi ll Road Scheme N8 Glanmire­ Watergrasshi ll Road Scheme Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt

Ballinvally, Monettia Bog

Offaly

Trackway

2000

ADS

00E0621

Ballinvally, Monettia Bog

Offaly

Trackway

Routeway

General

2000

ADS

00E0620

Rescue

Ballinvinny North

Cork

Kiln/Cereal cultivation site

Industrial

Uncertain

2001

Sheila Lane

01E0802

Rescue

Ballinvinny North

Cork

Kiln/Cereal cultivation site

Agricultural

Settlement Enclosure

Uncertain

2001

Sheila Lane

01E0802

Rescue

Ballinvinny North/Trantst own

Cork

Metal/Iron working site

Industrial

Uncertain

2001

Sheila Lane

01E0501

Rescue

Ballinvinny North/Trantst own

Cork

Metal/Iron working site

Industrial

Uncertain

2001

Sheila Lane

01E0204

Monitorin g

Ballinvinny South

Cork

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

General

2000

Sheila Lane

00E0673

Testing

Balloo Ballyadeen

Down Cork

ringfort ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastical

No significance No significance No significance Significant

2002 2001

ADS Eachtra

AE/02/55 01E1052

Monitorin g Testing

Ballyard

Kerry

ringfort

2001

Eachtra

00E0599

Monitorin g Rescue

Ballybarrack

Louth

Enclosed ecclesiastical site Enclosed ecclesiastical site

1977

National Museum Freelance

E166

Ballybarrack

Louth

Ecclesiastical

Significant

1995

95E189

Testing

217

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Ballybaun

County
Galway

EMAP_Class
ringfort

Category

Environs of Significanc e
Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure No significance No significance General

Year
2002

Compan y
Freelance

Exc. License
02E1443

Exc. Type
Monitorin g Testing

Route Scheme
E.S.B. Developme nt Residential Developme nt Farm Improvemen t Scheme Unidentified Sewerage Scheme

Ballybeg

Kerry

ringfort

1992

Freelance

Ballyboley

Antrim

Souterrain

Unenclosed

1977

N I Historic Monument s Branch Mary Henry Archaeolo gical Services Mary Henry Archaeolo gical Services Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore N I Historic Monument s Branch ACS 01E0612

Rescue

Ballyboy West, Clogheen

Tipperar y

Well

Ecclesiastic al

No significance

2001

Monitorin g

Ballyboy West, Clogheen

Tipperar y

Well

Ecclesiastic al

No significance

2001

01E0216

Monitorin g

Residential Developme nt

Ballybrit Racecourse, Ballybrit

Galway

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2000

00E0745

Testing

Developme nt

Ballybrolly

Armagh

Enclosed ecclesiastical site Kiln/Cereal cultivation site

Ecclesiastical

Significant

1978/1 979 2002

Testing

Farm Improvemen t Scheme N8 Rathcormac ­Fermoy Bypass Road Unidentified Service Pipeline/Tren ch None Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Uncertain

Ballybrowney Lower, 1

Cork

Agricultural

Settlement Enclosure

Uncertain

Testing

Ballybunion

Kerry

Burial Site

Cemetery/Buri al

Uncertain

1987

National Museum

Rescue

Ballybunion Ballybunnion Ballyburley

Kerry Kerry Offaly

Coastal Habitation Site Promontory Fort Undated ecclesiastical site Undated ecclesiastical site Undated ecclesiastical site Non­Circular Shaped Enclosure

Unenclosed Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastical

Significant No significance General

1986 2001 2001

UCG Eachtra Freelance 01E0141 01E0237

Research Testing Testing

Ballyburley

Offaly

Ecclesiastical

General

2001

Freelance

01E0717

Testing

Ballyburley

Offaly

Ecclesiastical

General

1997/1 998 1999

Freelance

97E0321

Testing

Ballycasey Beg

Clare

Settlement Enclosure

General

Ballycasey More, AR44C

Clare

Early Medieval Settlement Landscape

Settlement Landscape

Significant

2001

Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore ACS

99E0266

Rescue

01E0026

Rescue

Ballycasey More, AR44C

Clare

Early Medieval Settlement Landscape

Settlement Landscape

Significant

2002

ACS

02E0569

Monitorin g

Ballycasey More, AR44C

Clare

Early Medieval Settlement Landscape

Settlement Landscape

Significant

2002

ACS

02E1045

Rescue

Ballycasey More, AR44C

Clare

Early Medieval Settlement Landscape

Settlement Landscape

Significant

1999

Valerie J Keeley

99E0574

Testing

Ballyconboy

Roscom mon

raised ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

1999

Ballyconneel y;Ballygirreen , AR47/51

Clare

Early Medieval Settlement Landscape

Settlement Landscape

Significant

2000

Archaeolo gical Consultan cy Ltd. Valerie J Keeley

99E0123

Testing

N18/N19 Ballycasey­ Dromoland Road Scheme N18/N19 Ballycasey­ Dromoland Road Scheme N18/N19 Ballycasey­ Dromoland Road Scheme N18/N19 Ballycasey­ Dromoland Road Scheme Residential Developme nt N18/N19 Ballycasey­ Dromoland Road Scheme Bord Gais Brownsbarn­ Kilshane Pipeline

00E0284

Rescue

Ballycoolen; Astagob;Mit chelstown

Dublin

Metal/Iron working site

Industrial

Uncertain

2000

Margaret Gowen

00E0043

Monitorin g

218

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Ballycorick

County
Clare

EMAP_Class
Metal/Iron working site

Category
Industrial

Environs of Significanc e
Uncertain

Year
2002

Compan y
Margaret Gowen

Exc. License
02E1185

Exc. Type
Rescue

Route Scheme
Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Cappaneas ta­ Goatisland Phase 3) Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Cappaneas ta­ Goatisland Phase 3) Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Bord Gais Cork­Dublin Pipeline 1981/1982 N20/N21 Adare­ Annacotty Bypass Road Contract 1 Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt

Ballycorick, (BGE 3/26/1– 4)

Clare

Charcoal Pit

Industrial

Uncertain

2002

Margaret Gowen

02E1011

Rescue

Ballycullane

Kerry

Bullaun Stone

Miscellaneo us Unenclosed

No significance Significant

2000

Freelance

00E0804

Monitorin g Rescue

Ballycullen;Ol dcourt, Site 1 Ballycullen;Ol dcourt, Site 1 Ballyculling

Dublin

Unenclosed Habitation Site Unenclosed Habitation Site ringfort

2002

Arch­Tech

02E1373

Dublin

Unenclosed

Significant

2002

Arch­Tech

02E0190

Monitorin g Rescue

Tipperar y

Settlement Enclosure

Uncertain

1981

UCC

Ballycummin

Limerick

ringfort

Settlement Landscape

General

1996

ADS

96E379

Testing

Ballydonnell

Limerick

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastic al

No significance No significance

2001

Ballydrinnan

Tipperar y

medieval ecclesiastical site

2002

Ballyduff

Limerick

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

Significant

1979

Aegis Archaeolo gy UCC Archaeolo gical Services Unit UCC

01E1017

Monitorin g Monitorin g

02E0009

Rescue

Ballyduff, Dungarvan Ballyea

Waterfor d Clare

ringfort ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Agricultural Settlement Enclosure Unenclosed Settlement Enclosure

No significance No significance General Significant Significant

1998 1997

Freelance Freelance 97E0471

Testing Testing

Unidentified Road Developme nt Developme nt Residential Developme nt Quarry/Mine Quarry/Mine Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt

Ballyegan Ballyegan Ballygalley

Kerry Kerry Antrim

Field Boundaries Cashel & Souterrain Souterrain

2000 1991 2002

ADS UCC ADS

00E0356

Rescue Rescue

AE/02/40

Rescue

Ballygarran

Wexford

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2002

Ballygarth

Meath

Undated ecclesiastical site Undated ecclesiastical site

Ecclesiastic al Ecclesiastic al

No significance No significance

2002

UCC Archaeolo gical Services Unit CRDS

02E0261

Testing

02E1721

Monitorin g Testing

Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt

Ballygarvan

Cork

2001

Ballygeale, Site 1

Limerick

Early Medieval Settlement Landscape

Settlement Landscape

Uncertain

1999

UCC Archaeolo gical Services Unit ADS

01E1047

99E0341

Rescue

Ballygeale, Site 1

Limerick

Early Medieval Settlement Landscape

Settlement Landscape

Uncertain

1998/1 999

ADS

98E0506

Monitorin g

Ballygeale, Site 1

Limerick

Early Medieval Settlement Landscape

Settlement Landscape

Uncertain

1999

ADS

99E0342

Rescue

Ballyginny

Down

Souterrain

Unenclosed

General

1983

N I Historic Monument s Branch

Rescue

N20/N21 Adare­ Annacotty Bypass Road Contract 2 N20/N21 Adare­ Annacotty Bypass Road Contract 2 N20/N21 Adare­ Annacotty Bypass Road Contract 2 Residential Developme nt

219

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Ballyglass

County
Westme ath

EMAP_Class
ringfort

Category
Settlement Enclosure

Environs of Significanc e
No significance

Year
2002

Compan y
North West Archaeolo gical Services N I Historic Monument s Branch ADS Freelance

Exc. License
02E1517

Exc. Type
Testing

Route Scheme
Residential Developme nt Farm Improvemen t Scheme Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Developme nt Developme nt Unidentified Road Developme nt Farm Improvemen t Scheme Residential Developme nt None

Ballygortgarv e Ballygowan Ballyhannan South Ballyhealy Road, Delvin Ballyhenry 1

Antrim

raised ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Unenclosed

General

1971

Rescue

Down Clare

ringfort cashel

No significance No significance General

2002 1999

AE/02/63 99E0669

Monitorin g Monitorin g Rescue

Westme ath Antrim

Souterrain

1999

ACS

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastic al

Significant

1972

N I Historic Monument s Branch N I Historic Monument s Branch Eachtra 02E1440

Rescue

Ballyhenry 2

Antrim

raised ringfort

General

1972

Rescue

Ballyhest East

Cork

Undated ecclesiastical site Ringfort & Souterrain Undated ecclesiastical site Iron age/early medieval burial Undated ecclesiastical site Cemetery/Buri al Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2002

Monitorin g

Ballyhill Lower Ballykean Church Ballykeel South Ballykelly

Antrim

Significant

1985

N I Historic Monument s Branch Dominic Delany National Museum Mary Henry Archaeolo gical Services N I Historic Monument s Branch N I Historic Monument s Branch Freelance 95E149 J000122

Testing

Offaly

Ecclesiastic al

No significance General

1995

Monitorin g Rescue

Clare

1988

Tipperar y

Ecclesiastic al

No significance

2000

00E0862

Testing

Residential Developme nt

Ballykennedy

Antrim

Multi­Phase settlement raised ringfort

Settlement Landscape Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastic al Cemetery/Buri al

Significant

1978

Rescue

Farm Improvemen t Scheme Farm Improvemen t Scheme Residential Developme nt Farm Improvemen t Scheme

Ballylessant

Down

General

1970

Rescue

Ballylosky

Donegal

Undated ecclesiastical site Iron age/early medieval burial

No significance Highly Significant

1995

Testing

Ballymacaw ard

Donegal

1997/1 998

Ballymacpea Derry ke Upper Ballymactho mas Kerry

Souterrain

Unenclosed

General

1973

National Monument s and Historic Properties, Dúchas Ulster Museum Aegis Archaeolo gy Mary Henry Archaeolo gical Services Moore Archaeolo gical and Environme ntal Services Sheila Lane Freelance

97E0154

Rescue

Rescue

Farm Improvemen t Scheme N21 Ballycarthy­ Killally Road Scheme Residential Developme nt

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

1999

99E0262

Testing

Ballymaghro e

Wicklow

Undated ecclesiastical site

Ecclesiastical

Uncertain

1999

99E0302

Testing

Ballymagroar ty Irish, Ballintra

Donegal

Souterrain

Unenclosed

No significance

2001

01E0480

Monitorin g

Quarry/Mine

Ballymague

Cork

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastic al Unenclosed

No significance No significance No significance No significance General

1999

99E0045

Testing

Ballymahon

Longford medieval ecclesiastical site Louth Souterrain

1999

99E0441

Testing

Residential Developme nt Developme nt Residential Developme nt N7 Newbridge Bypass Road Residential Developme

Ballymakellet t Ballymany

2000

ACS

00E0592

Testing

Kildare

Undated ecclesiastical site Ringfort & Souterrain Settlement Enclosure

Ecclesiastic al

1989

Valerie J Keeley Freelance 96E0368

Testing

Ballymascanl an

Louth

1996

Testing

220

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME

County

EMAP_Class

Category

Environs of Significanc e

Year

Compan y

Exc. License

Exc. Type

Route Scheme
nt

Ballymascanl an Ballymoney

Louth

Ringfort & Souterrain Undated ecclesiastical site ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastic al Settlement Enclosure

General

1996

Freelance

96E039

Testing

Wexford

No significance No significance

2000

Eachtra

00E0386

Monitorin g Testing

Residential Developme nt Golf course

Ballymore, Craughwell

Galway

2001

Ballymount Great

Dublin

raised ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

General

2000/2 002

Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore Margaret Gowen

01E0273

Residential Developme nt

00E0538

Rescue

Ballymount Great

Dublin

raised ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

General

1997

Margaret Gowen

97E0316

Rescue

Ballymount Great Ballymuldorry

Dublin

raised ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

General

1982

OPW

Rescue

Luas Network Line A (Tallaght­ Middle Abbey Street) Luas Network Line A (Tallaght­ Middle Abbey Street) M50 Western Parkway Motorway Residential Developme nt A55 Belfast Outer Ring Road Unidentified Road Developme nt Residential Developme nt

Sligo

ringfort

No significance

2002

Ballymurphy

Antrim

raised ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

General

1977

North West Archaeolo gical Services N I Historic Monument s Branch Freelance

02E1653

Testing

Rescue

Ballynabooly

Kerry

ringfort

General

1999

99E0204

Testing

Ballynabucky

Galway

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

1998

Ballynacally, (BGE 3/30/1)

Clare

Metal/Iron working site

Industrial

Uncertain

2002

Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore Margaret Gowen

98E0570

Testing

02E1013

Rescue

Ballynacarrig a1&2 Ballynacarrig a1&2 Ballynacarrig a1&2 Ballynacragg a, Area 7

Cork

Non­Circular Shaped Enclosure Non­Circular Shaped Enclosure Non­Circular Shaped Enclosure Field Boundaries

Settlement Landscape Settlement Landscape Settlement Landscape Agricultural Settlement Enclosure

Highly Significant Highly Significant Highly Significant Uncertain

2001

ACS

01E0567

Rescue

Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Cappaneas ta­ Goatisland Phase 3) N25 Youghal Bypass Road N25 Youghal Bypass Road N25 Youghal Bypass Road N18/N19 Ballycasey­ Dromoland Road Scheme N18/N19 Ballycasey­ Dromoland Road Scheme Iarnród Éireann Developme nt None

Cork

2001

ACS

01E0751

Rescue

Cork

2001

ACS

01E0224

Testing

Clare

2000

Ballynacragg a, Site 17

Clare

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

Settlement Enclosure

Uncertain

1998

Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore Valerie J Keeley

98E0333

Testing

98E0336

Testing

Ballynafid

Westme ath

Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Early Medieval Settlement Landscape medieval ecclesiastical site Settlement Landscape Settlement Landscape Ecclesiastical

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2002

Valerie J Keeley

02E1430

Monitorin g

Ballynagalla gh, Lough Gur Ballynagalla gh, Lough Gur Ballynakill

Limerick

Significant

1996/1 997 1994

UCC

96E249

Research

Limerick

Significant

UCC

94E101

Research

None

Galway

No significance

1991

Mary Henry Archaeolo gical Services

Testing

Developme nt

221

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Ballynakill, Site 70

County
Kildare

EMAP_Class
ringfort

Category
Settlement Enclosure

Environs of Significanc e
General

Year
2002

Compan y
IAC

Exc. License
02E0149

Exc. Type
Rescue

Route Scheme
M4 Kinnegad­ Enfield­ Kilcock Motorway Scheme Contract 3 Residential Developme nt Bord Gais Cork­Dublin Pipeline 1986 Residential Developme nt Uncertain Residential Developme nt Bord Gais Barnakyle­ Coonagh West Pipeline None

Ballynamone y, Carrick On Shannon Ballynaraha, BW/9/1

Leitrim

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2001

Tipperar y

Kiln/Cereal cultivation site

Agricultural

Settlement Enclosure

Uncertain

1986

North West Archaeolo gical Services Margaret Gowen

01E1178

Testing

Rescue

Ballynastaig

Galway

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2000

Ballynee, Spiddal Ballynerrin Lower Ballynoe

Meath Wicklow

Souterrain Cemetery Site

Unenclosed Cemetery/Buri al Settlement Enclosure

General Uncertain

1988 1990

Archaeolo gical Consultan cy Ltd. UCD OPW

00E0806

Testing

Rescue Rescue

Limerick

ringfort

No significance

2002

Margaret Gowen

02E1649

Monitorin g

Ballynoe

Cork

Enclosed ecclesiastical site

Ecclesiastical

General

1995/1 996/19 99

Ballynoe

Limerick

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2002

OPW;Natio nal Monument s and Historic Properties, Dúchas Margaret Gowen

95E260

Conservat ion

02E1733

Rescue

Ballynora

Cork

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

1997

Ballynqe

Antrim

Non­Circular Shaped Enclosure cashel

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

General

1973

UCC Archaeolo gical Services Unit N I Historic Monument s Branch Archaeolo gical Consultan cy Ltd. Freelance Freelance Freelance

97E0134

Testing

Bord Gais Barnakyle­ Coonagh West Pipeline Residential Developme nt

Rescue

Farm Improvemen t Scheme Residential Developme nt Developme nt Developme nt None

Ballyogan

Clare

No significance

2002

02E0389

Testing

Ballyogan Ballyogan Ballyovey Church, Kilkeeran Ballypalady

Clare Clare Mayo

Ringfort & Souterrain Ringfort & Souterrain Enclosed ecclesiastical site ringfort Ecclesiastical

Unenclosed Unenclosed

No significance No significance General

1996 1997 1995

Testing 97E0294 95E0190 Testing Conservat ion Uncertain

Antrim

Settlement Enclosure Miscellaneous Miscellaneo us Settlement Landscape Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Landscape

Uncertain

1980

N I Historic Monument s Branch QUB

Uncertain

Ballyrea, Navan Fort Ballyroan

Armagh

Iron Age Royal Site Well

General

Laois

No significance General

1991/1 992/19 93 1998

Rescue

Developme nt Residential Developme nt Farm Improvemen t Scheme Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt N4 Ballysadare­ Collooney Bypass Road Uncertain

Freelance

98E0460

Testing

Ballyrobert

Cork

ringfort

1983

UCC

Rescue

Ballyroe Upper Ballyroe Upper Ballysadare

Limerick

ringfort

No significance No significance Significant

2002

Limerick

ringfort

2002

Sligo

Multi­Phase settlement

1995/1 996

Aegis Archaeolo gy Aegis Archaeolo gy John Channing

02E0112

Monitorin g Monitorin g Rescue

02E0130

95E20

Ballyshanagh ill Rath, Ballyshanagh ill Ballyshanagh ill Rath,

Antrim

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

Significant

1990/1 991

ADS

Testing

222

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Ballyshanagh ill

County

EMAP_Class

Category

Environs of Significanc e

Year

Compan y

Exc. License

Exc. Type

Route Scheme

Ballyshannon Demesne, Kilcullen Ballyshannon Demesne, Kilcullen Ballysimon

Kildare

medieval ecclesiastical site medieval ecclesiastical site Burial Site Cemetery/Buri al

Ecclesiastic al Ecclesiastic al

No significance No significance Uncertain

1998

Freelance

98E0345

Testing

Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt N7 Annacotty­ Rossbrien Limerick Southern Ring Road Phase 1 N7 Annacotty­ Rossbrien Limerick Southern Ring Road Phase 1 N7 Annacotty­ Rossbrien Limerick Southern Ring Road Phase 1 Developme nt

Kildare

2000

Dominic Delany Aegis Archaeolo gy

00E0277

Testing

Limerick

2001

01E0030

Rescue

Ballysimon

Limerick

Burial Site

Cemetery/Buri al

Uncertain

2000/2 001

Aegis Archaeolo gy

00E0434

Monitorin g

Ballysimon

Limerick

Burial Site

Cemetery/Buri al

Uncertain

2000

Aegis Archaeolo gy

00E0849

Testing

Ballythomas West, Dunderrow, Kinsale Ballyutoag

Cork

Souterrain

Unenclosed

No significance

2001/2 002

Sheila Lane

01E1111

Monitorin g

Antrim

Early Medieval Settlement Landscape ringfort Ogham Stone

Settlement Landscape Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastical

Settlement Enclosure

Significant

1981/1 982 1990/1 991 1996

N I Historic Monument s Branch UCD Eachtra E572 96E0087

Research

None

Ballyvanran Ballyvelly

Tipperar y Kerry

General General

Rescue Rescue

Uncertain Residential Developme nt Quarry/Mine

Ballyvollen

Antrim

Metal/Iron working site Non­Circular Shaped Enclosure

Unenclosed

Significant

1984

N I Historic Monument s Branch N I Historic Monument s Branch Discovery Programm e Freelance 02E1070

Testing

Ballywee

Antrim

Settlement Enclosure

Highly Significant

Ballywillin, Lough Kinale Balrath, Ballinagore Balrenny

Longford crannog

Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastic al Unenclosed

General

1974/1 984/19 93/199 4 2002

Rescue

Farm Improvemen t Scheme None

Westme ath Meath

Ecclesiastical Site Souterrain

No significance General

2000

00E0651

Non Excavatio n Testing

1977

UCD

Rescue

Residential Developme nt Farm Improvemen t Scheme M1 Dundalk Western Motorway Bypass M1 Dundalk Western Motorway Bypass M1 Dundalk Western Motorway Bypass M1 Dundalk Western Motorway Bypass Developme nt

Balriggan

Louth

Cemetery & Settlement Site Cemetery & Settlement Site raised ringfort

Settlement/Ce metery

Highly Significant

2002

IAC

02E1325

Rescue

Balriggan

Louth

Settlement/Ce metery

Highly Significant

2002

IAC

02E0373

Testing

Balriggan

Louth

Settlement Enclosure

General

2002

IAC

02E0370

Testing

Balriggan 1, Site 15

Louth

Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Well

Settlement Landscape

General

2002

IAC

02E0373

Testing

Baltimore

Cork

Ecclesiastic al

No significance

2001

Baltinglass East

Wicklow

Cistercian Abbey

Ecclesiastic al

No significance

2000

UCC Archaeolo gical Services Unit Freelance

01E0263

Monitorin g

00E0868

Testing

Baltinglass Water Supply Scheme

223

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Baltinglass West

County
Wicklow

EMAP_Class
ringfort

Category

Environs of Significanc e
Settlement Enclosure No significance

Year
2000/2 001

Compan y
Freelance

Exc. License
00E0869

Exc. Type
Testing

Route Scheme
Baltinglass Water Supply Scheme Uncertain Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Developme nt None

Banduff Barnaderg North Barradrum

Cork Galway

ringfort cashel

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastic al Ecclesiastic al Settlement Landscape Agricultural Settlement Enclosure Industrial

General No significance No significance No significance Significant

1999 2000

Sheila Lane Dominic Delany Freelance

99E0113 00E0485

Testing Testing

Westme ath Kildare

medieval ecclesiastical site medieval ecclesiastical site Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Mill raised ringfort

2001

01E0173

Testing

Barreen

1998/1 999 2002/2 003 2000 1995

Freelance

98E0559

Testing

Barrees Valley Barryscourt Baunmore

Cork

UCG

02E0914

Research

Cork Limerick

Significant No significance Uncertain

Freelance Limerick Corporatio n Margaret Gowen

96E0238 95E97

Conservat ion Monitorin g Rescue

None Developme nt Bord Gais Barnakyle­ Coonagh West Pipeline Bord Gais Pipeline extension Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Cappaneas ta­ Goatisland Phase 3) Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Cappaneas ta­ Goatisland Phase 3) None

Baunreagh, (BGE 3/51/3)

Limerick

Charcoal Pit

2002

02E0661

Bawnnaglog h Bearnafunshi n, (BGE 3/7/3)

Cork

Metal/Iron working site Metal/Iron working site

Industrial

Uncertain

1998

Margaret Gowen Margaret Gowen

98E0420

Testing

Clare

Industrial

Uncertain

2002

02E0119

Monitorin g

Bearnafunshi n, (BGE 3/7/3)

Clare

Metal/Iron working site

Industrial

Uncertain

2002

Margaret Gowen

02E0341

Rescue

Beaufort

Kerry

Souterrain

Unenclosed

General

1995

Beaulieu

Louth

Undated ecclesiastical site

Ecclesiastic al

No significance

2001

Bective Church Behaghane

Meath

medieval ecclesiastical site enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Cemetery/Buri al

Ecclesiastic al

No significance Uncertain

2000

Kerry County Museum UCC Archaeolo gical Services Unit Valerie J Keeley Freelance

95E217

Conservat ion Testing

01E0489

Baltray­ Termonfecki n Sewerage Scheme R161 Trim­ Navan Road Realignment Residential Developme nt None

00E0022

Testing

Kerry

2000

00E0739

Monitorin g Research

Bellaghy Bawn, Bellaghy Bellaghy Bawn, Bellaghy Bellinstown

Derry

ringfort

General

1989/1 990 1995

N I Historic Monument s Branch N I Historic Monument s Branch Valerie J Keeley 00E0953

Derry

ringfort

General

Rescue

Developme nt M1 Airport­ Balbriggan Motorway Bypass Contract 2 M1 Airport­ Balbriggan Motorway Bypass Contract 2 Residential Developme nt

Dublin

Iron age/early medieval burial

Significant

2000

Monitorin g

Bellinstown

Dublin

Iron age/early medieval burial

Cemetery/Buri al

Significant

2001

Valerie J Keeley

01E0744

Rescue

Berrings

Cork

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2002

Betaghstown Betaghstown Betaghstown

Meath Meath Meath

Multi­Phase settlement Multi­Phase settlement Multi­Phase settlement

Cemetery/Buri al Cemetery/Buri al Cemetery/Buri al

Significant Significant Significant

1977/1 979 2002 2001

UCC Archaeolo gical Services Unit National Museum ADS ACS

02E0804

Testing

E814 02E1709 01E1170

Rescue Rescue Rescue

None Developme nt Developme nt

224

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Betaghstown Big Glebe

County
Meath Derry

EMAP_Class
Multi­Phase settlement Raised Ringfort & Souterrain ringfort

Category
Cemetery/Buri al Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

Environs of Significanc e
Significant Highly Significant No significance

Year
1998 1976

Compan y
ADS N I Historic Monument s Branch Freelance

Exc. License
98E0072

Exc. Type
Testing Rescue

Route Scheme
Developme nt Farm Improvemen t Scheme Castlederm ot Water Supply Scheme None Developme nt Bord Gais Northeaster n Pipeline (Dunleer­ Mullagh Phase 3) Bord na Móna Peat Production

Bigbog

Kildare

2002

02E1596

Testing

Binders Cove, Finnis Blackhall Big, Dunboyne Blackhills Lower

Down Meath Cavan

Souterrain Field Boundaries Unenclosed Habitation Site

Unenclosed Agricultural Unenclosed Settlement Enclosure

General No significance General

2002 2002 1992

ACS CRDS ADS

AE/02/10 3 02E1388 92E0058

Conservat ion Testing Testing

Bloomhill a.k.a. Cloncraff;Ball ynahownwo od Bloomhill a.k.a. Cloncraff;Ball ynahownwo od Bodenstown

Offaly

Pilgrimage Road

Routeway

General

1992

Archaeolo gical Wetland Unit OPW

Rescue

Offaly

Pilgrimage Road

Routeway

General

1983/1 986

Rescue

Bord na Móna Peat Production

Kildare

Ecclesiastical Site

Ecclesiastical

No significance

2002

IAC

02E0585

Testing

Bodenstown

Kildare

Ecclesiastical Site crannog

Ecclesiastical

No significance Significant

2002

Margaret Gowen Archaeolo gical Wetland Unit QUB Centre for Archaeolo gical Fieldwork Margaret Gowen

02E1654

Testing

Bofeenaun

Mayo

Settlement Enclosure

1992

Rescue

Duncreevan ­ Castlewarde n South Water Supply Scheme Residential Developme nt Farm Improvemen t Scheme None

Boho Church, Toneel North &Reyfad Bonestown, (BGE 1a/18/2)

Fermana Ecclesiastical gh Site

Ecclesiastical

General

2002

AE/02/49

Conservat ion

Meath

Kiln/Cereal cultivation site

Agricultural

Uncertain

2002

02E0696

Rescue

Bonestown, (BGE 1a/18/3)

Meath

Charcoal Pit

Industrial

Uncertain

2002

Margaret Gowen

02E0694

Rescue

Bonfire Hill, Bishops Court Boolies Little

Down

Souterrain

Unenclosed

General

1973

N I Historic Monument s Branch OPW

Rescue

Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Ballough to Kinnegad Phase 1A) Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Ballough to Kinnegad Phase 1A) Developme nt Farm Improvemen t Scheme Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt

Meath

Multi­Phase settlement Undated ecclesiastical site ringfort

Cemetery/Buri al Ecclesiastic al Settlement Enclosure

Significant

1980

Rescue

Bordwell Big Church Bowling Green

Laois

No significance Significant

2000

Dominic Delany Mary Henry Archaeolo gical Services OPW Margaret Gowen Northern Archaeolo gical Consultan cy OPW

00E0159

Monitorin g Monitorin g

Tipperar y

2001

01E0884

Bowling Green Bowling Green Brackenagh East

Tipperar y Tipperar y Down

ringfort ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

Significant Significant

1970 1997

Rescue 97E0282 Monitorin g Monitorin g

Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt

ringfort

General

2001

AE/01/22

Brackloon

Kerry

Iron age/early medieval burial

Cemetery/Buri al

Uncertain

1991

Rescue

None

225

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Brade

County
Cork

EMAP_Class
Undated ecclesiastical site

Category
Ecclesiastical

Environs of Significanc e
No significance

Year
1998

Compan y
UCC Archaeolo gical Services Unit Archaeolo gical Projects Archaeolo gical Projects Archaeolo gical Projects Archaeolo gical Projects Archaeolo gical Projects Wexford Corporatio n Margaret Gowen ACS Margaret Gowen

Exc. License
98E0052

Exc. Type
Testing

Route Scheme
Developme nt

Bray Head, Valentia Island Bray Head, Valentia Island Bray Head, Valentia Island Bray Head, Valentia Island Bray Head, Valentia Island Bride Street

Kerry

Multi­Phase settlement Multi­Phase settlement Multi­Phase settlement Multi­Phase settlement Multi­Phase settlement

Settlement Landscape Settlement Landscape Settlement Landscape Settlement Landscape Settlement Landscape

Highly Significant Highly Significant Highly Significant Highly Significant Highly Significant

1993

93E0121

Research

None

Kerry

1994

94E119

Research

None

Kerry

1995/1 996 2001

95E166

Research

None

Kerry

01E0814

Research

None

Kerry

Wexford

Viking Urban Settlement Viking Urban Settlement raised ringfort Ford/River Crossing

Bridge Street Upper British & Seacash Broad Street;Georg e's Quay;Abbey River Brooklodge

Dublin Antrim Limerick

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Wexford Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin Settlement Enclosure Routeway

Highly Significant General Significant General

1997/1 998/19 99/200 0 1988

97E278

Research

None

E000438

Rescue

None

1992 1998 1998/1 999/20 00/200 1 1999

92E0078

Testing Rescue

Developme nt Developme nt Limerick Main Drainage Scheme Bord Gais Caherlag­ Ballincollig Pipeline Bord Gais Caherlag­ Ballincollig Pipeline Residential Developme nt

98E0581

Non Excavatio n

Cork

Kiln/Cereal cultivation site

Agricultural

Uncertain

Margaret Gowen

99E0314

Monitorin g

Brooklodge

Cork

Kiln/Cereal cultivation site

Agricultural

Uncertain

1999

Margaret Gowen

99E0438

Rescue

Broomville Gardens, Ballyroan Brownsbarn Brownsbarn; Collegeland Brownstown

Laois

Early Medieval Settlement Landscape

Settlement Landscape

No significance

1998

Freelance

98E0460

Testing

Dublin Kilkenny

ringfort ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

No significance No significance No significance

2000 2002

Margaret Gowen Freelance

00E0541 02E1672

Testing Monitorin g Monitorin g

Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt

Burgesland

Tipperar y

ringfort

2002

Burnchurch

Kilkenny

medieval ecclesiastical site

Ecclesiastic al

No significance

2001

Burnchurch

Kilkenny

medieval ecclesiastical site

Ecclesiastic al

No significance

2001

Butterfield, Rathfarnham Buzzardstow n Cadamstow n church Caheravart Caherduff

Dublin Dublin Kildare

Multi­Phase settlement Ecclesiastical Site Undated ecclesiastical site ringfort cashel

Settlement Landscape Ecclesiastic al Ecclesiastic al Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

Highly Significant No significance No significance General No significance Significant

1997 1999 2000

UCC Archaeolo gical Services Unit Moore Archaeolo gical and Environme ntal Services Moore Archaeolo gical and Environme ntal Services Judith Carroll Margaret Gowen Valerie J Keeley Sheila Lane Freelance

02E0572

01E0983

Monitorin g

Residential Developme nt

01E0983

Monitorin g

Residential Developme nt

97E0140 99E0046 00E0890

Rescue Testing Testing

Developme nt Developme nt Developme nt Uncertain Residential Developme nt None

Cork Mayo

1999 1999

99E0336 99E0591

Testing Testing

Cahergal

Kerry

cashel

1986/1 990/19 91

OPW

Conservat ion

226

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Caherlehillan

County
Kerry

EMAP_Class
Enclosed ecclesiastical site

Category
Ecclesiastical

Environs of Significanc e
Significant

Year
1992/1 993/19 94/199 5/1996 /1997/ 1998/1 999/20 02 2002

Compan y
UCC

Exc. License
93E0073

Exc. Type
Research

Route Scheme
None

Cahernalee

Galway

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

General

Cahernalee

Galway

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

General

2002

Moore Archaeolo gical and Environme ntal Services Margaret Gowen

02E0323

Monitorin g

02E0095

Monitorin g

Cahernalee

Galway

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

General

2002

Cahernaloug Clare h, (BGE 3/14/1)

Charcoal Pit

Industrial

Uncertain

2002

Moore Archaeolo gical and Environme ntal Services Margaret Gowen

02E0640

Testing

02E1187

Rescue

Caherwalter

Galway

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2002

Cahirvagliair, Cappeen West Callas

Cork

cashel

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

General

1985

Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore OPW

02E1160

Monitorin g

Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Athlone­ Gort Phase 2) Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Athlone­ Gort Phase 2) Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Athlone­ Gort Phase 2) Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Cappaneas ta­ Goatisland Phase 3) Residential Developme nt

Conservat ion 01E1195 Monitorin g

None

Westme ath

ringfort

No significance

2001

Calteraun

Sligo

Ringfort & Souterrain

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

1999

Camlisk More, Edgeworthst own Cappa

Westme ath

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2000

Kerry

Charcoal Pit

Industrial

Uncertain

2002

UCC Archaeolo gical Services Unit Mary Henry Archaeolo gical Services North West Archaeolo gical Services Eachtra

Residential Developme nt

99E0610

Testing

Residential Developme nt

00E0675

Monitorin g

Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt None Farm Improvemen t Scheme Residential Developme nt Quarry/Mine Quarry/Mine None

01E0811

Testing

Cappancur

Offaly

Enclosed ecclesiastical site ringfort

Ecclesiastical

General

1999

Dominic Delany Freelance

99E0214

Testing

Carlow

Carlow

Settlement Enclosure Agricultural Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Agricultural Agricultural Settlement Enclosure

Settlement Enclosure

No significance Uncertain General

1999

99E0058

Testing

Carlow Castle Carn

Carlow

Kiln/Cereal cultivation site

1996 1979

OPW N I Historic Monument s Branch N I Historic Monument s Branch CRDS CRDS N I Historic Monument s Branch QUB ACS

96E105

Conservat ion Rescue

Fermana cashel gh Down enclosure

Carnalbana gh East Carnalway Carnalway Carnlough North, (Windy Ridge) Carnmoney Carnmore West

General

1979

Rescue

Kildare Kildare Down

Kiln/Cereal cultivation site Kiln/Cereal cultivation site enclosure

Uncertain Uncertain Uncertain

1999 2000 1981

99E0416 00E0303

Monitorin g Rescue Research

Antrim Galway

ringfort cashel

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

Significant No significance

1970 2000

Research 00E0478 Testing

None Tuam Regional Water Supply Scheme Stage 3

227

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Carr

County
Tyrone

EMAP_Class
ringfort

Category
Settlement Enclosure

Environs of Significanc e
Uncertain

Year
1980

Compan y
N I Historic Monument s Branch ADS

Exc. License

Exc. Type
Uncertain

Route Scheme
Uncertain

Carragh church Carrick, Kiltimagh Carrickakelly

Kildare

medieval ecclesiastical site ringfort

Ecclesiastic al Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

No significance No significance No significance No significance

1992

Testing

Cemetery Extension Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt

Mayo

2002

Freelance

02E0519

Testing

Monagh an Tipperar y

ringfort

2000

ACS

00E0809

Testing

Carrickcone en

ringfort

2001

Carrigaline Middle Carrigans Lower Carrigeens

Cork

Multi­Phase settlement cashel

Settlement Landscape Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

General

2002

Mary Henry Archaeolo gical Services Sheila Lane Freelance

01E0470

Monitorin g

01E1148

Rescue

Sligo

No significance No significance

2001/2 002 2000

01E0333

Testing

Sligo

ringfort

Carrignamuc k Carrigoran, Site EX1, 18 & 20

Wicklow Clare

Unenclosed Habitation Site Early Medieval Settlement Landscape

Unenclosed Settlement Landscape

Uncertain Highly Significant

1978 1998/1 999/20 00

North West Archaeolo gical Services OPW Valerie J Keeley;Arc haeologic al Services Unit, Oranmore Valerie J Keeley

00E0734

Testing

Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt None N18/N19 Ballycasey­ Dromoland Road Scheme N18/N19 Road Improvemen t Scheme N18/N19 Road Improvemen t Scheme Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Cappaneas ta­ Goatisland Phase 3) Farm Improvemen t Scheme Residential Developme nt Developme nt

Research 98E0337 Testing

Carrigoran, Site EX1, 18 & 20 Carrigoran, Site EX1, 18 & 20 Carrow, (BGE 3/67/2)

Clare

Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Metal/Iron working site

Settlement Landscape

Highly Significant

1998/1 999/20 00 1998

98E0338

Testing

Clare

Settlement Landscape

Highly Significant

Valerie J Keeley

98E0426

Testing

Limerick

Industrial

Uncertain

2002

Margaret Gowen

02E0630

Rescue

Carrowbeg

Mayo

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

No significance No significance

1997/1 998 2002

Freelance

97E0474

Testing

Carrowbunn aun/Carrow dough Carrowbunn aun;Carrowd ough, Strandhill Carrowcana da Carrowdotia

Sligo

Raised Ringfort & Souterrain Raised Ringfort & Souterrain ringfort enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

Sligo

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2002

Mayo Clare

Settlement Enclosure

No significance No significance General

1992 2002

North West Archaeolo gical Services North West Archaeolo gical Services Freelance Aegis Archaeolo gy Aegis Archaeolo gy Aegis Archaeolo gy John Channing

02E1682

Testing

02E1682

Testing

Monitorin g 02E1494 Testing

N5 Swinford Bypass Road N18 Ennis Bypass Road N18 Ennis Bypass Road N18 Ennis Bypass Road N4 Ballysadare­ Collooney Bypass Road N59 Moylaw­ Crossmolina Road Realignment Residential Developme nt

Carrowdotia

Clare

cashel

2002

02E1493

Testing

Carrowdotia (AR27) Carrowgobb adagh

Clare

cashel

No significance General

2002

02E1490

Testing

Sligo

ringfort

1995

95E105

Rescue

Carrowkeel

Mayo

Multi­Phase settlement

Settlement Landscape

Significant

2002

Freelance

02E0596

Monitorin g

Carrowkeel

Galway

Field Boundaries

Agricultural

Settlement Enclosure

Uncertain

2000

North West Archaeolo gical Services

00E0726

Testing

228

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Carrowkeel

County
Mayo

EMAP_Class
Multi­Phase settlement

Category
Settlement Landscape

Environs of Significanc e
Significant

Year
2002

Compan y
Freelance

Exc. License
02E0598

Exc. Type
Rescue

Route Scheme
N59 Moylaw­ Crossmolina Road Realignment Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Athlone­ Gort Phase 2) Golf course

Carrowmore

Galway

Charcoal Pit

Industrial

Uncertain

2002

Carrowmore North

Clare

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2000

Carrowmurra gh

Roscom mon

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2002

Carrownakilly Clare Carrownalur gan 1 Mayo

crannog raised ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

Settlement Enclosure

No significance General

1998 1997

Moore Archaeolo gical and Environme ntal Services Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore North West Archaeolo gical Services Freelance Freelance

02E1127

Rescue

00E0007

Monitorin g

02E0753

Testing

Developme nt

98E0459 97E417

Testing Monitorin g

Developme nt R335 Westport­ Belclare Road Improvemen t Scheme R335 Westport­ Belclare Road Improvemen t Scheme Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Developme nt None Golf course

Carrownalur gan 1

Mayo

raised ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

General

1997

Freelance

97E414

Testing

Carrownama Donegal ddy Carrowncree vy Sligo

Souterrain

Unenclosed

General

1997

ADS

97E0120

Testing

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastical

No significance General

2002

Freelance

02E0763

Monitorin g Testing

Carrowreagh Down

Enclosed ecclesiastical site Burial Site Kiln/Cereal cultivation site Kiln/Cereal cultivation site ringfort

2002

ADS

AE/02/94

Carrowsteela Mayo gh Carton Demsen, Site 3 Carton Demsen, Site 3 Cartron Kildare

Cemetery/Buri al Agricultural

Uncertain Uncertain

1990 2001

National Museum Margaret Gowen Margaret Gowen Moore Archaeolo gical and Environme ntal Services Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore Archaeolo gical Consultan cy Ltd. Freelance 01E0377

Rescue Rescue

Kildare

Agricultural

Uncertain

2001

01E0200

Testing

Golf course

Galway

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2000

00E0789

Monitorin g

Residential Developme nt

Cartron More Roscom mon

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2002

02E0312

Testing

Residential Developme nt

Cartron, Craughwell

Galway

Early Medieval Settlement Landscape ringfort Settlement Enclosure Cemetery/Buri al

Settlement Landscape

No significance

2000

00E0324

Testing

Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Golf course

Cashel

Tipperar y Antrim

General

1997

97E0041

Testing

Castle Upton, Templepatric k Castle Upton, Templepatric k Castlearmstr ong 19, Castletown Bog, Lemanagha n Castlearmstr ong, Killaghintobe r Bog, Lemanagha n

Iron age/early medieval burial Iron age/early medieval burial Trackway

Significant

1996/1 997/19 98 2002

ADS

Monitorin g

Antrim

Cemetery/Buri al

Significant

ADS

AE/02/43

Monitorin g

Golf course

Offaly

Routeway

General

1993/1 996

Archaeolo gical Wetland Unit

96E0150

Rescue

Bord na Móna Peat Production

Offaly

Trackway

Routeway

General

1999

ADS

99E0445

Rescue

Bord na Móna Archaeologi cal Mitigation Project

229

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Castlearmstr ong, Killaghintobe r Bog, Lemanagha n Castlecrine/ Moygalla Castlecrine/ Moygalla Castlegar

County
Offaly

EMAP_Class
Trackway

Category
Routeway

Environs of Significanc e
General

Year
1998

Compan y
Archaeolo gical Wetland Unit

Exc. License
98E0464

Exc. Type
Rescue

Route Scheme
Bord na Móna Archaeologi cal Mitigation Project Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt

Clare

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Unenclosed

No significance No significance No significance

1992

ADS

Monitorin g 00E0343 Monitorin g Testing

Clare

ringfort

2000

Freelance

Galway

Souterrain

1998

Castlegar

Mayo

Ringfort & Souterrain

Settlement Enclosure

General

1998

Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore Freelance

98E0498

98E0304

Monitorin g

N17 Knock­ Claremorris Road Bypass Phase 1 N17 Knock­ Claremorris Road Bypass Phase 1 Residential Developme nt None M4 Celbridge Interchange Motorway M4 Celbridge Interchange Motorway None

Castlegar

Mayo

Ringfort & Souterrain

Settlement Enclosure

General

1999

Freelance

99E0037

Rescue

Castlelands, Mallow Castlemagn er Castletown, Celbridge

Cork

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Unenclosed Agricultural

General

2000/2 001 1972 2001

Sheila Lane UCC Valerie J Keeley

00E0830

Testing

Cork Kildare

Souterrain Kiln/Cereal cultivation site

General General

Rescue 01E0669 Rescue

Castletown, Celbridge

Kildare

Kiln/Cereal cultivation site

Agricultural

General

2001

Valerie J Keeley

01E0306

Monitorin g

Cathair Fionnúrach, Ballynaveno or

Kerry

Cashel & Souterrain

Settlement Enclosure

Significant

1994/1 995/19 96/199 7

Cathair Mor, BallyCarnlab ban Cavanapole Cecilstown

Clare

cashel

Settlement Enclosure

General

1999

Armagh Cork

ringfort Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Iron age/early medieval burial medieval ecclesiastical site Ecclesiastical Site Ecclesiastical Site Ecclesiastical Site Ecclesiastical Site Viking Urban Settlement Viking Urban Settlement

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Landscape Cemetery/Buri al

General No significance Significant

1996 2002

National Monument s and Historic Properties, Dúchas Archaeolo gical Consultan cy Ltd. ADS Eachtra

94E005

Research

99E0506

Conservat ion

None

Rescue 02E0734 Monitorin g Research

Quarry/Mine Residential Developme nt None

Chancellorsl and

Tipperar y

Charlestown

Louth

Ecclesiastic al Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin

No significance Significant

1992/1 993/19 94/199 5/1996 1998

Discovery Programm e ACS

92E0128

98E0247

Testing

Residential Developme nt None

Christchurch Cathedral, Wood Quay Christchurch Cathedral, Wood Quay Christchurch Cathedral, Wood Quay Christchurch Cathedral, Wood Quay Christchurch Place;Ross Road Christchurch Place;Ross Road;Werbur gh Street Christchurch Place;Ross Road;Werbur gh Street Christchurch Place;St. John's Lane,

Dublin

1999

Margaret Gowen Margaret Gowen ACS

99E0091

Testing

Dublin

Significant

1998

98E0606

Testing

None

Dublin

Significant

1997

Monitorin g 99E0539 Conservat ion Rescue

None

Dublin

Significant

1999

Margaret Gowen Margaret Gowen Margaret Gowen

None

Dublin

General

1992

Developme nt Developme nt

Dublin

Significant

1993

93E0128

Rescue

Dublin

Viking Urban Settlement

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin

Significant

1993

Margaret Gowen

93E0163

Testing

Developme nt

Dublin

Viking Urban Settlement

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin

Highly Significant

1972/1 973/19 74/197

National Museum

E122

Rescue

Developme nt

230

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Wood Quay

County

EMAP_Class

Category

Environs of Significanc e

Year
5/1976

Compan y

Exc. License

Exc. Type

Route Scheme

Christchurch, Waterford Christchurch, Waterford Church Bay, Rathlin Island Claomachar Fort, Scart, Gortalea Claristown 2

Waterfor d Waterfor d Antrim

Ecclesiastical Site Ecclesiastical Site Viking Burial Site ringfort

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Waterford Ecclesiastical Cemetery/Buri al Settlement Enclosure Cemetery/Buri al

No significance No significance General

1997

Margaret Gowen Margaret Gowen N I Historic Monument s Branch Eachtra

97E0459

Conservat ion Conservat ion Rescue

None

1997 1983

97E0459

None Quarry/Mine

Kerry

No significance Significant

2001

01E0439

Testing

Meath

Iron age/early medieval burial

2001

ACS

01E0039

Rescue

Clasheen

Kerry

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

General

1993

Kerry County Museum Eachtra Freelance

93E0161

Testing

Clievragh, Listowel Cloghan

Kerry Mayo

ringfort ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Landscape

No significance No significance Highly Significant

2002 2001

02E1545 01E0239

Testing Testing

Residential Developme nt M1 Gormanston ­ Monasterboi ce Motorway N22 Killarney­ Cork Road Upgrade Developme nt Residential Developme nt None

Clogher Demesne

Tyrone

Multi­Phase settlement

Cloghermore

Kerry

Cave

Unenclosed

Significant

1971/1 972/19 73/197 4/1975 /1977/ 1978/1 979/19 80 1999/2 000

Ulster Museum

Research

Cloghermore

Kerry

Metal/Iron working site

Industrial

Uncertain

1999

Kerry County Museum;A egis Archaeolo gy Aegis Archaeolo gy Eachtra

99E0431

Rescue

None

99E0130

Monitorin g

Cloghers, Tralee Cloghlucas South, 1/23/2

Kerry

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Unenclosed

No significance Significant

2000

00E0300

Testing

Cork

Unenclosed Habitation Site

1986

Margaret Gowen

Rescue

Clonabreany Churchyard, Bobsville Clonbeale More, Killaun Bog

Meath

Cemetery Site

Ecclesiastical

No significance General

1990

OPW FAS Scheme ADS 00E0242

Conservat ion Rescue

N21 Ballycarthy­ Killally Road Scheme Residential Developme nt Bord Gais Cork­Dublin Pipeline 1986 None

Dublin

Trackway

Routeway

2000

Cloncowan

Meath

Cemetery & Settlement Site

Cemetery/Buri al

Significant

2002

Margaret Gowen

02E0883

Rescue

Cloncowan

Meath

Cemetery & Settlement Site

Cemetery/Buri al

Significant

2002

Margaret Gowen

02E0194

Monitorin g

Clongawny; Greatdown; Newdown, Mullingar

Westme ath

Textile Production Site

Agricultural

General

2000

Eachtra

00E0075

Monitorin g

Clongawny; Greatdown; Newdown, Mullingar

Westme ath

Textile Production Site

Agricultural

General

2000

Eachtra

00E0076

Rescue

Bord na Móna Archaeologi cal Mitigation Project Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Ballough to Kinnegad Phase 1A) Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Ballough to Kinnegad Phase 1A) N4 Mullingar Road Realignment and Widening Scheme N4 Mullingar Road Realignment and Widening Scheme

231

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Clonhill, Curraghbrac k Clonmagad dan Clonmoney West, Site 42C

County
Westme ath Meath

EMAP_Class
ringfort

Category

Environs of Significanc e
Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure No significance No significance General

Year
2000

Compan y
ACS

Exc. License
00E0071

Exc. Type
Testing

Route Scheme
Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt N18/N19 Ballycasey­ Dromoland Road Scheme River Dredging River Dredging None

ringfort

2000

Margaret Gowen ACS

00E0058

Monitorin g Rescue

Clare

Early Medieval Settlement Landscape

Settlement Landscape

2001

01E0242

Clonmore

Armagh

Early Medieval Artefacts Early Medieval Artefacts Early Medieval Artefacts Ecclesiastical Site medieval ecclesiastical site ringfort

Miscellaneous

General

1991

Ulster Museum Ulster Museum Ulster Museum ACS AE/01/62

Clonmore

Armagh

Miscellaneous

General

2000

Clonmore

Armagh

Miscellaneous

General

2001

Clonmore, Louth Clonshire Beg Cloonagleav ragh

Louth

Ecclesiastic al Ecclesiastic al Settlement Enclosure

No significance No significance No significance

1998

98E0005

Non Excavatio n Non Excavatio n Non Excavatio n Testing

Limerick

2001

Aegis Archaeolo gy Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore North West Archaeolo gical Services Freelance

01E0801

Monitorin g Testing

Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Developme nt

Sligo

1999

99E0195

Cloonahera, Kilkishen

Clare

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2000

00E0230

Testing

Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt ReSsidential Developme nt N4 Rockingham ­Cortober Road Project N4 Rockingham ­Cortober Road Project N5 Swinford Bypass Road Developme nt Developme nt

Cloonaherna Clare

cashel

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Landscape

No significance No significance Significant

1999

99E0153

Monitorin g Monitorin g Rescue

Cloonalour, Tralee Cloongowna gh

Kerry

ringfort

2002

Roscom mon

Multi­Phase settlement

1999

Cloongowna gh

Roscom mon

Multi­Phase settlement

Settlement Landscape

Significant

1998

Aegis Archaeolo gy Mary Henry Archaeolo gical Services ACS

02E1796

99E0193

Monitorin g

Cloonlara Cloonlaur

Mayo Mayo

ringfort Undated ecclesiastical site ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastic al Settlement Enclosure

No significance No significance No significance

1992 1997

Freelance Freelance 97E0121

Testing Monitorin g Monitorin g

Cloonnaglog haum, Ruan

Clare

2001

Cloonown, Oldtown

Roscom mon

Ecclesiastical Site

Ecclesiastic al

No significance

2000

Cloonown, Oldtown

Roscom mon

Undated ecclesiastical site

Ecclesiastic al

No significance

2000

Cloonshana gh

Roscom mon

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2002

Cloontycarth Cork y Cloughergoo Cavan le Cloughorr Antrim

Mill ringfort

Agricultural Settlement Enclosure Unenclosed

General No significance General

1981 1997

North West Archaeolo gical Services Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore North West Archaeolo gical Services UCC Freelance

01E0071

00E0780

Testing

Residential Developme nt

00E0780

Testing

Residential Developme nt

02E1036

Monitorin g

Residential Developme nt Uncertain Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt None

E825 97E0421

Rescue Testing

Souterrain

1971

N I Historic Monument s Branch Archaeolo gical Projects 94E120

Rescue

Coarha Beg, Valentia Island

Kerry

Unenclosed Habitation Site

Unenclosed

Significant

1994

Research

232

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Cobbe's Hill, Mount Gamble, Miltonsfields, Swords Coldwinter

County
Dublin

EMAP_Class
Cemetery Site

Category
Cemetery/Buri al

Environs of Significanc e
Significant

Year
2002

Compan y
Margaret Gowen

Exc. License
02E0608

Exc. Type
Testing

Route Scheme
Developme nt

Dublin

Iron age/early medieval burial

Cemetery/Buri al

Significant

1999/2 000/20 01

Valerie J Keeley

99E0548

Testing/Re scue

M1 Airport­ Balbriggan Motorway Bypass Contract 2 Saggart­ Rathcoole­ Newcastle Drainage Scheme M4 Celbridge Interchange Motorway Developme nt Developme nt Residential Developme nt Bord Gais Northeaster n Pipeline Castlederm ot Water Supply Scheme Residential Developme nt None

Collegeland

Dublin

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2000

Judith Carroll

00E0316

Testing

Collinstown, Site 18

Kildare

Kiln/Cereal cultivation site

Agricultural

Uncertain

2001

Valerie J Keeley

01E1225

Rescue

Collooney

Sligo

medieval ecclesiastical site medieval ecclesiastical site Multi­Phase settlement Multi­Phase settlement raised ringfort

Ecclesiastical

Uncertain

1994

Margaret Gowen ADS

94E127

Testing

Collooney

Sligo

Ecclesiastical

Uncertain

2000

00E0383

Monitorin g Monitorin g Rescue

Colp West

Meath

Settlement Landscape Settlement Landscape Settlement Enclosure

Highly Significant Highly Significant No significance

Colp West

Meath

1999/2 000/20 01 1988

ACS

99E0472

Margaret Gowen Freelance

E462

Coltstown

Kildare

2002

02E1589

Testing

Common

Dublin

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastical

No significance Significant

1999

ACS

99E0693

Testing

Conva

Cork

Non­Circular Shaped Enclosure Ecclesiastical Site

1992

Discovery Programm e Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore CRDS 97E221

Research

Conwal

Donegal

No significance

1997

Testing

Cemetery Extension

Cookstown, Ashbourne

Meath

Undated ecclesiastical site Undated ecclesiastical site Early Medieval Settlement Landscape ringfort

Ecclesiastical

Uncertain

2002

02E1689

Testing

Cookstown, Ashbourne Coolahollog a, Site A1 Coolbanagh er

Meath

Ecclesiastical

Uncertain

2001

Margaret Gowen ACS

01E0091

Testing

N2­R125 Ballybin Road Realignment Developme nt N52 Nenagh Bypass Road Portlaoise Water Supply Improvemen t Scheme Farm Improvemen t Scheme Leixlip Water Treatment Plant Leixlip Water Treatment Plant Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Athlone­ Gort Phase 2) R693 Threecastles Road Realignment R693 Threecastles Road Realignment Developme nt

Tipperar y Laois

Settlement Landscape Settlement Enclosure

Uncertain

2000

00E0385

Rescue

No significance

1996

Valerie J Keeley

96E3 13

Testing

Coolcran

Fermana Ringfort & gh Souterrain Dublin Possible Viking Site Possible Viking Site Charcoal Pit

Settlement Enclosure Unenclosed

Significant

1983

N I Historic Monument s Branch Freelance 97E0027

Rescue

Cooldrinagh, Leixlip Cooldrinagh, Leixlip Coole Demesne

General

1997

Testing

Dublin

Unenclosed

General

1995

Freelance

95E039

Testing

Galway

Industrial

Uncertain

2002

Cooleeshalm ore

Kilkenny

Iron age/early medieval burial Iron age/early medieval burial ringfort

Cemetery/Buri al

General

2001

Moore Archaeolo gical and Environme ntal Services Uncertain

02E0495

Rescue

01E1167

Monitorin g

Cooleeshalm ore

Kilkenny

Cemetery/Buri al

General

2001

Uncertain

01E1206

Rescue

Coolgarriv

Kerry

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2000

Eachtra

00E0919

Monitorin g

233

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Coolmain

County
Cork

EMAP_Class
ringfort

Category

Environs of Significanc e
Settlement Enclosure Settlement Landscape Settlement Landscape No significance No significance No significance General No significance

Year
2002

Compan y
Freelance

Exc. License
02E1170

Exc. Type
Testing

Route Scheme
Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Developme nt Residential Developme nt

Coolnagree

Wexford

Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Early Medieval Settlement Landscape ringfort Undated ecclesiastical site Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastical

2000

Eachtra

00E0800

Testing

Coolnasoon, Carrigdrohid Coolowen Coolsraha

Cork

2001

Sheila Lane UCC Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore UCC Archaeolo gical Services Unit North West Archaeolo gical Services UCC Archaeolo gical Services Unit Freelance

01E0774

Testing

Cork Galway

1973 2001

Rescue 01E0408 Monitorin g

Coomlogan e, Millstreet

Cork

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2002

02E0416

Monitorin g

Residential Developme nt

Cootehall

Roscom mon

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2001

01E0519

Testing

Residential Developme nt Uncertain

Coraliss

Cork

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

Settlement Enclosure

General

1993

93E0136

Testing

Corbally

Mayo

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

Uncertain

2000

00E0057

Testing

N17 Knock­ Claremorris Road Bypass Phase 2 Developme nt Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt River Dredging Saggart­ Rathcoole­ Newcastle Drainage Scheme Saggart­ Rathcoole­ Newcastle Drainage Scheme River Camac Improvemen t Scheme River Camac Improvemen t Scheme River Camac Improvemen t Scheme Residential Developme nt Bord na Móna Peat Production Bord Gais Northeaster n Pipeline (Dunleer­ Mullagh

Corbally Corbally Corbally

Kildare Kildare Kerry

Multi­Phase settlement Multi­Phase settlement ringfort

Settlement/Ce metery Settlement/Ce metery Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement/Ce metery Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Routeway

Highly Significant Highly Significant No significance No significance Highly Significant No significance No significance General

2001/2 002 2000/2 002 1996

Margaret Gowen Margaret Gowen Eachtra

01E0299 00E0864 96E303

Rescue Monitorin g Monitorin g Testing

Corbally

Cork

ringfort

1999

Eachtra

99E0463

Corbally Cordal West

Kildare Kerry

Multi­Phase settlement ringfort

2002 1996

Margaret Gowen Kerry County Museum Freelance

02E1310 96E005

Rescue Monitorin g Monitorin g Non Excavatio n Monitorin g

Corderry

Louth

Ringfort & Souterrain Ford/River Crossing Metal/Iron working site

2001

01E360

Coreen Ford

Roscom mon Dublin

1989

National Museum Judith Carroll 00E0825

Corkagh Demense

Industrial

Uncertain

2000

Corkagh Demense

Dublin

Metal/Iron working site

Industrial

Uncertain

2000

Judith Carroll

00E0935

Rescue

Corkagh Demesne

Dublin

Burnt/Refuse Pit

Miscellaneous

Ecclesiastic al

Uncertain

2001

Judith Carroll

01E0912

Rescue

Corkagh Demesne

Dublin

Cemetery & Settlement Site Cemetery & Settlement Site ringfort

Settlement/Ce metery

Significant

2001

Judith Carroll

01E0911

Rescue

Corkagh Demesne

Dublin

Settlement/Ce metery

Significant

2001

Judith Carroll

01E0849

Monitorin g

Corkeeran

Monagh an Dublin

Settlement Enclosure Routeway

No significance General

1998

ACS

98E0063

Testing

Corlea 5 & 7

Trackway

1986/1 987 1992

UCD

Rescue

Cormeen

Meath

Ringfort & Souterrain

Settlement Enclosure

Significant

ADS

92E0052

Rescue

234

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME

County

EMAP_Class

Category

Environs of Significanc e

Year

Compan y

Exc. License

Exc. Type

Route Scheme
Phase 3)

Cornacully

Fermana Sweat House gh Dublin Viking Urban Settlement

Unenclosed

Significant

1988

N I Historic Monument s Branch Margaret Gowen 92E0109

Research

None

Cornmarket; Francis Street;Lamb Alley Corr;Dunaval ly Corr;Dunaval ly Corrstown, Hopefield Road, Portrush Corrstown, Hopefield Road, Portrush Coumeenool e South Courthoyle Old

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin

General

1992

Rescue

Developme nt

Armagh

Early Medieval Artefacts Early Medieval Artefacts Non­Circular Shaped Enclosure Non­Circular Shaped Enclosure Unenclosed Habitation Site medieval ecclesiastical site

Miscellaneous

General

1991

Ulster Museum Ulster Museum ACS AE/01/82

Armagh

Miscellaneous

General

1989

Derry

Settlement Enclosure

Highly Significant

2001/2 002

Non Excavatio n Non Excavatio n Testing

River Dredging River Dredging Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Developme nt Developme nt

Derry

Settlement Enclosure

Highly Significant

2002

ACS

AE/02/10 0

Rescue

Kerry Wexford

Unenclosed Ecclesiastic al

No significance No significance

2002 1997

Freelance Mary Henry Archaeolo gical Services ADS National Museum UCG

02E1609 97E0054

Testing Testing

Cregg Creggan

Sligo Roscom mon Galway

ringfort Ford/River Crossing ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Routeway

General General

1999 1989

99E0436

Testing Non Excavatio n Monitorin g Monitorin g

Developme nt River Dredging Residential Developme nt Developme nt None

Croaghill, Williamstown Croghan Church Cro­Inis

Settlement Enclosure Cemetery/Buri al Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Landscape Settlement Landscape

No significance Uncertain General

1993

93E0096

Offaly Westme ath Limerick

Cemetery Site crannog

1997 1989

Dominic Delany Cornelll University, Ithaca UCC E576

Croom East

ringfort

General

1974

Non Excavatio n Rescue

Croom Site 7

Limerick

Early Medieval Settlement Landscape

General

1999

'Cross Church of Moreen', Balally 'Cross Church of Moreen', Balally 'Cross Church of Moreen', Balally 'Cross Church of Moreen', Balally Crossmolina

Dublin

Enclosed ecclesiastical site Enclosed ecclesiastical site Enclosed ecclesiastical site Enclosed ecclesiastical site medieval ecclesiastical site medieval ecclesiastical site raised ringfort

Ecclesiastical

Significant

1990

Valerie J Keeley;Arc haeologic al Consultan cy Ltd. OPW

97E0400

Rescue

Residential Developme nt N20 Croom Bypass Road

Rescue

Bord Gais Pipeline extension M50 Southeaster n Motorway M50 Southern Cross Route Motorway M50 Southeaster n Motorway Crossmolina Sewerage Scheme Crossmolina Sewerage Scheme Farm Improvemen t Scheme Developme nt Residential Developme nt

Dublin

Ecclesiastical

Significant

1996

Valerie J Keeley

96E218

Testing

Dublin

Ecclesiastical

Significant

1990

Uncertain

Testing

Dublin

Ecclesiastical

Significant

2001

Valerie J Keeley

00E0370

Testing

Mayo

Ecclesiastic al Ecclesiastic al Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastical

No significance No significance Significant

2001

Freelance

01E0530

Rescue

Crossmolina

Mayo

2001

Freelance

01E0347

Monitorin g Rescue

Crossnacree vy Crumlin

Down

1971

N I Historic Monument s Branch Freelance 96E009

Dublin

Enclosed ecclesiastical site Enclosed ecclesiastical site

General

1996

Testing

Crumlin

Dublin

Ecclesiastical

General

2001

Judith Carroll

01E0465

Testing

235

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Crumlin

County
Dublin

EMAP_Class
Enclosed ecclesiastical site Enclosed ecclesiastical site Mill

Category
Ecclesiastical

Environs of Significanc e
General

Year
1999

Compan y
ACS

Exc. License
99E0305

Exc. Type
Rescue

Route Scheme
Residential Developme nt Developme nt Farm Improvemen t Scheme Uncertain N18/N19 Ballycasey­ Dromoland Road Scheme N18/N19 Ballycasey­ Dromoland Road Scheme E.S.B. Developme nt E.S.B. Developme nt E.S.B. Developme nt River Dredging E.S.B. Developme nt N22 Ballincollig Bypass Road Residential Developme nt Clane­ Prosperous Water Supply Scheme Prosperous Water Scheme Developme nt

Crumlin

Dublin

Ecclesiastical

General

1998

Archaeolo gical Projects OPW

98E0362

Testing

Crushyriree

Cork

Agricultural

Significant

1994

94E118

Rescue

Cuillaun Culleen, Site 29

Mayo Clare

Cashel & Souterrain ringfort Settlement Enclosure

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

No significance Uncertain

2001 2001

Freelance ACS

01E0226 01E0023

Testing Rescue

Culleen, Site 29

Clare

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

Settlement Enclosure

Uncertain

2000

Valerie J Keeley

00E0408

Testing

Cullenagh, Site 1 Cullenagh, Site 1 Cullenagh, Site 1 Culrevog;Mo y

Waterfor d Waterfor d Waterfor d Tyrone

Kiln/Cereal cultivation site Charcoal Pit

Industrial

Uncertain

2001

Sheila Lane Sheila Lane Sheila Lane IUART

01E0799

Monitorin g Rescue

Industrial

Uncertain

2001

01E0860

Kiln/Cereal cultivation site Early Medieval Artefacts Ringfort & Souterrain

Industrial

Uncertain

2001

01E0859

Rescue

Miscellaneous

General

1991

Cunghill­ Sligo Kingsmountai n Curraheen 1 Cork

Settlement Landscape

No significance

2002

Non­Circular Shaped Enclosure ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Industrial

Significant

2002

North West Archaeolo gical Services ACS

02E1431

Non Excavatio n Testing

01E1209

Rescue

Curryhills

Kildare

No significance General

1995

Freelance

95E187

Testing

Curryhills, Site 1

Kildare

Charcoal Pit

2000

Freelance

00E0064

Monitorin g

Curryhills, Site 1 Cushinstown

Kildare

Charcoal Pit

Industrial

General

1999

Freelance

99E0569

Rescue

Meath

Cemetery Site

Cemetery/Buri al

General

2000

Cushwash Rath, Cushwash

Fermana ringfort gh

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2000

Dagda's fort, Lisdane, Site 1

Limerick

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

General

2000

National Monument s and Historic Properties, Dúchas Northern Archaeolo gical Consultan cy Margaret Gowen

00E0163

Rescue

AE/00/03

Monitorin g

Developme nt

99E0643

Testing

Deanery Garden Deer Park Farms

Waterfor d Antrim

Viking Urban Settlement Raised Ringfort & Souterrain ringfort

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Waterford Settlement Enclosure

General

1998

Waterford Corporatio n N I Historic Monument s Branch N I Historic Monument s Branch Freelance

98E0447

Conservat ion Research

Limerick Main Drainage Scheme (Southern Interceptor Sewerage Pipeline) None

Highly Significant

Deerfin Lower Deerpark

Antrim

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastic al

General

1984/1 985/19 86/198 7 1975

None

Rescue

Farm Improvemen t Scheme Residential Developme nt Developme nt

Kerry

ringfort

No significance No significance

2000

00E0444

Monitorin g Testing

Delgany

Wicklow

medieval ecclesiastical site

1999

Arch­Tech

99E0231

236

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Delgany

County
Wicklow

EMAP_Class
medieval ecclesiastical site

Category

Environs of Significanc e
Ecclesiastic al No significance General

Year
2002

Compan y
Margaret Gowen Discovery Programm e Freelance

Exc. License
02E0390

Exc. Type
Testing

Route Scheme
Residential Developme nt None

Derragh, Lough Kinale Derrane

Longford crannog

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

2002

02E1071

Roscom mon

ringfort

No significance

2000

00E0279

Non Excavatio n Monitorin g

Derrane

Roscom mon

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

1999

Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore Eachtra

99E0561

Testing

Derreennam uckla Derrymore Fort, Bessbrook Derrymore Fort, Bessbrook Derrymore West

Kerry

Ringfort & Souterrain ringfort Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

Settlement Enclosure

No significance Significant

2001

01E0797

Testing

Armagh

2000

ADS

AE/00/22

Testing

Armagh

ringfort

Significant

2001

ADS

AE/01/38, 42, 69 02E0173

Rescue

Clare

cashel

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2002

Derrynaflan, Lurgoe A & B Derrynagun Bog, Lemanagha n

Tipperar y Offaly

Trackway

Routeway

General

1987

UCC Archaeolo gical Services Unit National Museum Archaeolo gical Wetland Unit

Testing

N61 Munsboroug h­Coolteige Road Realignment Phase 2 N61 Munsboroug h­Coolteige Road Realignment Phase 2 Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Uncertain

E423

Rescue

Trackway

Routeway

Significant

1996

96E151

Rescue

Devenish

Fermana Enclosed gh ecclesiastical site Fermana Enclosed gh ecclesiastical site Dublin Viking Urban Settlement

Ecclesiastical

Significant

2000/2 001 1973

University of York N I Historic Monument s Branch ADS 96E006

Non Excavatio n Rescue

Bord na Móna Peat Production Bord na Móna Archaeologi cal Mitigation Project None

Devenish

Ecclesiastical

Significant

None

Digges Lane

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin

General

1996

Rescue

Dirtane, Ballyheigue Dollas Lower, (BGE 3/67/5)

Kerry

Ringfort & Souterrain Metal/Iron working site Industrial

Settlement Enclosure

No significance Uncertain

2001

Eachtra

01E1037

Testing

Unidentified Road Developme nt Ballyheigue Sewerage Scheme Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Cappaneas ta­ Goatisland Phase 3) Developme nt Residential Developme nt M1 Dundalk Western Motorway Bypass N51 Dunmoe Road Realignment None

Limerick

2002

Margaret Gowen

02E0631

Rescue

Donaghmor e Donaghmor e Donaghmor e5

Kildare Louth

Ecclesiastical Site Undated ecclesiastical site Charcoal Pit Industrial

Ecclesiastic al Ecclesiastic al

No significance No significance General

1999 1999

Arch­Tech CRDS

99E0675 99E0063

Monitorin g Testing

Louth

2002

IAC

02E1333

Rescue

Donaghmor e, Blackcastle Demesne Donaghmor e, Blackcastle Demesne Donard Lower Donard Lower Doogarraun

Meath

Ecclesiastical Site

Ecclesiastic al

No significance

1999

ACS

99E0480

Testing

Meath

Ecclesiastical Site

Ecclesiastic al

No significance

1990/1 994

UCD

90E017

Rescue

Wicklow

Ecclesiastical Site Ecclesiastical Site ringfort

Ecclesiastic al Ecclesiastic al Settlement Enclosure

No significance No significance No significance

2000

John Channing ADS Archaeolo gical Services Unit,

00E0793

Monitorin g Testing Testing

Wicklow Galway

1997 2000

97E0378 00E0320

Residential Developme nt Developme nt Residential Developme nt

237

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME

County

EMAP_Class

Category

Environs of Significanc e

Year

Compan y
Oranmore

Exc. License

Exc. Type

Route Scheme

Doogary

Cavan

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2002

Doonlougha n, Ballyconneel y Doorath

Galway

Coastal Habitation Site

Unenclosed

Significant

1997

North West Archaeolo gical Services QUB

02E1221

Testing

Residential Developme nt None

97E0197

Research

Mayo

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2000

Doras

Tyrone

Enclosed ecclesiastical site Enclosed ecclesiastical site ringfort

Ecclesiastical

Significant

1983

Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore N I Historic Monument s Branch ADS

00E0280

Testing

Residential Developme nt

Rescue

Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt N52 Dundalk Inner Bypass Road Residential Developme nt Quarry/Mine

Doras

Tyrone

Ecclesiastical

Significant

1995

Testing

Dough

Clare

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Industrial

No significance General

1996

ACS

96E207

Testing

Dowdallshill

Louth

enclosure

1994

Valerie J Keeley ACS

94E075

Rescue

Doyles Villas, Camlough Drinnanstow n South

Antrim

ringfort

No significance Uncertain

2002

AE/02/12 0

Testing

Kildare

Metal/Iron working site

2001

Drom North

Cork

Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Burial Site Burial Site Settlement Landscape Cemetery/Buri al

Settlement Landscape

No significance Significant

2001

Dagda Archaeolo gical Projects Sheila Lane ACS

Rescue

01E1035

Monitorin g Rescue

Residential Developme nt Bord Gais Northeaster n Pipeline Developme nt Residential Developme nt Developme nt

Dromiskin

Louth

1988

E461

Dromkeen East Dromlohan

Kerry Limerick

Uncertain Cemetery/B urial No significance Significant

1985 2002

OPW Aegis Archaeolo gy UCC Archaeolo gical Services Unit Northern Archaeolo gical Consultan cy National Museum N I Historic Monument s Branch ADS 02E0780

Rescue Monitorin g Monitorin g

Dromthacker

Kerry

Early Medieval Settlement Landscape

Settlement Landscape

1997/1 998/19 99

97E0022

Drumadonne Down ll

Unenclosed Habitation Site

Unenclosed

Significant

1999

Monitorin g

Developme nt

Drumbaragh

Meath

Burial Site

Cemetery/Buri al Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Unenclosed

Uncertain

1988

Rescue

Drumbroneth

Down

ringfort

General

1979

Rescue

Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Golf course

Drumbroneth

Down

ringfort

General

1997

Testing

Drumilly Demesne, Loughgall

Armagh

Souterrain

General

1998

Drumlane 1

Monagh an

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

1998

Northern Archaeolo gical Consultan cy Freelance

Testing

98E0499

Testing

Drumlane 2

Monagh an

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

1998

Freelance

98E0500

Testing

Drummany Bog Drummany Bog

Cavan Cavan

Trackway Trackway

Routeway Routeway

General General

1998 1997

Margaret Gowen Margaret Gowen

98E0303 97E0304

Rescue Monitorin g

Castleblane y Urban Water Supply Scheme Castleblane y Urban Water Supply Scheme N3 Cavan Bypass Road N3 Cavan Bypass Road

238

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Drummond Outra

County
Monagh an

EMAP_Class
Metal/Iron working site

Category
Industrial

Environs of Significanc e
Ecclesiastic al Uncertain

Year
2000

Compan y
ACS

Exc. License
00E0108

Exc. Type
Monitorin g

Route Scheme
Carrickmacr oss Sewerage Scheme Extension Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Drumsna Sewerage Scheme None

Drumrane

Cavan

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

No significance No significance

2000

Freelance

00E0412

Testing

Drumruekill, Kilclare

Leitrim

ringfort

2002

Drumsna

Leitrim

Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Viking Urban Settlement Iron Age Royal Site Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin Miscellaneous

Settlement Landscape Settlement Landscape

No significance No significance

2002

North West Archaeolo gical Services ADS

02E1228

Monitorin g

02E1235

Monitorin g Testing

Drumsna

Leitrim

2001

Drumsna

Leitrim

Settlement Landscape

No significance

2001

Dublin Castle

Dublin

Highly Significant General

1985/1 986 1968/1 969/19 70/197 1/1972 /1973/ 1974/1 975 1992

North West Archaeolo gical Services North West Archaeolo gical Services OPW

01E0069

01E0106

Monitorin g

E296;E297 ;E298;E32 3;E324 E79

Conservat ion Research

Dun Ailline, Knockaulin, Kilcullen

Kildare

University of Pennsylva nia

None

Dun Aonghasa, Kilmurvy, Inishmore Dún Eoghanacht a, Eoghanacht, Inishmore Dunbeg Promentory Fort, Dingle Dunbell Big 5 Dunbell Big 6 Dunbin Little

Galway

Promontory Fort

Settlement Enclosure

General

Discovery Programm e Discovery Programm e

92E0102

Research

None

Galway

cashel

Settlement Enclosure

Ecclesiastic al

Significant

1995

95E0136

Research

None

Kerry

Promontory Fort ringfort ringfort Undated ecclesiastical site Souterrain

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastic al Unenclosed

Highly Significant Significant Significant No significance No significance No significance No significance No significance Highly Significant General

1977

TCD

Rescue

Coastal Erosion Quarry/Mine Quarry/Mine Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Developme nt Residential Developme nt Quarry/Mine Quarry/Mine

Kilkenny Kilkenny Louth

1990 1972 2001

ADS OPW CRDS

E571 E108 01E0556

Rescue Rescue Monitorin g Testing

Dungarvan

Waterfor d Kilkenny Monagh an Louth Tyrone

2000

Freelance

00E0775

Dúninga, Ballytarsna Dunmadigan

ringfort ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Unenclosed Settlement Landscape Settlement Enclosure

2000 1998

Valerie J Keeley Freelance

00E0155 98E0260

Testing Testing

Dunmahon Dunmisk

Souterrain Multi­Phase settlement enclosure

1995 1984/1 985/19 86 2002

ACS N I Historic Monument s Branch QUB Centre for Archaeolo gical Fieldwork QUB

95E191

Testing Rescue

Dunnyneil Islands

Down

AE/02/90

Rescue

Coastal Erosion

Dunsilly

Antrim

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastical

Significant

1974/1 975 1991

Rescue

Farm Improvemen t Scheme None

Dunurlin Church, Na Gorta Dubha Dysart

Kerry

medieval ecclesiastical site Ecclesiastical Site

No significance General

OPW

Conservat ion Research

Kilkenny

Ecclesiastical

1989/1 990

Dysart Church, Cummeen Eddrim Glebe, Mountcharle

Roscom mon Donegal

Enclosed ecclesiastical site Undated ecclesiastical site

Ecclesiastical

General

1993

University of California, Berkeley OPW

None

93E0184

Conservat ion Testing

None

Ecclesiastic al

No significance

2001

Freelance

01E0087

Cemetery Extension

239

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
s

County

EMAP_Class

Category

Environs of Significanc e

Year

Compan y

Exc. License

Exc. Type

Route Scheme

Eden Edermine

Antrim Wexford

Well medieval ecclesiastical site Souterrain Unenclosed

Ecclesiastic al Ecclesiastic al

No significance No significance General

2000 2000

ADS Eachtra

AE/00/67 00E0158

Testing Testing

Developme nt Developme nt Residential Developme nt

Eleven Ballyboes

Donegal

1999

Eleven Ballyboes

Donegal

Souterrain

Unenclosed

General

2001

Emlagh West

Kerry

Ringfort & Souterrain Ringfort & Souterrain Ringfort & Souterrain Viking Urban Settlement

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin

Significant

1997

Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore Eachtra

99E0138

Testing

01E0508

Testing

Residential Developme nt

97E0178

Monitorin g Testing

Emlagh West

Kerry

Significant

1993

Kerry County Museum Freelance

93E0080

Residential Developme nt Dingle Area Sewerage Scheme Residential Developme nt Developme nt

Emlagh West

Kerry

Significant

1999

99E0495

Monitorin g Rescue

Essex Street West;Lower Exchange Street;Copp er Alley, Temple Bar West Exchange Street;High Street Fanaghans

Dublin

Highly Significant

1996/1 997/19 98

Margaret Gowen

96E0245

Waterfor d Donegal

Viking Urban Settlement Well

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Waterford Ecclesiastic al

General

2001

Freelance

01E0515

Testing

Developme nt Residential Developme nt

No significance

2001

Fanningstow n

Limerick

Enclosed Mound

Settlement Enclosure

Significant

1997/1 999

Farrandreg

Louth

Unenclosed Habitation Site Unenclosed Habitation Site Souterrain enclosure

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Unenclosed Settlement Enclosure Unenclosed

General

2000

Moore Archaeolo gical and Environme ntal Services Valerie J Keeley;Ae gis Archaeolo gy IAC

01E0120

Testing

97E0408

Rescue

N20 Croom Bypass Road

00E0082

Rescue

Dundalk Sewerage Scheme Dundalk Sewerage Scheme Developme nt Dundalk Sewerage Scheme Listowel Regional Water Supply Scheme Stage 4 Listowel Regional Water Supply Scheme Stage 4 Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Farm Improvemen t Scheme Residential Developme nt Coastal Erosion

Farrandreg

Louth

General

2000

IAC

00E0299

Monitorin g Testing Testing

Farrandreg Farrandreg

Louth Louth

General General

1998 1999

ACS IAC

95E0109 99E0624

Farranstack

Kerry

Souterrain

No significance

2002

Eachtra

02E1660

Monitorin g

Farranstack

Kerry

Souterrain

Unenclosed

No significance

2002

Eachtra

02E1556

Testing

Farranyharpy

Sligo

Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Early Medieval Settlement Landscape enclosure Settlement Enclosure

Settlement Landscape Settlement Landscape

No significance No significance Uncertain

1996

Freelance

96E239

Testing

Farranyharpy

Sligo

1997

Freelance

97E0173

Monitorin g Rescue

Farrest

Tyrone

1981

N I Historic Monument s Branch Freelance 96E042

Faughart Lower Feall A'Mhuilinn, Inishmurray

Louth

enclosure

Settlement Enclosure Agricultural

No significance Significant

1996

Testing

Sligo

Mill

1999

University of Glasgow

99E0383

Rescue

240

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Ferganstown & Ballymackon Ferganstown & Ballymackon Ferganstown & Ballymackon Ferganstown & Ballymackon Ferganstown & Ballymackon Ferns

County
Meath

EMAP_Class
Charcoal Pit

Category
Industrial

Environs of Significanc e
Uncertain

Year
1998

Compan y
Eachtra

Exc. License
98E0602

Exc. Type
Monitorin g

Route Scheme
Navan Sewerage Augmentati on Scheme Navan Sewerage Augmentati on Scheme Navan Sewerage Augmentati on Scheme Uncertain

Meath

Charcoal Pit

Industrial

Uncertain

1999

Eachtra

99E0010

Monitorin g

Meath

Iron age/early medieval burial Iron age/early medieval burial enclosure

Cemetery/Buri al

Uncertain

1999

Eachtra

99E0011

Testing

Meath

Cemetery/Buri al Settlement Enclosure

Uncertain

1976

National Museum Eachtra 99E0178

Rescue

Meath

Significant

1999

Rescue

Wexford

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

General

1998/1 999

Ferns

Wexford

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Miscellaneous

General

2001

Mary Henry Archaeolo gical Services Freelance

98E0132

Monitorin g

Navan Sewerage Augmentati on Scheme Ferns Sewerage Scheme

Testing

'Ferrystown', Gortgole Finkiltagh

Antrim

Early Medieval Artefacts raised ringfort

General

1995

Ulster Museum N I Historic Monument s Branch Margaret Gowen 02E0668

Antrim

Settlement Enclosure Industrial

General

1973

Non Excavatio n Rescue

Residential Developme nt River Dredging Farm Improvemen t Scheme Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Cappaneas ta­ Goatisland Phase 3) R445 Limerick Northern Relief Road Phase 2 R445 Limerick Northern Relief Road Phase 2 Developme nt Developme nt

Finniterstown, Limerick (BGE 3/64/5)

Charcoal Pit

Uncertain

2002

Rescue

Fish Lane;Sir Harry's Mall, King's Island

Limerick

Viking Urban Settlement

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Limerick

General

1996

Limerick Corporatio n

96E0334

Rescue

Fish Lane;Sir Harry's Mall, King's Island

Limerick

Viking Urban Settlement

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Limerick

General

1996

Limerick Corporatio n

96E213

Testing

Fishamble Street 1, Wood Quay Fishamble Street II, Wood Quay

Dublin

Viking Urban Settlement Viking Urban Settlement

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin

Significant

1975/1 976 1974/1 975/19 76/197 7/1978 /1979 1996

National Museum National Museum

E141

Rescue

Dublin

Highly Significant

E172

Rescue

Fishamble Street;Essex Street West;Exchan ge Street Lower, Temple Bar West Flemingtown

Dublin

Viking Urban Settlement

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin

General

Margaret Gowen

96E111

Monitorin g

Developme nt

Dublin

Kiln/Cereal cultivation site

Agricultural

Uncertain

2002

Margaret Gowen

02E0296

Rescue

Fontstown Upper

Kildare

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2002

Freelance

02E0325

Testing

Fools Fort Cormeen Forenaughts Great Forgney

Meath

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Cemetery/Buri al Settlement Enclosure

No significance Significant

1999

ACS

99E0477

Monitorin g Research

Kildare

Iron age/early medieval burial Longford ringfort

1980

UCD

E208

Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Gormansto n to Ballough Phase 6) South Kildare Water Supply Scheme Residential Developme nt None

No significance

1998

IAC

98E0394

Testing

Residential Developme nt

241

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Fort Hill, Moneygurne y

County
Cork

EMAP_Class
ringfort

Category
Settlement Enclosure

Environs of Significanc e
General

Year
1999

Compan y
UCC Archaeolo gical Services Unit Sheila Lane John Channing

Exc. License
99E0374

Exc. Type
Testing

Route Scheme
Residential Developme nt

Fort Hill, Moneygurne y Fort William

Cork

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

General

2001

01E0414

Testing

Sligo

ringfort

General

1995

95E151

Rescue

Frenchgrove

Mayo

crannog

Settlement Enclosure

General

1998

Furness, Forenaghts Great Gallarus Gallarus

Kildare

medieval ecclesiastical site Ecclesiastical Site Souterrain Ecclesiastical Unenclosed

Ecclesiastic al

No significance No significance General

1997

Archaeolo gical Wetland Unit CRDS

Conservat ion

Residential Developme nt N4 Ballysadare­ Collooney Bypass Road None

97E0231

Testing

Residential Developme nt None Farm Improvemen t Scheme Residential Developme nt Developme nt Residential Developme nt

Kerry Kerry

1970 1979

OPW National Museum Freelance 02E1485

Conservat ion Rescue

Garfinny

Kerry

medieval ecclesiastical site ringfort Undated ecclesiastical site Settlement Enclosure

Ecclesiastic al

No significance General

2002

Testing

Garraneban e Garranes

Kerry Cork

1998 2001

Eachtra UCC Archaeolo gical Services Unit Aegis Archaeolo gy

98E0522 01E0366

Testing Monitorin g

Ecclesiastic al

No significance

Garraun

Limerick

Charcoal Pit

Industrial

Uncertain

2000/2 001

00E0854

Testing

Garristown Church Garristown Church Garrynadur, Lispole Garrynadur, Lispole Garryntempl e

Meath

medieval ecclesiastical site medieval ecclesiastical site cashel

Ecclesiastical

No significance No significance Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastic al No significance No significance Uncertain

2001

Freelance

01E0513

Monitorin g Rescue

N7 Annacotty­ Rossbrien Limerick Southern Ring Road Phase 1 Residential Developme nt Uncertain

Meath

Ecclesiastical

1990

OPW

Kerry

2002

Eachtra

02E1247

Testing

Kerry

Ecclesiastical Site Souterrain Unenclosed

2002

Eachtra

02E0773

Testing

Tipperar y

1981

UCC

Rescue

George's Street Upper, Wexford Gibbet Rath, The Curragh Glanbannoc Lower Glanlough South Glannahary

Wexford

Viking Urban Settlement ringfort ringfort ringfort ringfort

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Wexford Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

Uncertain

1994

Freelance

94E157

Testing

Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Bord Gais Cork­Dublin Pipeline 1981/1982 Developme nt Developme nt Dam/Reserv oir Developme nt Residential Developme nt

Kildare Cork Kerry Carlow

No significance No significance No significance No significance

1997 1996 2002 2002

Freelance Margaret Gowen Freelance UCC Archaeolo gical Services Unit OPW Sheila Lane Freelance

97E0388 96E307 02E0561 02E0352

Testing Testing Monitorin g Monitorin g

Glanturkin Glanworth

Cork Cork

ringfort medieval ecclesiastical site Enclosed ecclesiastical site ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastic al Ecclesiastical

Uncertain No significance Significant

1980 2002

E000817 02E0328

Rescue Testing

Uncertain Residential Developme nt None

Glaspatrick, Croagh Patrick Gleagormley , Kilcoan More Glebe

Mayo

1994/1 995 1986

94E0115

Research

Antrim

Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastic al

General

N I Historic Monument s Branch Eachtra 00E0491

Rescue

Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt

Wexford

medieval ecclesiastical site

No significance

2000

Testing

242

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Glebe

County
Wicklow

EMAP_Class
Ecclesiastical Site

Category

Environs of Significanc e
Ecclesiastic al Uncertain

Year
2002

Compan y
Margaret Gowen

Exc. License
02E0226

Exc. Type
Testing

Route Scheme
Wicklow Port Access and Town Relief Road Cemetery Extension Unidentified Sewerage Scheme

Glebe Glebe, Athleague

Westme ath Roscom mon

Ecclesiastical Site Undated ecclesiastical site

Ecclesiastical Ecclesiastic al

General No significance

1997 1995

Freelance Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore Freelance

97E0047 95E277

Testing Testing

Glebe, Ballaghadire en Glebe, Site 43, Tully Glebestown

Roscom mon Dublin

medieval ecclesiastical site ringfort Settlement Enclosure

Ecclesiastic al

No significance Highly Significant

1997

97E268

Testing

Residential Developme nt M50 Southeaster n Motorway Residential Developme nt None

2000/2 001/20 02 1993

Valerie J Keeley Freelance

00E0758

Rescue

Meath

medieval ecclesiastical site Unenclosed Habitation Site Unenclosed

Ecclesiastic al

No significance Uncertain

93E0055

Monitorin g Research

Glen Fahan, Mount Eagle, Dingle Peninsula Glenbaun Glenbeg Glenfinn­ Glenmore Road

Kerry

1989

Freelance

Mayo Cork Donegal

enclosure ringfort Charcoal Pit

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Industrial

General No significance Uncertain

1992/1 993 2002 1998

OPW Sheila Lane ADS 02E1280 98E0232

Research Testing Testing

None Quarry/Mine R252 Glenfinn­ Glenmore Road Improvemen t Scheme Quarry/Mine

Glennamea de Gneevebeg

Limerick

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Settlement/Ce metery

No significance Highly Significant

1992

Westme ath

Cemetery & Settlement Site

2002

Limerick Corporatio n Margaret Gowen

Testing

02E0479

Rescue

Gneevebeg

Westme ath

Cemetery & Settlement Site

Settlement/Ce metery

Highly Significant

2002

Margaret Gowen

02E0262

Monitorin g

Gormanston Beach

Meath

Boat

Miscellaneous

Uncertain

2002

Archaeolo gical Diving Company Eachtra

02E0467;0 2E0948

Monitorin g

Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Kinnegad­ Athlone Phase 1B) Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Kinnegad­ Athlone Phase 1B) Bord Gais Irish Subsea Interconnec tor Pipeline Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Westport Main Drainage and Waste Water Disposal Scheme N22 Bealagrellag h­Gortatlea Road Realignment N22 Bealagrellag h­Gortatlea Road Realignment N22 Bealagrellag h­Gortatlea Road Realignment N22 Bealagrellag h­Gortatlea Road Realignment

Gortamullen, Kenmare Gortaneare

Kerry

Well

Ecclesiastic al Settlement Enclosure Agricultural

No significance No significance Uncertain

2002

02E0521;0 2E1262 99E0015

Monitorin g Monitorin g Rescue

Kerry

ringfort

1999

Freelance

Gortaroe, Site II

Mayo

Kiln/Cereal cultivation site

2001

Freelance

01E1042

Gortatlea

Kerry

Non­Circular Shaped Enclosure

Settlement Enclosure

General

2001

Aegis Archaeolo gy

01E0175

Rescue

Gortatlea

Kerry

Non­Circular Shaped Enclosure

Settlement Enclosure

General

2001

Aegis Archaeolo gy

01E0939

Rescue

Gortatlea

Kerry

Non­Circular Shaped Enclosure

Settlement Enclosure

General

2001

Gortatlea

Kerry

Non­Circular Shaped Enclosure

Settlement Enclosure

General

2000

UCC Archaeolo gical Services Unit Aegis Archaeolo gy

01E1101

Rescue

00E0779

Rescue

243

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Gortatlea

County
Kerry

EMAP_Class
Non­Circular Shaped Enclosure

Category
Settlement Enclosure

Environs of Significanc e
General

Year
2000

Compan y
Aegis Archaeolo gy

Exc. License
00E0660

Exc. Type
Monitorin g

Route Scheme
N22 Bealagrellag h­Gortatlea Road Realignment Quarry/Mine Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt E.S.B.­N.I.E. Cathaleen’s Fall­ Enniskillen­ Gortawee 110kV Line Residential Developme nt

Gortineddan Gortmore

Fermana cashel gh Clare ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

No significance No significance

2001 2000

John Channing North West Archaeolo gical Services Sheila Lane North West Archaeolo gical Services Arch­Tech

AE/01/75 00E0436

Monitorin g Testing

Gortnagross Church Gortnaleck

Cork

Undated ecclesiastical site ringfort

Ecclesiastic al Settlement Enclosure

No significance No significance

2002

02E0732

Testing

Cavan

2002

02E1768

Testing

Gortoorlan & Snugboroug h

Cavan

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

1998

98E0592

Monitorin g

Gowlane South

Cork

Ringfort & Souterrain

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2001

Gracedieu

Dublin

Cemetery Site

Cemetery/Buri al

Highly Significant

1999

UCC Archaeolo gical Services Unit Margaret Gowen

01E0778

Monitorin g

99E0395

Monitorin g

Gracedieu

Dublin

Cemetery Site

Cemetery/Buri al

Highly Significant

1999

Margaret Gowen

99E0217

Rescue

Gracedieu

Dublin

Cemetery Site

Cemetery/Buri al Settlement Enclosure Unenclosed Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Unenclosed

Highly Significant Significant

1988

Margaret Gowen National Museum Freelance Eachtra

E464;E440

Rescue

Bord Gais Ballough­ Kilshane Pipeline Bord Gais Ballough­ Kilshane Pipeline Bord Gais Northeaster n Pipeline Farm Improvemen t Scheme Golf course Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Developme nt Developme nt Developme nt Developme nt Residential Developme nt None

Gragan West

Clare

Enclosed Mound Souterrain ringfort

1988

E458

Rescue

Graigue Graiguefrah ane Grallagh

Galway Tipperar y Roscom mon Wexford

General No significance No significance Uncertain

1990 2002

Rescue 02E0565 Monitorin g Testing

ringfort

1998

Freelance

98E0523

Grange

Midden

1996

Freelance

96E116

Testing

Grange East

Sligo

Ringfort & Souterrain Ringfort & Souterrain Ringfort & Souterrain Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Ecclesiastical Site Coastal Habitation Site Coastal Habitation Site raised ringfort Settlement Landscape Settlement Landscape Settlement Landscape Settlement Landscape Ecclesiastical

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

No significance No significance No significance Significant

2001

Freelance

01E0787

Testing

Grange East

Sligo

2001

Freelance

01E0786

Testing

Grange East

Sligo

2001

Freelance

01E0788

Testing

Grange Industrial Park Grange Industrial Park Grange Industrial Park Grange Industrial Park Grange of Mallusk Grange West

Dublin

1997

ADS

97E0116

Testing

Dublin

Significant

1999

IAC

98E0572

Monitorin g Testing

Dublin

Significant

2000

Margaret Gowen ADS

00E0263

Dublin

Significant

1996

96E273

Testing

Antrim

General

1995

ADS

Conservat ion Research

Sligo

Unenclosed

General

1998

Grange West Gransha

Sligo Down

Unenclosed Settlement Enclosure

General Highly Significant

1998 1972/1 982

University of Stockholm Freelance N I Historic Monument s Branch

98E0381

Testing Rescue

Developme nt Quarry/Mine

244

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Greatheath

County
Laois

EMAP_Class
Cemetery Site

Category
Ecclesiastical

Environs of Significanc e
No significance Settlement Enclosure No significance General

Year
2000/2 001/20 02 2001

Compan y
Discovery Programm e Eachtra

Exc. License

Exc. Type
Testing

Route Scheme
Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt N9 Kilcullen Link Motorway Residential Developme nt M4 Kinnegad­ Enfield­ Kilcock Motorway Scheme Contract 1 M4 Kinnegad­ Enfield­ Kilcock Motorway Scheme Contract 1 Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Developme nt Developme nt Residential Developme nt Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt

Greenfield

Cork

ringfort

01E0898

Testing

Greenhills

Kildare

Greyabbey

Kildare

Iron age/early medieval burial ringfort

Cemetery/Buri al Settlement Enclosure Industrial

1988/1 989 1993

Valerie J Keeley Uncertain 93E0107

Testing

No significance General

Testing

Griffinstown, 3

Westme ath

Metal/Iron working site

2002

ACS

02E1144

Rescue

Griffinstown, Site 1

Westme ath

Undated ecclesiastical site

Ecclesiastical

Uncertain

2002

ACS

02E0105

Testing

Haggardsto wn Haggardsto wn Haggardsto wn Haggardsto wn Haggardsto wn Haggardsto wn Haggardsto wn Hanover Street;South Main Street, South Island Hapsboroug h, Ballinea Hardwood 3

Louth

Kiln/Cereal cultivation site Kiln/Cereal cultivation site enclosure Metal/Iron working site Ringfort & Souterrain Ringfort & Souterrain Ringfort & Souterrain Viking Urban Settlement

Agricultural

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

Uncertain

1999

CRDS

99E0683

Testing

Louth

Agricultural

Uncertain

1999

ADS

98E0440

Testing

Louth Louth Louth

Settlement Enclosure Industrial Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Cork

Significant General General

2001 2002 1995

IAC IAC ADS

01E0015 02E0549 95E126

Testing Testing Testing

Louth Louth

General General

1999 1994

CRDS Freelance

99E0683 94E197

Monitorin g Testing

Cork

Significant

1996

Westme ath Meath

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Industrial

No significance General

2000

UCC Archaeolo gical Services Unit ACS

96E128

Rescue

00E0096

Testing

Metal/Iron working site

2002

ACS

02E1141

Rescue

Hardwood, 2

Meath

Charcoal Pit

Industrial

General

2002

ACS

02E1140

Rescue

Harristown

Meath

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Settlement/Ce metery Settlement Enclosure

No significance Significant

2001

CRDS

01E0760

Testing

Harristown

Louth

Hartley

Leitrim

Cemetery & Settlement Site ringfort

1994

ACS

Rescue

No significance

2002

Haynestown, Dunleer

Louth

Multi­Phase settlement

Settlement Landscape

Significant

1992

North West Archaeolo gical Services Valerie J Keeley

02E0483

Testing

Residential Developme nt M4 Kinnegad­ Enfield­ Kilcock Motorway Scheme Contract 1 M4 Kinnegad­ Enfield­ Kilcock Motorway Scheme Contract 1 E.S.B. Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Unidentified Road Developme nt Unidentified Road Developme nt Developme nt

Testing

Haynestown, Dunleer

Louth

Multi­Phase settlement

Settlement Landscape

Significant

1993

Valerie J Keeley

93E0098

Rescue

High Street, Wood Quay

Dublin

Viking Urban Settlement

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Cork

Highly Significant

1970/1 971/19 72

National Museum

E71

Rescue

245

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
High Street;Peter Street Hillhead, Magheralav e

County
Waterfor d Antrim

EMAP_Class
Viking Urban Settlement ringfort

Category
Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Waterford

Environs of Significanc e
Significant

Year
1987/1 988/19 90 2000

Compan y
Waterford Corporatio n Northern Archaeolo gical Consultan cy ADS

Exc. License
E406

Exc. Type
Rescue

Route Scheme
Developme nt Developme nt

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

AE/00/16

Monitorin g

Holy Trinity Church, Carlingford Holy Trinity Church, Carlingford Holy Trinity Church, Carlingford Holy Trinity Church, Rathkeale Holycross

Louth

medieval ecclesiastical site medieval ecclesiastical site medieval ecclesiastical site medieval ecclesiastical site Ecclesiastical Site

Ecclesiastical

No significance No significance

1999

99E0686

Monitorin g Conservat ion

Developme nt None

Louth

Ecclesiastical

1992

Louth

Ecclesiastical

No significance Ecclesiastic al No significance No significance

1999

Carlingfor d Lough Heritage Trust ADS

98E0161

Monitorin g Monitorin g Monitorin g

Carlingford Drainage Scheme Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt

Limerick

2001

Aegis Archaeolo gy Mary Henry Archaeolo gical Services Margaret Gowen Mary Henry Archaeolo gical Services Mary Henry Archaeolo gical Services University of California, Berkeley ADS N I Historic Monument s Branch N I Historic Monument s Branch ADS

01E1066

Tipperar y

Ecclesiastical

2002

02E1559

Holycross Holycross

Tipperar y Tipperar y

Ecclesiastical Site Ecclesiastical Site

Ecclesiastical Ecclesiastical

No significance No significance

2000 2001

00E0634 01E0393

Monitorin g Testing

Developme nt Residential Developme nt

Holycross

Tipperar y

Ecclesiastical Site

Ecclesiastical

No significance

2001

01E0168

Testing

Residential Developme nt

Illaunlougha n

Kerry

Ecclesiastical Site

Ecclesiastical

Significant

Inch Inch

Down Down

enclosure Ecclesiastical Site Ecclesiastical Site Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Undated ecclesiastical site

Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastical

General General

1992/1 993/19 94/199 5 1997/1 998 1983

92E0087

Research

None

Rescue Rescue

Developme nt Cemetery Extension Cemetery Extension Developme nt Developme nt N11 Kilmacanog ue­Glen of the Downs Road Scheme None

Inch

Down

Ecclesiastical

General

1993

Rescue

Inch;Ballyren an 1 Inch;Ballyren an 1 Inchanappa South

Down

Settlement Landscape Settlement Landscape Ecclesiastic al

Highly Significant Highly Significant Uncertain

1999

Rescue

Down

1997

ADS

Rescue

Wicklow

2001

ADS

01E0653

Testing

Inchmacneri n, Church Island, Lough Key

Roscom mon

Ecclesiastical Site

Ecclesiastical

Significant

2000/2 002

Inchycullane

Kerry

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastic al

No significance No significance

2002

National Monument s and Historic Properties, Dúchas Sheila Lane ADS

00E0483

Conservat ion

02E0184

Testing

Inishargy

Down

medieval ecclesiastical site crannog Settlement Enclosure Unenclosed

2001

AE/01/84

Monitorin g

Island MacHugh, Baronscourt Islandbridge;l nchicore North

Tyrone

Significant

1985/1 986 1988/1 999

QUB

Research

Residential Developme nt Telecommu nications Developme nt None

Dublin

Possible Viking Site

General

OPW

Monitorin g

Jamestown Well, Poppintree Park,

Dublin

Well

Ecclesiastic al

No significance

1999

Margaret Gowen

99E0469

Testing

N4 Con Colbert Road Improvemen t North Fringe Sewerage Scheme

246

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Poppintree

County

EMAP_Class

Category

Environs of Significanc e

Year

Compan y

Exc. License

Exc. Type

Route Scheme

Jerpoint West, Thomastown

Kilkenny

Cistercian Abbey

Ecclesiastical

No significance

2002

Jerpoint West, Thomastown Jerpoint West, Thomastown Jerpoint West, Thomastown

Kilkenny

Cistercian Abbey

Ecclesiastical

No significance

2002

National Monument s and Historic Properties, Dúchas Valerie J Keeley

02E1870

Monitorin g

Developme nt

02E1246

Monitorin g

Kilkenny

Cistercian Abbey Cistercian Abbey

Ecclesiastical

No significance No significance

1998

Freelance

98E0554

Testing

Kilkenny

Ecclesiastical

2001

Johnstown 1 (Site A)

Meath

Multi­Phase settlement

Settlement Landscape

Highly Significant

2002

National Monument s and Historic Properties, Dúchas ACS

01E0510

Monitorin g

Unidentified Road Developme nt Residential Developme nt Developme nt

02E0100

Testing

Johnstown 1 (Site A)

Meath

Multi­Phase settlement

Settlement Landscape

Highly Significant

2002

ACS

02E0462

Rescue

Johnstown South

Wicklow

Metal/Iron working site

Industrial

Significant

1996/1 997

Jordanstown (BGE 6/12/1)

Dublin

Kiln/Cereal cultivation site

Agricultural

Uncertain

2002

Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore Margaret Gowen

96E0156

Rescue

M4 Kinnegad­ Enfield­ Kilcock Motorway Scheme Contract 2 M4 Kinnegad­ Enfield­ Kilcock Motorway Scheme Contract 2 N11 Arklow Town Bypass Road

02E0684

Rescue

Jordanstown (BGE 6/12/1)

Dublin

Kiln/Cereal cultivation site

Agricultural

Uncertain

2002

Margaret Gowen

02E0122

Monitorin g

Jury's Hotel, Christchurch Place, Wood Quay Jury's Hotel, Christchurch Place, Wood Quay Keadew Lower

Dublin

Viking Urban Settlement

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin

Significant

1992

Margaret Gowen

92E0030

Rescue

Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Gormansto n to Ballough Phase 6) Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Gormansto n to Ballough Phase 6) Developme nt

Dublin

Viking Urban Settlement

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin

Significant

1992

Margaret Gowen

Monitorin g

Developme nt

Donegal

Kiln/Cereal cultivation site

Agricultural

Uncertain

1999

Keadew Lower

Donegal

Kiln/Cereal cultivation site

Agricultural

Uncertain

1999

Moore Archaeolo gical and Environme ntal Services IAC

99E0167

Monitorin g

N15 Clar­ Barnesmore Road Realignment

99E0379

Rescue

N15 Clar­ Barnesmore Road Realignment Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt River Dredging Developme nt Residential Developme

Keeloges, Galbally

Limerick

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2000

Keeloguesbe g Kellysgrove, River Suck Keyser Street;High Street Kilbane

Galway

Ecclesiastical Site Ford/River Crossing Viking Urban Settlement Metal/Iron working site

Ecclesiastical

Significant

2001

North West Archaeolo gical Services Eachtra

00E0237

Monitorin g

01E0361

Testing

Galway

Routeway

General

1991

National Museum Waterford Corporatio n Aegis Archaeolo

E611

Waterfor d Limerick

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Waterford Industrial Settlement Landscape

General

1992

Non Excavatio n Testing

Uncertain

2002

02E1710

Rescue

247

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME

County

EMAP_Class

Category

Environs of Significanc e

Year

Compan y
gy

Exc. License

Exc. Type

Route Scheme
nt

Kilbane

Limerick

Metal/Iron working site

Industrial

Settlement Landscape

Uncertain

2002

Aegis Archaeolo gy Aegis Archaeolo gy Aegis Archaeolo gy ACS

02E1541

Monitorin g

Kilbane

Limerick

Metal/Iron working site Metal/Iron working site ringfort

Industrial

Settlement Landscape Settlement Landscape Settlement Enclosure

Uncertain

2002

02E1772

Rescue

Kilbane

Limerick

Industrial

Uncertain

2002

02E1615

Monitorin g Testing

Kilbarron

Donegal

No significance General

1999

99E0544

Kilbreckan, (BGE 3/18/5)

Clare

Charcoal Pit

Industrial

2002

Margaret Gowen

02E1060

Rescue

Kilbree Lower

Mayo

Bullaun Stone

Miscellaneous

Ecclesiastic al

General

1996

Freelance

96E0333

Testing

Kilbrenan Church, Gweesadan Kilcarn

Louth

Undated ecclesiastical site Souterrain Unenclosed

Ecclesiastic al

No significance

1996

Freelance

96E229

Testing

Meath

General

2000

Neil O'Flanaga n Margaret Gowen Margaret Gowen ADS

00E0020

Rescue

Kilcarn, Athlumney Kilcarn, Athlumney Kilcarn, Drumreagh Kilcashel

Meath

Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Early Medieval Settlement Landscape medieval ecclesiastical site cashel

Settlement Landscape Settlement Landscape Ecclesiastic al Settlement Enclosure

General

1997

97E322

Testing

N7 Castletroy Distributor Road Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Cappaneas ta­ Goatisland Phase 3) Westport Water Supply Scheme­ Cloonkeen Extension Unidentified Road Developme nt Mid Meath Water Supply Scheme Developme nt Developme nt Residential Developme nt None

Meath

General

1999

98E0596

Rescue

Down

No significance General

2000

AE/00/61

Testing

Mayo

1999

Kilcolman

Tipperar y Cork

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastic al Ecclesiastic al Ecclesiastic al Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastic al Ecclesiastic al Unenclosed

No significance No significance No significance No significance No significance No significance No significance No significance No significance Significant

2002

Archaeolo gical Consultan cy Ltd. Freelance

99E0531

Conservat ion

02E0035

Monitorin g Testing

Kilcolman

Ecclesiastical Site Ecclesiastical Site Ecclesiastical Site ringfort

2001

Sheila Lane ADS

01E0725

Kilcoole

Wicklow

2002

02E1372

Monitorin g Monitorin g Monitorin g Monitorin g Testing

Kilcoole

Wicklow

1998

ADS

98E0244

Kilcooleyabb ey Kilcooly

Tipperar y Meath

2000

Freelance

00E0561

Undated ecclesiastical site Undated ecclesiastical site Souterrain

1999

Margaret Gowen Eachtra

99E0607

Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Bord Gais Navan­Trim Pipeline Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt None

Kilcummin More Kilcurly

Kerry

2001

01E0244

Louth

2002

Freelance

02E0308

Monitorin g Testing

Kildorrery

Cork

Undated ecclesiastical site Cashel & Souterrain Settlement Enclosure

Ecclesiastic al Ecclesiastic al

2002

Sheila Lane UCC

02E1416

Kildreenagh, Loher

Kerry

Kildreenagh, Loher Kilgowan

Kerry

Cashel & Souterrain Iron age/early medieval burial

Settlement Enclosure Cemetery/Buri al

Ecclesiastic al

Significant

1982/1 983/19 84/198 5 1999

E840

Research

Eachtra

99E0136

Testing

Kildare

Significant

1987

Valerie J Keeley

Rescue

Residential Developme nt Quarry/Mine

248

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Kilkea church Kilkea church Kilkea church Kilkenny Castle Kill Kill St Lawrence

County
Kildare

EMAP_Class
medieval ecclesiastical site medieval ecclesiastical site medieval ecclesiastical site Unenclosed Habitation Site Souterrain Enclosed ecclesiastical site medieval ecclesiastical site

Category

Environs of Significanc e
Ecclesiastic al Ecclesiastic al Ecclesiastic al No significance No significance No significance General General Significant

Year
1997

Compan y
OPW

Exc. License
97E0443

Exc. Type
Testing

Route Scheme
Developme nt Bord Gais Pipeline extension Developme nt None None R708 Waterford Airport Road Realignment Residential Developme nt None

Kildare

2000

Margaret Gowen OPW

00E0111

Testing

Kildare

1993/1 995 1991/1 992 1987 2002

93E0061

Testing

Kilkenny Kerry Waterfor d

Unenclosed Unenclosed Ecclesiastical

OPW National Museum ACS

E627 J000123 02E1448

Conservat ion Rescue Testing

Kill, Dunfanaghy Killadeas Church, Rockfield Killaderry

Donegal

Ecclesiastic al Ecclesiastical

No significance No significance No significance Uncertain

1994

Freelance

94E026

Testing

Fermana Ecclesiastical gh Site Offaly ringfort

1997

Settlement Enclosure Agricultural

1994

Fermanag h County Museum OPW

Research

94E038

Testing

Killagh More

Galway

Kiln/Cereal cultivation site

2002

Killalee Church, Fossa Killallon Church, Boherard Killanully Killaveenoge East Killavillig, Castlemagn er

Kerry

medieval ecclesiastical site medieval ecclesiastical site Ringfort & Souterrain Undated ecclesiastical site Undated ecclesiastical site

Ecclesiastical

No significance No significance Significant Settlement Landscape No significance No significance

2000

Moore Archaeolo gical and Environme ntal Services Eachtra

02E0981

Rescue

00E0304

Testing

Residential Developme nt Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Athlone­ Gort Phase 2) N72 Fossa­ Ballymallis Road Cemetery Extension Uncertain Developme nt Developme nt

Meath

Ecclesiastical

1993

Freelance

93E0027

Testing

Cork Cork

Settlement Enclosure

1992 2001

Uncertain Sheila Lane UCC Archaeolo gical Services Unit Archaeolo gical Consultan cy Ltd. UCC 01E0440

Uncertain Monitorin g Testing

Cork

Ecclesiastical

1991

Killeely More

Galway

Undated ecclesiastical site Ecclesiastical Site Ecclesiastical

Ecclesiastic al

No significance

2000

00E0542

Testing

Developme nt

Killeen Cormac, Colbinstown Killeenagarrif f

Kildare

Uncertain

1981

Uncertain

Limerick

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

1997/1 998/20 01 2000

Aegis Archaeolo gy Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore Freelance

97E0350;9 7R0030

Monitorin g

Killeenhugh

Galway

Ringfort & Souterrain

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

00E0904

Testing

Bord Gais Cork­Dublin Pipeline 1981/1982 Ballymacke ogh­Mulkear Drainage Scheme Residential Developme nt

Killefree Westme Church, ath Castlepollard Killegar Killelton Oratory, Killelton Killemly, Cahir Wicklow Kerry

Undated ecclesiastical site Ecclesiastical Site Enclosed ecclesiastical site Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Ecclesiastical

Ecclesiastic al Ecclesiastic al

No significance No significance Significant

1998

98E0347

Testing

Residential Developme nt Quarry/Mine None

1991 1987/1 988 1999

Freelance OPW

Monitorin g Conservat ion 99E0047 Testing

Tipperar y

Settlement Landscape

Uncertain

Killererin Galway Church, Carrownama nagh Killerr, Offaly Ballintober

medieval ecclesiastical site ringfort

Ecclesiastical

No significance

1989

Mary Henry Archaeolo gical Services OPW

N24 Cahir Eastern Relief Road

Conservat ion

None

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2002

North West Archaeolo gical Services

02E1824

Testing

Residential Developme nt

249

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME

County

EMAP_Class
Non­Circular Shaped Enclosure

Category
Settlement Enclosure

Environs of Significanc e
Highly Significant

Year
2002

Compan y
IAC

Exc. License
02E0135

Exc. Type
Testing

Route Scheme
M4 Kinnegad­ Enfield­ Kilcock Motorway Scheme Contract 3 M4 Kinnegad­ Enfield­ Kilcock Motorway Scheme Contract 3 M4 Kinnegad­ Enfield­ Kilcock Motorway Scheme Contract 3 M4 Kinnegad­ Enfield­ Kilcock Motorway Scheme Contract 3 M4 Kinnegad­ Enfield­ Kilcock Motorway Scheme Contract 3 M4 Kinnegad­ Enfield­ Kilcock Motorway Scheme Contract 3 M4 Kinnegad­ Enfield­ Kilcock Motorway Scheme Contract 3 M4 Kinnegad­ Enfield­ Kilcock Motorway Scheme Contract 3 Developme nt Mourne Conduit Replaceme nt Scheme (Aquarius Project) Mourne Conduit Replaceme nt Scheme (Aquarius Project) Quarry/Mine Quarry/Mine

Killickaweeny Kildare Site AE23

Killickaweeny Kildare Site AE23

Non­Circular Shaped Enclosure

Settlement Enclosure

Highly Significant

2002

IAC

02E1002

Rescue

Killickaweeny Kildare Site AE23

Non­Circular Shaped Enclosure

Settlement Enclosure

Highly Significant

2002

IAC

02E0141

Testing

Killickaweeny Kildare , Sites 23/17/18/AE2 5

Metal/Iron working site

Industrial

Significant

2002

IAC

02E0999

Testing

Killickaweeny Kildare , Sites 23/17/18/AE2 5

Metal/Iron working site

Industrial

Significant

2002

IAC

02E1535

Rescue

Killickaweeny Kildare , Sites 23/17/18/AE2 5

Metal/Iron working site

Industrial

Significant

2002

IAC

02E0995

Rescue

Killickaweeny Kildare , Sites 23/17/18/AE2 5

Metal/Iron working site

Industrial

Significant

2002

IAC

02E0137

Testing

Killickaweeny Kildare , Sites 23/17/18/AE2 5

Metal/Iron working site

Industrial

Significant

2002

IAC

02E0994

Rescue

Killiney Killinure

Dublin Down

Ecclesiastical Site Metal/Iron working site Industrial

Ecclesiastic al

No significance Uncertain

1995 2001

Margaret Gowen ADS

95E153 AE/01/71

Testing Rescue

Killinure

Down

Metal/Iron working site

Industrial

Uncertain

1999

ADS

Monitorin g

Killoran 15 Killoran 16 Lisheen Mine Developmen t Killoran 3 Killoran Bog, Derryville 54 & 56 Killorane Killoughane Church Killoughter church

Tipperar y Tipperar y

Charcoal Pit Burnt/Refuse Pit

Industrial Miscellaneous

Uncertain General

1998 1998

Margaret Gowen Margaret Gowen

97E0372 98E0066

Rescue Rescue

Tipperar y Tipperar y Kerry Kerry

Field Boundaries Trackway

Agricultural Routeway

General Significant

1997 1997

Margaret Gowen Margaret Gowen Eachtra Freelance

97E036 96E0202

Rescue Rescue

Quarry/Mine Quarry/Mine

ringfort medieval ecclesiastical site Ecclesiastical Site

Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastic al Ecclesiastic al

No significance No significance No significance

2002 1998

02E0269 98E0309

Monitorin g Testing

Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt

Wicklow

2000

IAC

00E0490

Testing

250

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Killoughter church

County
Wicklow

EMAP_Class
Ecclesiastical Site

Category

Environs of Significanc e
Ecclesiastic al No significance

Year
2000

Compan y
Margaret Gowen

Exc. License
00E0690

Exc. Type
Testing

Route Scheme
Bord Gais Hollybrook­ Wicklow Pipeline Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt N18/N19 Ballycasey­ Dromoland Road Scheme N18/N19 Ballycasey­ Dromoland Road Scheme Residential Developme nt

Killoughter church Killucan

Wicklow

Ecclesiastical Site ringfort

Ecclesiastic al Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

No significance No significance No significance General

2000

Freelance

00E0575

Monitorin g Testing

Westme ath Westme ath Clare

2000

ACS

00E0681

Killucan

ringfort

2001

ACS

01E1022

Testing

Killulla, AR27

enclosure

2001

ACS

01E0022

Rescue

Killulla, AR27

Clare

enclosure

Settlement Enclosure

General

2000

Valerie J Keeley

00E0345

Testing

Killult, Falcarragh

Donegal

Undated ecclesiastical site

Ecclesiastic al

No significance

2001

Killult, Falcarragh

Donegal

Undated ecclesiastical site

Ecclesiastic al

No significance

2001

Killurin

Wexford

medieval ecclesiastical site raised ringfort

Ecclesiastical

No significance General

1998

Moore Archaeolo gical and Environme ntal Services Moore Archaeolo gical and Environme ntal Services ADS

01E0059

Monitorin g

01E0754

Monitorin g

E.S.B. Developme nt

98E0422

Testing

Cemetery Extension Developme nt

Killybegs Road

Antrim

Settlement Enclosure

1998

Killycanavan Lower Killygreagh

Tyrone

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Landscape Settlement Enclosure Agricultural

Uncertain

1980

Northern Archaeolo gical Consultan cy N I Historic Monument s Branch N I Historic Monument s Branch N I Historic Monument s Branch N I Historic Monument s Branch ACS 00E0443

Testing

Uncertain

Uncertain

Fermana ringfort gh Antrim Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Ringfort & Souterrain Kiln/Cereal cultivation site

General

1983

Testing

Uncertain

Killylane

Significant

1982

Non Excavatio n Rescue

None

Killyliss

Tyrone

Significant

1982

Farm Improvemen t Scheme N11 Kilmacanog ue­Glen of the Downs Road Scheme M4 Celbridge Interchange Motorway M4 Celbridge Interchange Motorway M4 Celbridge Interchange Motorway Residential Developme nt Developme nt

Kilmacanog e South

Wicklow

Uncertain

2000

Monitorin g

Kilmacredoc k Upper

Kildare

Kiln/Cereal cultivation site

Agricultural

Uncertain

2001

Valerie J Keeley

01E0547

Rescue

Kilmacredoc k Upper, Site 1 Kilmacredoc k Upper, Site 5 Kilmashogue

Kildare

Charcoal Pit

Industrial

Uncertain

2001

Valerie J Keeley

01E0306

Rescue

Kildare

Metal/Iron working site

Industrial

Uncertain

2001

Valerie J Keeley

01E0306

Rescue

Dublin

Early Medieval Artefacts Undated ecclesiastical site Ecclesiastical

Miscellaneo us

No significance Uncertain

2002

Uncertain

02E1313

Testing

Kilmokea Church

Wexford

2002

Kilmoney

Cork

Ringfort & Souterrain Enclosed ecclesiastical site Ecclesiastical

Settlement Enclosure

No significance General

2002

Stafford McLoughli n Archaeolo gy Sheila Lane University of Glasgow

02E0071

Testing

02E0823

Monitorin g Research

Kilmore

Cork

1997

97E0255

Residential Developme nt None

251

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Kilmore, Tully

County
Roscom mon Limerick

EMAP_Class
ringfort

Category

Environs of Significanc e
Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastic al No significance No significance No significance

Year
1996

Compan y
Freelance

Exc. License
96E190

Exc. Type
Monitorin g Testing

Route Scheme
Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt

Kilmoylan church, Old Abbey Kilmurry

medieval ecclesiastical site medieval ecclesiastical site Ecclesiastical

1999

Eachtra

99E0667

Laois

1998

Kilmurry

Limerick

Undated ecclesiastical site

Ecclesiastic al

No significance

2002

National Monument s and Historic Properties, Dúchas Aegis Archaeolo gy

98E0466

Monitorin g

01E1069

Monitorin g

Kilmurry North 2

Wicklow

Fulacht Fiadh

Miscellaneous

General

2001

ACS

01E1134

Rescue

Kilmurry North 2

Wicklow

Fulacht Fiadh

Miscellaneous

General

2001

ACS

00E0443

Monitorin g

Kilnamonagh , Abbeytown Kilrainy Kilrainy Kilrathmurry Kilrathmurry Kilrodane

Galway

Enclosed ecclesiastical site Kiln/Cereal cultivation site Kiln/Cereal cultivation site Metal/Iron working site Metal/Iron working site Undated ecclesiastical site Metal/Iron working site

Ecclesiastical

General

1989

OPW FAS Scheme Arch­Tech Arch­Tech Arch­Tech Arch­Tech Eachtra 02E0450 02E0404 02E0513 02E0433 99E0124

Conservat ion Rescue Monitorin g Rescue Monitorin g Testing

Clareville­ Newcastle Water Supply Scheme N11 Kilmacanog ue­Glen of the Downs Road Scheme N11 Kilmacanog ue­Glen of the Downs Road Scheme None

Kildare Kildare Kildare Kildare Limerick

Industrial Industrial Industrial Industrial Ecclesiastic al Industrial

Uncertain Uncertain Uncertain Uncertain No significance Uncertain

2002 2002 2002 2002 1999

Quarry/Mine Quarry/Mine Quarry/Mine Quarry/Mine Residential Developme nt N8 Glanmire­ Watergrasshi ll Road Scheme Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt E.S.B. Developme nt Bord Gais Ballough­ Kilshane Pipeline Bord Gais Northeaster n Pipeline Developme nt Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Cappaneas ta­ Goatisland Phase 3) Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Cappaneas ta­ Goatisland Phase 3) Farm Improvemen t Scheme

Kilrussane

Cork

2001

Sheila Lane

01E0701

Rescue

Kilsallagh

Longford ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastic al

No significance No significance

1998

ACS

98E0449

Testing

Kilscoran

Wexford

Well

2001

Kilseily

Clare

Early Medieval Artefacts Multi­Phase settlement Settlement Landscape

Miscellaneo us

No significance Highly Significant

2001

Kilshane

Dublin

1999

South Eastern Archaeolo gy Aegis Archaeolo gy Margaret Gowen

01E0734

Testing

01E0348

Monitorin g Monitorin g

99E0220

Kilshane

Dublin

Multi­Phase settlement Undated ecclesiastical site Metal/Iron working site

Settlement Landscape Ecclesiastic al Industrial

Highly Significant No significance Uncertain

1988

Margaret Gowen Freelance

E467

Rescue

Kiltallaght

Louth

2001

01E0362

Monitorin g Rescue

Kiltenan South

Limerick

2002

Margaret Gowen

02E0574

Kiltenan South, (BGE 3/62/1)

Limerick

Kiln/Cereal cultivation site

Agricultural

Uncertain

2002

Margaret Gowen

02E0666

Rescue

Kiltierney (Archdall Deerpark)

Fermana ringfort gh

Settlement Enclosure

General

1975

N I Historic Monument s Branch

Testing

252

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Kiltimagh

County
Mayo

EMAP_Class
ringfort

Category

Environs of Significanc e
Settlement Enclosure No significance

Year
2002

Compan y
Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore Freelance

Exc. License

Exc. Type
Testing

Route Scheme
Residential Developme nt

Kiltimagh Town

Mayo

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2002

02E0558

Testing

Residential Developme nt

Kiltimagh Town Kiltimagh Town Kilwarden, (BGE 1a/47/1)

Mayo

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Industrial

No significance No significance Uncertain

2002

02E0796

Testing

Mayo Meath

ringfort Metal/Iron working site

1997 2002

Freelance Margaret Gowen

97E0434 02E0868

Testing Rescue

Residential Developme nt Developme nt Bord Gais Pipeline to the West (Ballough to Kinnegad Phase 1A) Residential Developme nt

Kincullia

Galway

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2002

King John's Castle, King's Island

Limerick

Viking Urban Settlement

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Limerick

Highly Significant

King John's Castle, King's Island King's Island, John's Ward B, Site 8

Limerick

Viking Urban Settlement Viking Urban Settlement

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Limerick Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Limerick

Highly Significant General

1993/1 994/19 95/199 6/1997 /1998 1990

Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore Limerick Corporatio n

02E0461

Testing

93E0082

Research

Developme nt

Limerick Corporatio n Limerick Corporatio n

E534

Conservat ion Rescue

None

Limerick

1990

Kingstown

Dublin

Charcoal Pit

Industrial

Uncertain

2000

Valerie J Keeley Margaret Gowen

00E0256

Rescue

R445 Limerick Northern Relief Road Phase 1 M50 Southeaster n Motorway Developme nt

Kinlay House, Fishamble Street;Copp er Alley;Lord Edward Street, Wood Quay Kinnegad 2

Dublin

Viking Urban Settlement

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Dublin

Significant

1994

94E102

Monitorin g

Westme ath

Metal/Iron working site

Industrial

General

2002

ACS

02E0926

Rescue

Kinnegad 2

Westme ath

Metal/Iron working site

Industrial

General

2002

ACS

02E0108

Testing

Knappagh More Knock

Mayo

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastic al Unenclosed Settlement Landscape

No significance No significance No significance No significance

2001

Freelance

01E0155

Testing

Meath

Undated ecclesiastical site Souterrain Early Medieval Settlement Landscape

2000

ACS

00E0528

Testing

M4 Kinnegad­ Enfield­ Kilcock Motorway Scheme Contract 1 M4 Kinnegad­ Enfield­ Kilcock Motorway Scheme Contract 1 Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt R334 Cross­ Neale Road Tuam Regional Water Supply Scheme Stage 2 Residential Developme nt N7 Nenagh Bypass Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt

Knock North Knockacarrig en;Pollaturk

Mayo Galway

1999 1995

Freelance Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore Eachtra

99E0440 95E36

Testing Monitorin g

Knockagarra ne East Knockalton Upper Knockanare

Cork

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

Uncertain

1997

Testing

Tipperar y Cork

ringfort ringfort

Uncertain No significance No significance

1997 2001/2 002 1996

ADS Sheila Lane Freelance

97E320 02E1219

Testing Testing

Knockanean

Clare

cashel

Testing

253

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Knockaville

County
Westme ath Kildare Mayo

EMAP_Class
ringfort

Category

Environs of Significanc e
Settlement Enclosure No significance No significance Settlement Enclosure No significance

Year
2002

Compan y
Valerie J Keeley Valerie J Keeley Freelance

Exc. License
02E1511

Exc. Type
Monitorin g Rescue

Route Scheme
Residential Developme nt Quarry/Mine Westport Water Supply Scheme­ Cloonkeen Extension Cemetery Extension Developme nt Landfill Landfill N2 Ardee­ Rathory Road Realignment N2 Ardee­ Rathory Road Realignment Quarry/Mine Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Uncertain

Knockbounc e Knockbrack

ringfort enclosure

Settlement Enclosure

1988 1996/1 997

96E337

Testing

Knockcomm on Knockfield, Castledermo t knockharley knockharley Knocklore

Meath

medieval ecclesiastical site ringfort

Ecclesiastical

No significance Settlement Enclosure No significance No significance No significance Uncertain

1998

ACS

98E0023

Testing

Kildare

2002

Freelance

02E0454

Testing

Meath Meath Louth

Well Well Iron age/early medieval burial Iron age/early medieval burial

Ecclesiastical Ecclesiastical Cemetery/Buri al

1999 1999 1998

Valerie J Keeley Margaret Gowen Valerie J Keeley

97E190 99E0059 98E0126

Testing Testing Rescue

Knocklore

Louth

Cemetery/Buri al

Uncertain

1996

Knockmant Knocknacarr agh Cross, Salthill Knocknagap ple, Conna Knocknahur

Westme ath Galway

Souterrain Mill

Unenclosed Agricultural

Ecclesiastic al

General Significant

1976 1994

Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore National Museum UCG

96E162

Testing

Rescue 94E068 Rescue

Cork

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

No significance No significance

2002

Freelance

02E1771

Testing

Sligo

Ringfort & Souterrain

2002

Knockroe

Tipperar y Kerry

Undated ecclesiastical site Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Multi­Phase settlement Settlement Landscape

Ecclesiastic al Settlement Landscape Settlement Enclosure

No significance No significance Highly Significant

1995

North West Archaeolo gical Services Freelance

02E0801

Monitorin g

95E184

Testing

Knoppoge

2002

Eachtra

02E1737

Monitorin g Research

Residential Developme nt None

Knowth

Meath

Knowth, Site M

Meath

Cemetery & Settlement Site

Settlement Enclosure

Highly Significant

1970/1 971/19 72/197 4/1975 /1976/ 1977/1 978/19 79/198 0/1981 /1982/ 1983/1 984/19 86/198 7/1988 /1989/ 1990/1 991/19 92/199 3/1994 /1995/ 1998/1 999/20 00 2002

UCD

E70

Knoxspark

Sligo

Multi­Phase settlement

Settlement Landscape

Highly Significant

1994

National Monument s and Historic Properties, Dúchas Uncertain

02E0726

Research

None

94E060

Rescue

Knoxspark Lackabaun

Sligo Kerry

Multi­Phase settlement enclosure

Settlement Landscape Settlement Enclosure

Highly Significant Uncertain

1996 2001

John Channing Eachtra

96E123 01E0757

Testing Testing

N4 Ballysadare­ Collooney Bypass Road None Residential Developme nt

254

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Lackagh

County
Tyrone

EMAP_Class
Enclosed ecclesiastical site

Category
Ecclesiastical

Environs of Significanc e
Uncertain

Year
2000

Compan y
Environme nt & Heritage Service, Belfast Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore Judith Carroll Freelance

Exc. License

Exc. Type
Testing

Route Scheme
Residential Developme nt

Lackan

Galway

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

1996

96E019

Monitorin g

Dam/Reserv oir

Lackan, Multyfarnha m Lackannashi nnagh Lacken

Westme ath Clare

Ringfort & Souterrain Well

Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastic al Ecclesiastic al Ecclesiastical

General

1999/2 001 2001

99E0036

Monitorin g Monitorin g Monitorin g Rescue

No significance No significance Highly Significant

01E0081

Waterfor d Tipperar y

Undated ecclesiastical site Enclosed ecclesiastical site Viking Urban Settlement Viking Urban Settlement Viking Urban Settlement Well

2002

Freelance

02E0904

Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Farm Improvemen t Scheme Developme nt Developme nt Developme nt Developme nt N72 Killarney­ Killorglin Road Improvemen t Coastal Erosion Residential Developme nt

Lackenavorn a, Killederdadru m Lady Lane

1984

OPW

Waterfor d Waterfor d Waterfor d Cork

Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Waterford Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Waterford Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Waterford Ecclesiastic al Settlement Enclosure

General

2000/2 001/20 02 1982/1 983 1987

Waterford Corporatio n OPW

00E0276

Monitorin g Rescue

Lady Lane

Significant

E260

Lady Lane;Bakeho use Lane Lady's Well, Lady's Well Hill Lahard

Significant

Waterford Corporatio n Cork Corporatio n Kerry County Museum

E422

Rescue

No significance General

2000

00E0641

Testing

Kerry

ringfort

1994

94E166

Testing

Lambay Island Laragh

Dublin Galway

Burial Site ringfort

Cemetery/Buri al Settlement Enclosure

Uncertain No significance

1991 2001

National Museum Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore OPW Valerie J Keeley University of Glasgow Freelance

J00092 01E1053

Rescue Testing

Latoon South, Area 3

Clare

Kiln/Cereal cultivation site

Agricultural

Uncertain

1998/1 999

98E0332

Testing

Laughansto wn Laughansto wn Leachta Phadraig, Inishmurray Leamnaguila

Dublin Dublin

Early Medieval Artefacts Kiln/Cereal cultivation site Pilgrimage Station ringfort

Miscellaneous Agricultural

General Significant

1982 2000/2 001/20 02 1999

Rescue 00E0283 Rescue

N18/N19 Ballycasey­ Dromoland Road Scheme None M50 Southeaster n Motorway Coastal Erosion Residential Developme nt Uncertain Residential Developme nt

Sligo

Ecclesiastical

General

99E0382

Rescue

Kerry

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastical Ecclesiastic al

No significance General General

1995

95E147

Rescue

Lecarrow Legarhill

Sligo Armagh

ringfort Ecclesiastical Site

1989 2000

Valerie J Keeley Northern Archaeolo gical Consultan cy N I Historic Monument s Branch N I Historic Monument s Branch Margaret Gowen

E000919 AE/00/14

Testing Rescue

Legarhill

Armagh

Ecclesiastical Site Ecclesiastical Site Charcoal Pit

Ecclesiastical

Ecclesiastic al Ecclesiastic al

General

1983

Testing

Uncertain

Legarhill

Armagh

Ecclesiastical

General

1989

Monitorin g 99E0434 Monitorin g

Developme nt Bord Gais Ballyvass to Athy Pipeline Bord Gais Ballyvass to Athy Pipeline Residential Developme

Leinster Lodge

Kildare

Industrial

Uncertain

1999/2 000

Leinster Lodge

Kildare

Charcoal Pit

Industrial

Uncertain

1999

Margaret Gowen

99E0474

Rescue

Leiter, Bailieboroug

Cavan

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

1999

ACS

99E0635

Monitorin g

255

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
h Lemanagha n Lemoneigh

County

EMAP_Class

Category

Environs of Significanc e

Year

Compan y

Exc. License

Exc. Type

Route Scheme
nt

Offaly

Ecclesiastical Site raised ringfort

Ecclesiastic al Settlement Enclosure Settlement Landscape

No significance No significance General

2002

Freelance

02E1437

Monitorin g Testing

Louth

2000

ACS

00E0808

Leyland Road Industrial Estate, Site B Lifford, Gort Road, Ennis Liscahane

Antrim

Early Medieval Settlement Landscape ringfort

2001

ADS

AE/01/65

Monitorin g

Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Developme nt

Clare

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

No significance Significant

2000

Eachtra

00E0893

Testing

Cork

Ringfort & Souterrain

Lisdermot, Corhill Bog

Offaly

Trackway

Routeway

Significant

1981/1 982/19 83/198 4 2000

UCC

Rescue

Residential Developme nt None

ADS

00E0461

Rescue

Lisdermot, Corhill Bog

Offaly

Trackway

Routeway

Significant

2000

ADS

00E0441

Rescue

Lisdermot, Corhill Bog

Offaly

Trackway

Routeway

Significant

2000

ADS

00E0399

Rescue

Lisdermot, Corhill Bog

Offaly

Trackway

Routeway

Significant

2000

ADS

00E0333

Rescue

Lisdermot, Corhill Bog

Offaly

Trackway

Routeway

Significant

2000

ADS

00E0463

Rescue

Lisdoo, Castle Balfour Demense, Lisnaskea Lisdrumchor Upper Lisdrumskea Lisduggan North 1 & 2 Lisduggan North 3 Lisgall

Fermana ringfort gh

Settlement Enclosure

Significant

1977

N I Historic Monument s Branch

Rescue

Bord na Móna Archaeologi cal Mitigation Project Bord na Móna Archaeologi cal Mitigation Project Bord na Móna Archaeologi cal Mitigation Project Bord na Móna Archaeologi cal Mitigation Project Bord na Móna Archaeologi cal Mitigation Project Residential Developme nt

Armagh

raised ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastic al Settlement Landscape Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

General

1971

N I Historic Monument s Branch ACS UCC 98E0294

Rescue

Farm Improvemen t Scheme Golf course Quarry/Mine

Cavan Cork

ringfort Early Medieval Settlement Landscape ringfort ringfort

No significance Significant

1998 1972

Monitorin g Rescue

Cork Monagh an Kerry

General No significance No significance

1973 1999

UCC Valerie J Keeley UCC Archaeolo gical Services Unit Eachtra 99E0270

Rescue Testing

Quarry/Mine Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt

Lisgortnacah eragh, Carraig, Reenconnell Lisgortnarah, Cloghane Lisheen, Ballymore Lower, Laurencetow n Lisheens

ringfort

2001

01E0122

Testing

Kerry

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Cemetery/Buri al

No significance Uncertain

2001

01E1117

Testing

Galway

Cemetery Site

2001

Cork

Souterrain

Unenclosed

No significance No significance

2001

Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore ACS

01E0780

Testing

Residential Developme nt Developme nt

01E0443

Monitorin g Monitorin g

Lisket

Clare

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

1999

North West Archaeolo gical Services

99E0694

N22 Ballincollig Bypass Road Residential Developme nt

256

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Lislackagh Lislackagh ringfort Lislea

County
Mayo

EMAP_Class
ringfort

Category
Settlement Enclosure

Environs of Significanc e
Significant

Year
1992

Compan y
Freelance

Exc. License
92E0152

Exc. Type
Rescue

Route Scheme
N5 Swinford Bypass Road Residential Developme nt None

Cavan

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Landscape

No significance Highly Significant

1999

Freelance

99E0166

Testing

Lisleagh I

Cork

Multi­Phase settlement

Lisleagh II

Cork

Ringfort & Souterrain

Settlement Enclosure

Significant

Lislear, Baronscourt Lismeen

Tyrone Cavan

ringfort ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

General No significance

1981/1 982/19 83/198 4 1989/1 990/19 91/199 2/1993 1987 1994

UCC

E218

Research

UCC

E488

Research

None

QUB Freelance 94E052

Research Monitorin g

None Ballyjamesd uff Regional Scheme Water Plant Developme nt Residential Developme nt Developme nt None Residential Developme nt

Lismeen Lismerraun

Cavan Sligo

ringfort ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

No significance No significance

1999 2002

Arch­Tech North West Archaeolo gical Services N I Historic Monument s Branch UCC UCC Archaeolo gical Services Unit UCC

99E0277 02E1217

Monitorin g Monitorin g

Lismurphy

Derry

raised ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

General

1973

Rescue

Lisnacahera gh, Garranes Lisnagrave, Monaparson

Cork Cork

ringfort ringfort

Significant No significance

1990/1 991 2002

E629 02E0387

Research Testing

'Lisnagun', Darrary Lisnakill, Butlerstown Lisnatubbrid, Ballypatrick Lisnavin, Gortnahorna Lisnenan

Cork

Ringfort & Souterrain medieval ecclesiastical site ringfort ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastic al Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Ecclesiastic al

Significant

Waterfor d Tipperar y Galway

No significance No significance No significance No significance

1987/1 988/19 89 1998

Conservat ion 98E0048 Monitorin g Monitorin g Testing

None

Freelance

Residential Developme nt Uncertain Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt

1995 2001

Freelance Dominic Delany Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore Moore Archaeolo gical and Environme ntal Services ACS

95E156 01E0088

Donegal

Well

2001/2 002

01E0287

Monitorin g

Lisnenan

Donegal

Well

Ecclesiastic al

No significance

2001

01E0233

Monitorin g

Residential Developme nt

Lissaraw

Monagh an Kerry

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

No significance No significance No significance

1999

99E0736

Testing

'Lissaroe', Shanakeal Lissavane East

ringfort

1992

Freelance

Testing

Kerry

ringfort

2001

Lissavarra

Limerick

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

No significance No significance No significance

2000

UCC Archaeolo gical Services Unit ACS

01E1030

Monitorin g

Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt

00E0546

Monitorin g Testing

Lisseeghan

Leitrim

ringfort

1994

Valerie J Keeley North West Archaeolo gical Services ADS Eachtra

94E171

Residential Developme nt N4 Drumsna­ Jamestown Bypass Road Residential Developme nt Uncertain Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt

Lisserlough

Sligo

ringfort

2001

01E0418

Testing

Lissue Listellick South, Tralee Listellick South, Tralee

Antrim Kerry

Burnt/Refuse Pit ringfort

Miscellaneous

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure

General No significance No significance

2000 2001

AE/00/52 01E0829

Monitorin g Testing

Kerry

ringfort

2002

Eachtra

02E1444

Testing

257

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Little Patrick Street;Barron strand Street Little Patrick Street;Barron strand Street Logavinshire

County
Waterfor d Waterfor d Limerick

EMAP_Class
Viking Urban Settlement Viking Urban Settlement Charcoal Pit

Category
Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Waterford Viking/Hiberno ­Norse Waterford Industrial

Environs of Significanc e
General

Year
1992

Compan y
Waterford Corporatio n Waterford Corporatio n Margaret Gowen

Exc. License
92E0210

Exc. Type
Testing

Route Scheme
Developme nt Developme nt Limerick Main Drainage Scheme (Northern Lower Interceptor Sewerage Pipeline) Developme nt Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Farm Improvemen t Scheme None

General

1993

92E0210

Rescue

Uncertain

1998

98E0252

Monitorin g

Loreto Abbey, Rathfarnham Lota More

Dublin

Well

Ecclesiastic al Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Settlement Enclosure Unenclosed

No significance No significance No significance General

2002

Cork

ringfort

1998

Lotteragh Lower Lough Eskragh Lough na Trosk Cave, Lemnalary Mountain Lough na Trosk, Lemnalary Mt. Loughane East

Limerick

raised ringfort

2000

Archaeolo gical Projects Cork Corporatio n Eachtra

02E1473

Monitorin g Monitorin g Testing

98M0022

Tyrone

crannog

1973

N I Historic Monument s Branch UCC

Rescue

Antrim

Cave

Uncertain

1981

Research

Antrim

enclosure

Settlement Enclosure

Uncertain

1982

UCC

Research

None

Cork

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

1997

Loughane East Loughboy Loughboy Loughnafina

Cork

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Settlement Landscape Settlement Landscape Settlement Enclosure

No significance Significant Significant General

2002

UCC Archaeolo gical Services Unit Sheila Lane Valerie J Keeley Valerie J Keeley Mary Henry Archaeolo gical Services Eachtra

97E0016

Testing

Residential Developme nt

02E1250

Testing

Kilkenny Kilkenny Tipperar y

Multi­Phase settlement Multi­Phase settlement raised ringfort

1998 1998 1998

98E0219 98E0282 98E0414

Testing Monitorin g Rescue

Residential Developme nt Developme nt Developme nt Cashel Sewerage Scheme

Loumanagh South, Boherbue Lucan & Pettycannon Mac Nissi, St Saviour's Church, Connor Macetown

Cork

ringfort

Settlement Enclosure Unenclosed

No significance No significance General

2002

02E1249

Testing

Dublin

Souterrain

2000

CRDS

00E0717

Monitorin g Rescue

Antrim

Enclosed ecclesiastical site Iron age/early medieval burial Ringfort

Ecclesiastical

1986

N I Historic Monument s Branch National Museum Mary Henry Archaeolo gical Services National Monument s and Historic Properties, Dúchas Moore Archaeolo gical and Environme ntal Services Northern Archaeolo gical Consultan cy J000018

Residential Developme nt Residential Developme nt Developme nt

Meath

Cemetery/Buri al Settlement Enclosure

Significant

1992

Rescue

Developme nt Sligo Inner Relief Road

Magheraboy

Sligo

General

2001

01E1063

Testing

Magheracar

Donegal

Ecclesiastical Site

Ecclesiastic al

No significance

1999

99E0082

Testing

Residential Developme nt

Magheraintu re, Ballymacarry

Donegal

cashel

Settlement Enclosure

No significance

2001/2 002

01E0447

Monitorin g

Residential Developme nt

Magherame nagh

Derry

Souterrain

Unenclosed

General

2000

Testing

Developme nt

258

EARLY MEDIEVAL ARCHAEOLOGY PROJECT

Appendix 1: Excavated Sites and Associated Licenses

NAME
Magherame nagh

County
Derry

EMAP_Class
Early Medieval Settlement Landscape

Category
Settlement Landscape

Environs of Significanc e
Significant

Year
1998

Compan y
Northern Archaeolo gical Consultan cy Northern Archaeolo gical Consultan cy CRDS

Exc. License

Exc. Type
Testing

Route Scheme
Developme nt

Magherame nagh

Derry

Early Medieval Settlement Landscape

Settlement Landscape

Significant

1999

Rescue

Developme nt

Magheross, Carrickmacr oss Magheross, Carrickmacr oss Magheross, Carrickmacr oss Main Street, Carrowhubb ock South, Enniscrone Marble Arch Reservoir, Killesher Margaretsto wn Markstown, Cullybackey

Monagh an Monagh an Monagh an Sligo

Ecclesiastical Site Ecclesiastical Site Ecclesiastical Site ringfort

Ecclesiastic al Ecclesiastic al Ecclesiastic al Settlement Enclosure

No significance No significance No significance No significance

2000

00E0129

Testing

Developme nt Bord Gais Pipeline extension Bord Gais Pipeline extension Residential Developme nt

2000

Margaret Gowen Margaret Gowen Archaeolo gical Services Unit, Oranmore ACS 00E0563

Monitorin g Monitorin g Testing

2000

2000

00E0740

Fermana Undated gh ecclesiastical site Dublin Burial Site Cemetery/Buri al Unenclosed

Settlement Landscape

No significance Uncertain

1999

Monitorin g Rescue

Dam/Reserv oir Residential Developme nt Developme nt

1991

OPW

Antrim

Unenclosed Habitation Site

Significant

2001

Marlinstown

Westme ath Westme ath Westme ath Louth Louth

Marlinstown

Marlinstown

Marshes Upper Marshes Upper Marshes Upper Marshes Upper

Cemetery & Settlement Site Cemetery & Settlement Site Cemetery & Settlement Site Unenclosed Habitation Site Unenclosed Habitation Site Souterrain Unenclosed Habitation Site

Settlement/Ce metery Settlement/Ce metery Settlement/Ce metery Unenclosed Unenclosed

Highly Significant Highly Significant Highly Significant Significant Significant

1990/1 991 2000

Northern Archaeolo gical Consultan cy Valerie J Keeley ACS

AE/01/17

Rescue

E560

Rescue

N4 Mullingar Bypass Road Residential Developme nt Developme nt Developme nt N52 Dundalk Inner Bypass Road Developme nt Developme nt

00E0186

Monitorin g Monitorin g Rescue

2001

ACS

01E0827

1984/1 985 1981

OPW OPW E000211

Rescue

Louth Louth

Unenclosed Unenclosed

General Significant

1991 1985

Freelance University of Bermingha m Archaeolo gical Field Unit ACS

Testing Rescue

Marshes Upper Marshes Upper Marshes Upper Marshes Upper Marshes Upper Marshes Upper Marshes Upper Marshes Upper Maulnagrou gh Mayfield, a.k.a. Rocket's Castle, BW/20/1

Louth

Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Souterrain Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Early Medieval Settlement Landscape Souterrain Souterrain ringfort

Settlement Landscape Unenclosed Settlement Landscape Settlement Landscape Settlement Landscape Settlement Landscape Unenclosed Unenclosed Settlement Enclosure Cemetery/Buri al

Highly Significant Uncertain Highly Significant Highly Significant Highly Significant Highly Significant General General No significance General

2002

02E0201

Rescue

Developme nt Uncertain Developme nt Developme nt Developme nt Developme nt Developme nt Developme nt Residential Developme nt Bord Gais Cork­Dublin Pipeline 1986

Louth Louth

1982 2002

UCC ACS

E000233 02E0200

Rescue Rescue

Louth

2002

ACS

02E0234

Rescue

Louth

2002

ACS

02E0233

Rescue

Louth

2002

ACS

02E0008

Monitorin g Monitorin g Rescue Monitorin g Rescue

Louth Louth Cork

1999 1982 2001

ACS Margaret Gowen Sheila Lane Margaret Gowen

99E0112

01E0713

Waterfor d

<