An early medieval settlemt/cemetery at Carrowkeel, Co. Glaway

INTRODUCTION

This paper describes the archaeological excavation of amulti-period enclosure and cemetery site atCarrowkeel, Co. Galway (NGR 159326/223949;Ministerial Direction No. A024/E2046) (Fig. 1). Thesite was on the brow of an east–west ridge surroundedby a landscape of lower, gently undulating hills,approximately 7km from Loughrea, at a height of 45mOD. It was recorded in the Sites and MonumentsRecord (GA097-066) as an enclosure and featuredclearly on the first edition OS map (sheet 72), but hadsince been subject to extensive ploughing and was nolonger visible as an upstanding earthwork. The site wasless than 1km from an extensive early medievalsettlement complex (GA097-068), also in the townlandof Carrowkeel, and 2km from medieval churchyards atKiltullagh to the north-west (GA097-114) andTooloobaun to the south (GA097-148).

The main enclosure at Carrowkeel comprised alarge ditch and remnants of a substantial internal bank,probably constructed in the seventh or eighth century(Pl. 2). Originally the enclosure probably encircled thebrow of the hill, but approximately one third of it andan unknown portion of the cemetery remained beyondthe limit of the excavation. A small number of post-holes were identified in the north-west of theenclosure, but these could not be unequivocallyassigned to the main phase of enclosure and probablypre-dated its construction. In the absence of clearstructural evidence, general indicators of settlementincluded a large animal bone assemblage, pits, twocooking pits, and iron slag recovered from ditchfeatures. Near the centre of the enclosure, but in its

eastern half, was a cemetery that had probably beenused from the seventh to the fifteenth century. Fourcemetery phases have been identified on the basis ofgrave-cut truncation and radiocarbon dating, althougha general continuity was observed. One hundred andthirty-two skeletons were excavated, but as theincidence of burials increased towards the edge of theexcavation it is safe to assume that the cemeteryoriginally extended beyond the limit of excavation,possibly extending over the brow of the hill.

METHODOLOGY

The site was excavated in advance of construction ofthe N6 Galway to Ballinasloe road scheme betweenSeptember 2005 and January 2006, on behalf of theNational Roads Authority and Galway CountyCouncil. A geophysical survey prior to test-trenchingidentified a series of anomalies interpreted as potentialditches, and a large open area of topsoil was removedto assess their extent and character. The topsoil wasremoved mechanically under supervision using atoothless ditching bucket. A total area of 3,500m2 wasinvestigated, with topsoil deposits removed to the depthof the glacial till to ascertain the extent of theenclosure, except in the cemetery area, where alldeposits below vegetation layer were removed by hand.

Three main phases were recognised: an earlysequence of ditches and discrete cut features possibly ofprehistoric date (phase 1), the main enclosure andassociated cemetery (phase 2), and a phase of linearcultivation features outside the enclosure (phase 3).

The Journal of Irish Archaeology Volume XVII, 2008 57–83

An early medieval settlement/cemetery atCarrowkeel, Co. Galway

Brendon Wilkins and Susan Lalonde

A multi-period settlement/cemetery was excavated at Carrowkeel, Co. Galway. The main phase of the site was asubstantial early medieval enclosure ditch with a cemetery area contained in its eastern half. The enclosure and associatedfeatures were divided into three phases based on their uses and location. The human remains assemblage is made upof 132 individuals, although the cemetery could originally have been much larger, extending beyond the limit ofexcavation. It was separated into four phases, from the seventh to the fifteenth century AD, and contained adisproportionate percentage of non-adults, with predominantly infant and foetal remains in the later phases. Non-metric traits may indicate a degree of relatedness in the assemblage, consistent with the possibility that Carrowkeel wasfounded by an extended family splitting from a larger kin group. The Carrowkeel cemetery appears to represent thespatial segregation of non-adults within a normal cemetery population and is not thought to be a cillín, which arecommon in the later and post-medieval period, especially in the west of Ireland. The segregation at Carrowkeel maybe a precursor to this Irish tradition, however.

58 Brendon Wilkins and Susan Lalonde

Fig. 1 —Location of excavation area and overall site plan, with detail of cemetery area.

NATURAL DEPOSITS

The site was on a limestone ridge, covered with alimestone-derived till consisting of calcareous silts,stony sand and clays with a highly mixed and variablecharacter. A number of areas of dense silty clay and claywere uncovered during topsoil-stripping. These wereexamined and determined to be naturally occurring,constituting variations in the glacial till. The orangecolouration of the silty clays and clays suggests thatthese deposits contain more iron or have iron in a morehighly oxidised state than the majority of thesurrounding till. The topsoil in the cemetery area wasextremely shallow. Some loss of topsoil in this area canbe accounted for by soil creep and plough wash, butthe depth also reflects the fact that these graves wereoriginally topsoil burials placed just below thecontemporary ground surface. This also accounts forwhy many burials have no identifiable grave-cut, andwhy in other cases only a slight cut into the subsoil wasobserved. The absence of grave-cuts is explicable interms of ongoing processes of reworking in the topsoil,particularly through earthworm activity.

PHASE 1: FEATURES PRE-DATING THEMAIN ENCLOSURE AND CEMETERY

Though much less substantial than the main enclosureditch, an earlier phase was represented by a sequence ofditches. A number of discrete pits, one of whichproduced three pieces of undiagnostic but possibly lateNeolithic struck chert (Ballin 2007), were alsoidentified in the northern part of the enclosure andcould be associated with this phase. These artefactscould also have been residual finds indicative of ageneral ‘background noise’ of prehistoric activity, andalthough the sequence of phase 1 ditches weretruncated by the main enclosure, this could haveoccurred soon after silting, in which case both phasesmay be early medieval.

Phase 1 ditches The early ditches 1015, 1020 and 1022 were located tothe north of the main enclosure ditch. Ditches 1015 and1020 may represent an enclosure ditch forming anentrance onto the brow of the hill, and ditch 1022 waspossibly associated with this phase of enclosure, forminga secondary barrier to the entrance ditches. The full

An early medieval settlement/cemetery at Carrowkeel, Co. Galway 59

Pl. 1—Working shot ofditch 1023, lookingnorth.

extent of ditch 1015 was uncertain within the interiorof the main phase 2 enclosure (1023) but was clearlytruncated by it. It may originally have extended furthersouth, but if so this section may have been shallowerowing to outcropping of bedrock at the top of the hilland may subsequently have been adversely affected bythe relatively deep plough truncation in this area. It was1.95m wide, 0.67m deep and 11m long. Two primarydeposits of red-brown silt were noted at the base (1016and 1018). The main fill was a mid- to dark brown silt(1017) with inclusions of approximately 35% smallstones. A small gully (1535), 1.2m long, 0.6m wide and0.32m deep, was associated with this ditch. It was filledby orange-brown silty clay (1536) of moderatecompaction.

In conjunction with 1015 just described, ditch 1020formed a possible entrance onto the brow of the hill. Itwas V-shaped in plan, 1.8m wide and 0.6m deep, andextended east–west for 12m before turning sharply torun north–south for 10m. It was filled by a mid-brownsilty sand (1021) containing a large quantity of stones,animal bones and charcoal. A weathered piece ofmedieval pottery (E2046:1302:001) of a local, oxidisedfine orange fabric was recovered from this feature, but itsabraded nature and position close to the surface of thefeature suggested that it was residual. Ditch feature 1020appeared to be truncated by the phase 2 main enclosureditch (1023), although at this point it was very shallowand the area was disturbed by a large modern pit (1375).This modern pit truncated the inside edge of the mainenclosure but extended no further.

Linear feature 1022 was L-shaped in plan and waslocated to the north-east of 1020 and 1015, runningwest–east for 15m before turning south and continuingin that direction for 7m. It had sloping sides and aconcave base that was almost V-shaped in section at thewestern end but flattened out considerably towards theeastern end. Deposit 1316 was light brown silty claywithin 1022 and contained small stones, charcoal andanimal bone inclusions. It contained an iron strap(E2046:1315:001), and during environmental processingof the samples a small blue glass bead was retrieved.Feature 1372 was a small linear feature running east–weston the northern side of the main enclosure ditch (1023),although its precise relationship with earlier ditchescould not be determined owing to similarities ofdeposits. It had sloping sides and a flat base and was 0.6mwide and 0.15m deep. It was filled by deposit 1373,which comprised a mid-grey-brown sandy silt of firmcompaction with animal bone and stone inclusions.

Phase 1 discrete featuresA linear arrangement of six cut features was identified inthe north-west quadrant of the main (phase 2) enclosureon the brow of the hill, described below in sequence.

Owing to their shallow nature these features could notbe characterised as either post-holes or pits, althoughtheir linear arrangement suggests the former. Movingfrom north to south, the first subcircular cut feature(1051) was 0.75m long, 0.63m wide and 0.23m deep. Itwas filled by mid-brown sandy silt (1052), with amoderate quantity of stone inclusions up to 0.2m in size.A subcircular cut feature (1049) was excavated south ofthis. It was 0.5m in diameter and 0.06m deep, withshallow sides and a flat base. It was filled by a deposit ofblack-grey silty clay (1050) with occasional charcoalflecks and small fragments of chert inclusions.Subcircular cut 1047 had steep sides and a concave base.It was 0.6m in diameter and 0.11m deep, and was filledby black-grey silty clay (1048) with inclusions of smallstones, frequent charcoal flecks and burnt bone. Anirregular subcircular cut (1057) with irregular shallowsides and a concave base was excavated adjacent to thisfeature. It was 0.5m in diameter and 0.11m deep andfilled by black-grey silty clay (1058). Cut feature 1045was subrectangular with shallow sides and a flat base. Itwas uneven and only 0.05m in depth and 0.4m indiameter. It was interpreted as a post-hole in alignmentwith other features even though it was rectangular,uneven and very shallow. It was filled by 1046, a darkgrey silty clay of moderate compaction with stones andoccasional charcoal flecks. A suboval cut (1053) inalignment with these features was likely to have been anatural feature.

Three pieces of black chert were recovered from asubcircular cut feature (1051). These artefacts were notstrictly diagnostic but were the product of a well-controlled flake industry supporting a date in the lateNeolithic (Ballin 2007). They included a secondaryhard-hammer flake with an untrimmed platform edge(30mm x 28mm x 8mm), a proximal section of tertiaryhard-hammer flake (23mm x 23mm x 4mm) and atertiary irregular or multi-directional core (24mm x19mm x 19mm). Although all these features wereassigned to phase 1, they could equally be contemporarywith the main enclosure, with chert incorporated intoearlier fills as residual material. A rim fragmentcharacteristic of Carrowkeel ware (E2046:1001:001) wasalso recovered from the topsoil. It consisted of a reducedbuff-grey fabric, with frequent black and red small stoneand occasional mica inclusions, and may also beindicative of generalised low-level Neolithic activity.

PHASE 2: THE MAIN ENCLOSURE ANDASSOCIATED FEATURES (EXCLUDINGTHE CEMETERY)

The main enclosure ditch (1023) was truncated by theline of the proposed road and continued around the



Pl. 2—Ditch 1023 and upcast bank. looking north-west.

Fig. 2—Sections of main enclosure ditch (1023).

contour of the hill. Three main subphases wererecognised in the ditch and bank sections (phases 2a,2b and 2c; Fig. 2). In the eastern portion of theenclosure three contemporary ditches (1260, 1359 and1475) served to partially delineate the cemetery area,separating it from the rest of the site. The similarity ofthe fills of these features, their parallel construction andthe lack of truncation suggested that they werecontemporary rather than successive phases of recut. Anumber of discrete but undated features were alsoidentified as most likely belonging to the occupationphase of the enclosure.

The main feature of phase 2 was a U-shaped ditch(1023) with the partial remnants of an internal upcastbank (Fig. 2; Pl. 2). It measured approximately 65m by47m and was situated in a commanding position at thetop of the hill, overlooking a valley and the surroundinglandscape. The enclosure continued around the brow ofthe hill and was truncated by the line of the proposedroad scheme, with approximately a third of the enclosedarea beyond the limit of excavation. The enclosure ditchwas on average 1.5m deep and 3m wide at the top andwas excavated by a series of sixteen 2m-wide slots (Figs2 and 3). There were no breaks in the ditch indicating anentrance, although this may lie in the unexcavated partof the site. The upcast bank was partly preserved by amuch later drystone field wall that respected the line ofthe bank for a short distance in the southern part of thesite (Pl. 2).

The main deposits filling ditch 1023 were fairlyuniform, and variations were accounted for by changesin the natural subsoil through which the ditch hadbeen cut (Fig. 2). The three main subphases recognisedin the ditch and bank sections are as follows. After theconstruction of the ditch (phase 2a), a thin layer of siltand unconsolidated natural subsoil was washed into itsbase (phase 2b). The primary silting began soon afterconstruction, as the upcast bank began to slump backinto the ditch. The presence of slump material on bothsides of the ditch indicates that unconsolidated materialeroded from the sides of the ditch as well as from theinternal bank. Following this initial slumping, the ditchstabilised into an S-shaped profile, consolidated by apossible vegetation layer (phase 2b). This was followedby a final phase when the ditch was deliberatelybackfilled with large stones and boulders, probably as aresult of field clearance (phase 2c). A series of small,isolated burnt patches were identified in the uppertopsoil deposits filling the ditch but proved too diffuseto section properly. They were often discovered against,or near to, the outside of the ditch cut, particularlyaround the northern and north-eastern parts of theditch. These features were interpreted as temporaryhearths located within the depression formed by thepartially silted ditch, which may have been chosen

because it would act as a windbreak.The evidence for phase 2 occupation is quite

limited, comprising a few discrete features that do notseem to belong to phase 1 or phase 3. These includeda subrectangular pit (1292) with steep sides and a flatbase that was located outside the enclosure near thenorthern end of the excavated area. It was interpretedas a cooking pit owing to its alternating fills of charcoaland silt, indicating in situ burning. The burning wasconcentrated at the northern end of the pit, wherethere was also evidence of burnt clay in its base. It was2.7m long, 1.2m wide and 0.65m deep. A furtherfeature (1346) was a pit to the north of the site, alsointerpreted as a cooking pit. Soil analysis of samplesrecovered high concentrations of charcoal, a smallquantity of unidentified burnt animal bone but nocharred cereal grain. Feature 1351 was subrectangularand aligned north–south, with gentle sides that weresteeper on the northern and southern ends. The basewas concave and dropped to a deeper northern end,where most of the burnt bone was found. It was linedwith medium-sized stones and was 3.02m in length,2.5m in width and 0.35m in maximum depth.

The animal bone assemblage from Carrowkeelprovided much better evidence for domesticoccupation (see Appendix 1; Tourunen 2007). The totalassemblage comprised 13,631 specimens characteristicof domestic waste, consisting of both high- and low-utility skeletal elements. No wild mammal specimensrelating to subsistence were recovered. Cattle were thedominant species, followed by sheep, pig and horse, andthese derive mainly from the main enclosure ditch. Theanimal bones were characteristic of domestic waste,consisting of butchery remains, food debris anddiscarded dead animals like cats and dogs or stillborncalves, piglets and lambs.

House mice bones (Mus musculus) were recoveredfrom processed soil samples originating from a contextin the main enclosure ditch at the interface betweenphases 2b and 2c. They were radiocarbon-dated to cal.AD 860–1020 (GU-15327) and cal. AD 670–890(GU-15326). Because mice are burrowing animals itcannot be assumed that these ranges accurately datephases 2b and 2c, but this possibility is stronglysupported by the fact that these date ranges are broadlycontemporary with cemetery phase 2 (below). Thehouse mouse tends to live near human populations anddoes not dig deeply into the ground, so there is everypossibility that these bones derive from animalscontemporary with the main phase of occupationwithin the enclosure. In addition, these ranges are ofintrinsic significance because before now it was notcertain that the house mouse was present in Irelandprior to the arrival of the Anglo-Normans (seeAppendix 1; Tourunen 2007).



Fig. 3—Metal artefacts.

PHASE 2: THE CEMETERY

A clearly defined cemetery area was excavated in theeastern half of the large enclosure. It was partiallydelimited by three slightly curving parallel ditches,1260, 1359 and 1475, which (within the excavated

area) extended from the south side of the cemetery toits eastern end. Here they terminated, leaving thenorth-eastern and north-western sides of the cemeteryunenclosed. These ditches bounded the cemetery in anarea where the underlying topography took apronounced slope. The division of this area from therest of the enclosure indicates an internal separation ofactivities, with no burials extending beyond theseditches to the south-east.


Fig. 4—Cemetery phases at Carrowkeel.

Two discrete features excavated in the cemeteryarea could have been structural, although no clearpattern could be discerned. An oval post-hole (1229)was recorded adjacent to the limit of excavation,truncated by the cemetery phase 2 burial of skeleton32. It contained a single bird talon but no other finds.Close to this a second oval post-hole (1279) wasrecorded, truncated on the south side by the cemeteryphase 1 burial of skeleton 49. These features wereidentified close to the limit of excavation, and they raisethe possibility that there was a structure in this areaduring cemetery phase 2.

The human remains assemblage represented a totalof 158 individuals, a minimum number calculated fromboth articulated burials (132 individuals) anddisarticulated bone (26 individuals). The burials can besplit into four cemetery phases over 800 years from theseventh to the fifteenth century. Phasing of thecemetery was undertaken using a combination ofstratigraphic analysis and radiocarbon dating of 40individuals. Table 1 shows the distribution of adults andnon-adults across the cemetery population. In this case,‘Juvenile’ covers age categories from younger child toadolescent, from six to eighteen years at death(Appendix 4).

Cemetery phase 1 (c. 650–850)At some time between c. AD 650 and 770, ditch 1260was dug at the eastern extent of the burial-ground,forming a curving boundary to this part of thecemetery. This was the largest of the three ditchesdelimiting the cemetery area, with steep sides and aconcave base, a maximum width of 2.46m andmaximum depth of 1m. A consistent deposit sequencewas observed, although slight variation in thecomposition of fills was recorded. The primary fill(1368) was identified in all sections. It was rapidlydeposited soon after construction as the sides of thefreshly cut ditch weathered. This was followed bysecondary deposit 1353, which had graduallyaccumulated through the natural silting of the ditchand surrounding ground surface over time. Thecarcasses of at least eleven sheep were buried within thebasal fill (1368). The colouration of the ends of longbones indicates that they were articulated when buried,probably placed longitudinally, although there wassome degree of post-depositional disturbance(Appendix 1). Any cutting of the bodies prior todeposition was more likely for ease of transport ratherthan for consumption.

The adolescent remains of skeleton 72 were also


Fig. 5—Sections of cemetery ditches.

interred within ditch 1260, deposited as the feature wasbeginning to silt up. The burial was partially cut intothe silting deposit (1353) and the north-westernsection of the ditch terminus. This burial also cut theinterface between this ditch and the smaller ditch(1359). This individual was buried in a flexed position(Pl. 3) and was dated to cal. AD 676–870 (UB-7425)(Table 2). Following this burial, the ditch continued tosilt and skeleton 33 (cal. AD 857–991 (UB-7482)) wasinterred directly above its south-western end. Othercemetery phase 1 burials (skeletons 42 and 52) werealso interred over both ditches 1260 and 1359.Cemetery phase 2 skeletons 13, 14 and 71 also utilisedthe ditch area once both ditches had fallen out of use.Even then, however, the remnants of the ditches wereprobably visible and continued to be perceived as theboundary of the cemetery, for no interments took place

outside the south-eastern edge of ditch 1260. A smaller ditch (1359) ran parallel to ditch 1260

(Fig. 1). It had steep sides with a concave base and amaximum depth of 0.44m. The function of this ditchwas difficult to determine, as it was very close to thelarger ditch feature (1260) and comparatively verynarrow. One possibility is that it formed the foundationtrench for a palisade fence, although no post-holes werediscovered within it. Ditch feature 1475 was located3m south of these two ditches and further downslope.It also terminated at the eastern end of the cemetery. Ithad a V-shaped profile, was 1m wide and 0.5m deep,and the primary deposit (1477) had accumulated as aconsequence of the slumping of upcast material andcolluvial erosion. The secondary deposit (1476) waslikely to be the result of stones and gravel accumulatingat the base of the ploughsoil in the depression of the


Table 1—Number of individuals in the assemblage from Carrowkeel, by cemetery phase and age category.

Cemetery Calendar Foetus Infant Juvenile Adult Adult Totalphase date (AD) Male Female

1 650–850 8 6 12 3 7 372 850–1050 24 23 25 2 - 753 1050–1250 3 5 5 2 1 184 1340–1450 2 - - - - 2

37 34 42 7 8 132

Table 2—Radiocarbon dating results from cemetery phase 1 individuals.

SK no. Age category Sex Lab no. BP date Calendar date (AD)

1 Young adult Female UB-7448 1249 ± 31 678–83222 Older middle adult Male UB-7412 1186 ± 32 770–89927 Younger child – UB-7414 1156 ± 31 798–90651 Older adult Female UB-7417 1228 ± 31 761–88453 Infant – UB-7418 1214 ± 31 765–89057 Younger middle adult Female UB-7420 1264 ± 31 667–78369 Younger adult Male UB-7423 1244 ± 32 682–87270 Older child – UB-7424 1182 ± 32 771–90072 Adolescent – UB-7425 1250 ± 34 676–87085 Older child – UB-7430 1185 ± 31 770–89986 Younger child – UB-7431 1193 ± 34 766–89987 Younger child – UB-7432 1261 ± 33 668–82793 Infant – UB-7434 1215 ± 32 764–890100 Younger child – UB-7435 1203 ± 32 765–895107 Younger middle adult Male UB-7436 1193 ± 31 768–897112 Foetus – UB-7483 1227 ± 31 761–884113 Younger child – UB-7439 1168 ± 32 775–903114 Younger middle adult Male UB-7440 1301 ± 31 660–772115 Younger adult Female UB-7441 1182 ± 31 771–900119 Younger middle adult Female UB-7443 1305 ± 34 658–773122 Younger adult Female UB-7445 1196 ± 35 765–898124 Infant – UB-7446 1223 ± 33 761–887125 Foetus – UB-7447 1193 ± 33 767–898

ditch, probably owing to bioturbation and wormaction. The similarity of fills and the lack of intercuttingstratigraphy made the relationships between these threeditches difficult to determine. The presence ofcemetery phase 2 burials directly above ditches 1359and 1260 suggests that these ditches may becontemporary. It is possible that ditch 1475 is areplacement cemetery boundary, dating from cemeteryphase 2, but this is not supported by any datingevidence.

The cemetery phase 1 assemblage totals 37individuals (28% of the whole), 22 of whom wereradiocarbon-dated (Table 2). Just over 70% of theindividuals from cemetery phase 1 are non-adults. Thisgroup can be further subdivided into foetus (14%),perinate (8%), infant (16%), younger child (16%), olderchild (11%) and adolescent (5%). Of the adults atCarrowkeel, cemetery phase 1 has 61% of the totalnumber, and almost 90% of the females. Of thoseburials for which direction could be assessed, themajority (76%, n = 28) lay north-east/south-west (Fig.4). Body position was recorded for 31 individuals; 71%(n = 22) were supine and extended, while theremaining 29% (n = 9) were found to be flexed. Themajority of the flexed burials were non-adults, asidefrom skeleton 51 and skeleton 119, both adult females.

Cemetery phase 2 (c. 850–1050) The second cemetery phase dates from the mid-ninth tothe eleventh century (Table 3; Fig. 6). The largest part ofthe assemblage, this cemetery phase contains 75individuals, 93% (n = 73) of which are non-adult. Theonly adult remains present were skeleton 90 and skeleton105, both male. Cemetery phase 2 contains the largestproportion of very young children. Of these, 64% werebelow one year of age at death (foetus 27%, perinate 7%,neonate 4% and infant 27%). Younger children made up16%, and 12% were older children. The excavatedportion of the cemetery appears to have been usedalmost exclusively for the burial of non-adults in thisperiod. Body position was more varied than in cemeteryphase 1. This is probably linked to the higher number ofnon-adults, who show more differention in their burialpositions than the adults. In total, 44% (n = 33) were

buried supine and extended, 1% (n = 1) crouched and21% (n = 16) flexed. One infant, skeleton 50, was buriedflexed and prone, the only burial of its type in thecemetery. The crouched burial of a younger child,skeleton 84, is also unique in the assemblage. As incemetery phase 1, the majority of the burials werealigned north-east/south-west. Four individuals,skeletons 10, 17, 18 and 34, were truncated by lateragricultural activity in the form of an east–west furrow.

Cemetery phase 3 (c. 1050–1250)It appears that the cemetery began to fall out of useduring the latter part of cemetery phase 3, dating fromthe mid-eleventh to the mid-thirteenth century (Table4; Fig. 7). Only eighteen individuals were recoveredfrom this phase, with a more even spread of agecategories than in the previous cemetery phases. Thismay indicate a shift in use of this portion of thecemetery towards a more ‘normal’ burial population.Non-adults still account for 78% (n = 14) of thecemetery phase 3 assemblage, but they are older than incemetery phase 2, with only 44% (n = 8) below oneyear of age at death (foetus 17%, infant 28%). Noperinates, neonates or adolescents were recovered inthis period. Burial orientation followed the same broadpattern as cemetery phases 1 and 2, with 67% (n = 12)aligned north-east/south-west (Fig. 4). Body positionwas more uniform. Supine extended burials accountfor 50% (n = 9) of the group and 17% were flexed. Theremaining 33% (n = 6) were disarticulated. East–westfurrow 1169 also truncates two individuals in thisperiod, skeletons 46 and 47. Skeleton 46 was recovereddisarticulated within the furrow itself.

Cemetery phase 4 (c. 1340–1450) Only two individuals belong to the final cemeteryphase (Table 5). One dates from the fourteenth century,while the other dates from the fifteenth century. Thismay indicate a move away from this portion of thecemetery, the discontinuation of use of the burial-ground as a whole, or later burials unconnected withthe earlier cemetery phases. The very young age ofboth burials suggests that in this period the site wasused as a cillín.



SK no. Age category Lab no. BP date Calendar date (AD)

16 Older child UB-7449 1113 ± 32 869–101517 Younger child UB-7411 1129 ± 31 857–98924 Foetus UB-7413 1148 ± 31 804–97533 Older child UB-7482 1127 ± 32 857–99141 Infant UB-7416 1125 ± 31 859–99182 Older child UB-7429 1104 ± 31 885–999121 Older child UB-7444 1113 ± 32 869–1015


Fig. 6—Cemetery phase 2 (AD 850–1050).


SK no. Age category Sex Lab no. BP date Calendar date (AD)

60 Foetus – UB-7422 815 ± 31 1169–126974 Infant – UB-7426 830 ± 31 1159–126577 Adult Female UB-7427 940 ± 31 1024–116179 Older middle adult Male UB-7428 906 ± 31 1038–120889 Younger adult Female UB-7433 954 ± 31 1022–1156110 Infant – UB-7437 949 ± 32 1023–1208111 Younger middle adult Male UB-7438 935 ± 31 1024–1165116 Younger child – UB-7442 907 ± 30 1037–1192

The demographic profileThe Carrowkeel assemblage is dominated by non-adults (Table 1). Only 11% of the individuals are adults.There were no older adults and the majority diedbefore the age of 35. Males and females were equallyrepresented in the adult portion of the assemblage; themajority of females were found in cemetery phase 1,however. This may indicate preferential burial ofwomen in one area of the cemetery during this earliestperiod. Estimations of attained adult stature showedclose male and female means (168cm and 164cmrespectively). Often stressed populations will notachieve their full genetic potential, especially in adultstature levels. Males tend to be more affected thanfemales, with the result that there is less sexualdimorphism in stature level (S. Lewis 1997, 35).

The calculation of a life table provided an estimatedlife expectancy of 55 years for the assemblage. The size

of the population from which the assemblage is derivedwas calculated using formulae provided by Acsádi andNemeskéri (1970):

P = D(e/t)K,

where P = size of living population, D = size of skeletalassemblage (158), e = life expectancy at birth (28.5), t= time-span of cemetery (800), and K = constant (10%of t) (80). The contributing population size was thusestimated to be 450.3 individuals over 800 years. Itshould be remembered that as the cemetery was notfully excavated this number refers only to the size ofpopulation for this part of the cemetery. In reality, theassociated population may have been much larger.

As discussed above, the assemblage wascharacterised by young children, with almost 90%made up of non-adults. Over 53% of individuals were


Fig. 7—Cemetery phase 3 (AD 1050–1250).

aged below one year; of these, 52% were foetuses(28% of the whole assemblage). It is suggested thatthis reflects the spatial organisation of the cemeteryrather than the totally separate burial of children asin a cillín. Had the entire cemetery been excavated,the assemblage may have resembled a normalpopulation with an even distribution of agecategories.

Using regression formulae developed byScheuer et al. (1980), it was possible to further refinethe age estimation of the foetuses through limbbone measurements. Age estimation data were thencompared to information on modern still and livebirths. Cemetery phases 3 (n = 3) and 4 (n = 2) werenot included in this analysis owing to their smallsample size.

Foetal age distribution follows the ‘flat’ patternof modern stillbirths, suggesting normal lossesthrough premature birth or miscarriage rather thaninfanticide practised at birth (Fig. 8). If the latterwere true, we might expect a peak of foetal deathsaround 38–40 weeks, following the live birthpattern (Mays 1998, 64–5). High infant mortality isa common feature of past populations when, for thefirst year of life, children were particularlyvulnerable. In a review of 42 assemblages and 9,658individuals, Lewis found a second peak of mortalityduring the weaning period, a highly dangerous timeowing to bacterial infections from feeding bottlesand traditional weaning ‘paps’. The age at whichchildren enter the adult world can also sometimesbe recognised in the archaeological record, with anincrease in deaths around the age of ten to nineteenyears as they are exposed to the dangers of the widerworld (M. Lewis 2007, 86–7).

The Carrowkeel assemblage does not follow theexpected trend of non-adult mortality (Fig. 9). Incontrast to the expected peak between ten andnineteen years, all cemetery phases from Carrowkeelexperience a fall. This may have more to do with thespatial uses of the excavated portion of the cemeterythan with an actual mortality pattern. Certainly wedo see a peak in infant losses and again in the olderchild group. It is possible that the children of theCarrowkeel population are entering the adult worldat this latter stage, being expected to help withdomestic and agricultural tasks, and suffering fatalaccidents while undertaking these duties.



SK no. Age category Lab no. BP date Calendar date (AD)

15 Foetus UB-7410 499 ± 29 1400–144754 Foetus UB-7419 638 ± 30 1340–1396

Fig. 8—Distribution of foetal deaths from Carrowkeel bycemetery phase compared to modern stillbirth and live birthrates (after Mays 1998, 64–5).

Fig. 9—Patterns of non-adult mortality from Carrowkeel presentedby cemetery phase and in comparison with the expected trend(after M. Lewis 2007, 86).

Health and diseaseIn general the sample appears to be healthy, with lowrates of infectious disease and trauma. Prevalence ratesof congenital conditions were also low. Pathologicalconditions that were noted were linked to physicalactivity and poor nutrition. Poor levels of nutritionwere also seen in metrical analyses. Levels of generalhealth appear to have fallen in the later phases. This canbe seen through the increasing rates of dental enamelhypoplasia, porotic hyperostosis and cribra orbitalia incemetery phases 2 and 3. These increases could belinked to a genuine fall in the levels of nutrition andgeneral health of the population, or they could beconnected to the shift in focus of the cemetery towardsmore child burials. If the section of the populationbeing buried in this part of the cemetery is different,we may expect a difference in the rate of general healthindicators.

Dental diseaseRates of calculus (plaque) and periodontal (gum)disease are high in all cemetery phases, while caries andabscesses are rare throughout the sample. This suggeststhat the diet probably did not contain a lot ofcariogenic foods such as sugar and refinedcarbohydrates. The pattern of calculus depositionsuggests that oral hygiene was poor. Cemetery phase 2sees a clear reduction in all types of dental disease. Thisis probably due to the high number of infants andfoetal remains with unerupted dentition.

Activity indicatorsAlthough fracture rates were low, the assemblage clearlyderives from an active population. The presence of osacromiale also indicates an active non-adult population.Os acromiale is thought to be the result of strenuousmovements of the shoulder during an individual’speriod of growth (Pl. 4). Regarded as a rare anomalytoday, it is largely seen in professional sports peoplesuch as baseball players, who often train heavily duringadolescence (Knüsel 2000, 103–5). The Carrowkeelassemblage showed two bilateral examples of thecondition from cemetery phases 2 and 3, in a youngadult female and middle adult male respectively.

Only the adult sample was assessed for degenerativejoint disease. The rate of vertebral degradationremained constant at 28–29% from cemetery phases 1to 3. Males showed higher rates of degradation,probably linked to more strenuous activity. Whiledegenerative joint disease was a constant in the adultsample, cases were mild and restricted to osteophyticlipping of joint surfaces. There were no cases ofosteoarthritis, which requires eburnation (polishing ofthe joint surface) for a positive diagnosis. Extra-spinaljoint degradation was only found in cemetery phase 1.This is probably due to the low number of adults in thelater periods and their younger age profile, as this groupof pathologies is strongly linked to advancing age.

Non-metric traitsNon-metric, or discontinuous, traits are classed as non-pathological variants in bone morphology, such as the


Pl. 4—Os acromiale of the right scapula, skeleton 90, a middle-aged adult male, cemetery phase 2.

presence of an extra foramen on the anterior mandible,ossicle within cranial sutures or the presence of a thirdtrochanter on the femur. There is some argument in theliterature as to the cause and significance of these traits,and several studies have used them as markers ofbiodistance between populations and within samples(Bondioli et al. 1986; Ossenberg 1976). Therelationship between trait expression and age iscontroversial; trait expression is not necessarily anindicator of familial relationships. Many infra-cranialtraits may be related to physiological rather thangenetic factors (Tyrrell 2000).

The Carrowkeel sample was assessed for 45 traits intotal, 28 cranial and seventeen post-cranial. Primarytraits (Buikstra and Ubelaker 1994) that were expressedby more than one individual were plotted into Fig. 10.Phases 1 and 2 show an increase in the parietalforamina and mandibular tori. The septal aperture isonly found in cemetery phase 1. This trait is reliablygenetically linked, and is often expressed only byfemales. It is likely that it only appears in cemeteryphase 1 owing to the high number of females in thisphase. The absence of the trait in the later phases doesnot indicate a change in population. The positiveexpression of mandibular tori is thought to have agenetic cause (Gorsky et al. 1998). The consistentpresence of this trait in the assemblage may indicate a

familial relationship between some of the individuals.The general low level of trait expressions and thepartial nature of the assemblage mean that any trendswithin the data may not be reliable, however.

PHASE 3: LINEAR CULTIVATIONFEATURES

A large oval pit (1375) truncated the main enclosureditch during the final stages of silting. It had concavesides and was 1m deep and 5m wide. The primary fillwas predominantly silt and the secondary fill waspredominantly cobbles and large stones, the probableresult of field clearance. A series of parallelnorth/south-running linear cultivation features wasidentified outside the enclosure to the north. Theywere generally 0.48m wide, 0.08m deep and 16m long,with a concave profile filled with orange-brown siltyclay. They respected the course of the main enclosure,running up to the ditch but not continuing into theinterior. The enclosure had been identified on the firstedition OS map, dated to 1838 (sheet 72), though noton subsequent map surveys. These furrows respect theenclosure and represent cultivation when the enclosurewas still extant, sometime prior to the early nineteenthcentury.

DISCUSSION

The main enclosure at Carrowkeel was probablyconstructed in the seventh or, less likely, the eighthcentury. At this time a great number of enclosedsettlements were being constructed in Ireland. Most ofthem fall into one of two categories: ringforts andcashels, which are secular farmsteads of circular plan,and ecclesiastical settlements, which often have larger,less regular but usually curvilinear enclosures (e.g. Stout1997, 14, 100; Swan 1983). Carrowkeel cannot beassigned to either of these categories. Though structuralevidence was limited, the large animal bone assemblagesuggests that it served as a settlement for a considerableperiod. Given that under two thirds of the enclosurewas excavated, a question remains as to howrepresentative the recovered evidence is. A significantportion of the site lay beyond the line of the proposedroad scheme, and the location of possible structures inthis area, especially towards the brow of the hill, shouldnot be ruled out. Nevertheless, its overall morphologyand the presence of a cemetery rule out its classificationas a ringfort.

Its somewhat irregular shape is more reminiscent ofan ecclesiastical enclosure, and the position of itscemetery in the eastern half of the enclosure is also


Fig. 10—Cranial non-metric traits displayed by the adult samplefrom Carrowkeel, providing the expression of a trait as apercentage of the possible expressions within the phase.Definitions of each trait can be found in Table 6.

paralleled in the majority of ecclesiastical sites. Swan(1983, 274) defined ecclesiastical sites on the basis ofeleven attributes: evidence of enclosure, a burial area(normally in the south-east corner), a place-name withan ecclesiastical element, structural remains, a nearbyholy well, a bullaun stone, a carved or decorated stonecross or slab, a townland boundary forming part of theenclosure, a souterrain, a pillar stone, a founder’s tomb,and a traditional ritual or folk custom. He furtherspecified that at least five of these are required. On thisbasis Carrowkeel would not qualify as an ecclesiasticalsite. The absence of evidence for a church in particularmeans that it cannot be definitively classified asecclesiastical, though it is possible that a church stoodin the unexcavated part of the enclosure.

Alternatively, Carrowkeel may belong to a group ofsites recently recognised as a result of pre-developmentarchaeology that are generally referred to assettlement/cemeteries (e.g. Clarke 2002; Seaver 2006;A. O’Sullivan and Harney 2008, 78–84). In manyrespects these are similar to ecclesiastical settlements butthey appear to lack church buildings. The possibilitythat they were not ecclesiastical sites is supported bydocumentary evidence that indicates that until at leastthe eighth century some communities were notbringing their dead for churchyard burial butcontinued to bury them in non-ecclesiastical familyburial-grounds (O’Brien 1984; 1999, 52). Compilers ofthe early eighth-century Collectio Canonum Hibernensiswere not entirely opposed to the continuing use ofancestral burial-grounds. They cited biblical precedentsfor the practice, in particular the example of Jacob andJoseph, who requested that their bones be carried backfrom Egypt to the land of Canaan in order that theymight be buried in the tomb of their ancestors.Increasingly, however, monks, ecclesiastical tenants andsections of the wider population were beingencouraged to have their affiliation recognised in deaththrough burial at ecclesiastical sites (O’Brien 1999, 52).Some ancestral burial-grounds were unenclosed orpartially enclosed sites dedicated purely to burial, butothers, the so-called settlement/cemeteries, likeJohnstown, Raystown and Carrowkeel, are withinlarger enclosures that were used for occupation as wellas burial. To date, the vast majority of these have beenidentified in Leinster. Carrowkeel is particularlysignificant as it is the first possible example excavatedwest of the Shannon.

The cemetery at Carrowkeel remained in use untilthe fifteenth century. The social conditions in whichthe cemetery was established were very different tothose that led to its eventual abandonment. Bothfounding and abandonment represent breaks withtradition: a significant initial investment in a newcemetery and an active decision not to continue to

place the dead in the usual site of disposal (ParkerPearson 1999). To focus discussion on the foundation ofthe site, Chrisitianity had already become established asthe dominant belief system by AD 600 (Edwards 1990,99), so religious reasons were unlikely to have been theonly, or indeed the principal, motivation for thefounding of Carrowkeel. Possibly it was founded as aresult of a family lineage breaking away from a largerkin group. The prominence of Carrowkeel on a hilloverlooking an area of known early medieval andprehistoric activity (RMP: GA097-068) may haveinfluenced the choice of location for the mainenclosure. Another factor may have been the presenceof earlier ditches and discrete features pre-dating themain enclosure, though the date, duration and characterof this earlier phase of activity remain unclear.

Notwithstanding the trend towards burial atecclesiastical sites, it seems that a group at Carrowkeelcontinued to bury their dead, or at least some of theirdead, in a non-ecclesiastical burial-ground throughoutthe early medieval period and beyond. They may havehad pragmatic reasons for doing so. The founding ofthe cemetery and its enduring use as a formal burialarea was a deliberate strategy by a group bound byfamilial and kinship ties to perpetuate their relationshipwith their ancestors. The act of burial makes theremains of the dead a fixed part of the landscape,thereby legitimising the rights of the living to it (ParkerPearson 1999, 125). In a predominantly pastoraleconomy based on a transhumance model of summergrazing, the settlement enclosure would also havehelped to secure tenure of the surrounding land.Seasonal occupation is one possible explanation for thelimited evidence for substantial structures within theenclosure.

Funerary practicesThe extent to which pagan or Christian religiousbeliefs can be seen to dictate burial custom atCarrowkeel throughout this period is uncertain. Therole of Christian ideology in the Irish early medievalperiod can be usefully separated into two phases: anexpansion period when the faith was still a minoritypractice and not fully integrated, and a consolidationperiod when Christianity was the dominant (but notexclusive) belief system (Mytum 1992, 60). Thepositioning of the body as a supine west–eastinhumation is usually regarded as a Christian practice.This reflects the Christian belief that the dead will riseagain, and an alignment with the orientation of therising sun during Eastertide (mid- to late April) waspreferred. A lack of grave-goods is also interpreted asreflecting a change from a pagan to a Christianconception of the afterlife.

Cross-cultural surveys of burial practice also advise


caution when applying generalisations: because of thediverse nature of mortuary rites there will usually bedivergences from the norm (Ucko 1969, 262). Ananalysis of the Irish excavation evidence indicates thatRoman burial customs were adopted independently ofChristianity, so there must be other supporting evidenceto determine the religion of an individual (Raftery1981). The Carrowkeel burials were almost all uniformlysimple in nature, with little evidence of lining of graves,grave-markers or grave-goods. Burial was in accordancewith Christian rites in a roughly east–west orientation,although there were some startling departures from thegeneral pattern. Unusual burials included the flexed

adolescent found at the terminus of ditch 1260 fromcemetery phase 1 (Fig. 4; Pl. 3), the tightly crouchedadolescent from cemetery phase 2 and the highlyunorthodox ‘akimbo’ female burial, also from cemeteryphase 2 (Fig. 4). The placement of these individuals indeliberately different burial positions may indicate thatsome funerary rituals were the site of contestedmeaning, although the reasons why they were accordedsuch treatment was not evident. No patterning in eitherage, sex or temporal and spatial distribution could beidentified, and no pathological conditions could bedetermined that would have singled these individualsout as different.


Pl. 3—Adolescentflexed burial at theterminus of ditch1260, cemetery phase1 (cal. AD 676–870).

River-rolled quartz and some animal bone werealso found in a number of burials, which may representolder, non-Christian practices retained by thepopulation, although quartz pebbles are commonlyfound in burials at early ecclesiastical sites (Cardy 1997,556; White Marshall and Walsh 2005, 81). The patternof quartz deposition does not vary greatly between thecemetery phases, nor does there seem to be a significanttrend in the inclusion of quartz with male, female ornon-adult burials. The significance of the stone to Irishburial culture is not certain; quartz may symbolise thesoul of the dead, or light the way into the next world.Excavations in Wales have also found quartz placed ingraves dating from the early medieval period, and it hasbeen suggested that the practice is linked to a passagefrom Revelations which states ‘. . . give him a whitestone, and in the stone a new name written, which noman knoweth saving he that receiveth it’ (Revelations2:17, quoted in Holbrook 2005).

Segregated burial in the early medieval period Phase 1 of the cemetery was made up of three distinctsubphases, identified through stratigraphic analysis anda programme of radiocarbon dating. The majority ofburials (n = 75) were found in phase 2 of the cemetery,dating from AD 850 to 1050. This is distinct incharacter from the earlier and later use of this sectionof the cemetery, and seems to provide evidence for thedeliberate spatial segregation of children. Cillíní areessentially children’s burial-grounds, commonthroughout Ireland but mainly focused in the westerncounties such as Kerry and Galway (Dennehy 1997).They are known to have been in use during themedieval and post-medieval periods, but their originsremain obscure. Often sited in visible monuments suchas abandoned ringforts, tower-houses and ecclesiasticalruins, they have been described as a physicalembodiment of limbo within the landscape. Thedevelopment of this practice is assumed to coincidewith the twelfth-century Church reforms leading tothe establishment of the doctrine of limbo infantus(Finlay 2000, 408–9).

Archaeologically, cillíní are recognised through theseemingly disorganised burial of very young childrenwithin older monuments, often overlying moreorganised and formal burials. During excavation it wasassumed that the cluster of young children buried atCarrowkeel represented the later, probably post-medieval reuse of the site as a cillín. The extensiveprogramme of radiocarbon dating undertaken on theremains showed this not to be the case, and generatedquestions about the origin of the cillín tradition andhow this may relate to the spatial segregation ofchildren within early medieval cemetery populations. Itis possible that the separate burial of children in the

early medieval period was a common phenomenonacross Britain and Ireland, one which had an influenceon the Irish tradition of cillín burial in later centuries.

While the separate burial of children in cillíní hasbeen well documented for the later and post-medievalperiod in Ireland (Finlay 2000), there has been littleevidence for the segregation of children in the earlymedieval period, although in recent years excavations atthe Rock of Cashel and Raystown, Co. Meath(Hodkinson 2003; Seaver 2006), have found separateclusters of non-adults within larger cemeteries. Clustersof child burials are often found within Anglo-Saxoncemeteries, and there does appear to be a Christiantrend in early medieval Britain for the separation ofyoung children within cemeteries such as RaundsFurnells in Northamptonshire and Whithorn Priory inGalloway (Boddington 1987; Cardy 1997). The patternis also seen at other ecclesiastical sites in Europe fromthe period, including the cathedrals of Trondheim andHamar in Norway (M. Lewis 2007, 30–3). Thesegregated burial of children has also been recognisedat the Late Roman site of Cazzanello in central Italy,where a small group of perinate burials was foundwithin the remains of a fourth-century AD bathhouse.This seems to form part of a wider Etruscan patternthat may be a precursor to the modern Italian practiceof separate burial for foreigners and very youngchildren (Becker 2007, 290).

There is evidence for the segregation of certaingroups during the medieval and post-medieval periodat sites such as Relignaman, Co. Tyrone (Hamlin andFoley 1983), and St Ronan’s, Iona (J. O’Sullivan 1994),where the separate burial of women is connected tothe presence of convents or chapels dedicated to theVirgin. Defining conceptual divisions between thedead, therefore, may be a common European practicewhich in some areas develops into the practice ofestablishing totally separate burial-grounds for certainsections of society.

The Carrowkeel assemblage provides a securelydated example of the spatial segregation of children inan Irish context. This spatial segregation of children inone section of the cemetery may be a precursor to thelater and post-medieval cillín tradition, which is nowbecoming better understood but whose origins remainobscure (Finlay 2000). Recent excavations atCloncowan II, Co. Meath (Baker 2007, 72), revealed anearlier ditched enclosure reused as a possible cillínbetween the tenth and thirteenth centuries. Thiscorresponds to Carrowkeel cemetery phase 3 andsuggests an emerging pattern. The work reported hereshould highlight the importance of extensiveradiocarbon dating of cemeteries, or areas withincemeteries, dominated by infant remains, for it showsthat we cannot assume that these are post-medieval


cillín assemblages. Rather, like the Carrowkeelassemblage, they may provide important new insightsinto the complex and potentially early origins of thisphenomenon.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors are indebted to all staff at HeadlandArchaeology Ltd, particularly Stuart Callow, KevinMurphy and Deborah Riches, who supervised theexcavations, and to Emer O’Donovan and BryanMcDomhnail for survey work. Dr Stephen Lancastervisited the site on two occasions and assisted greatlywith interpretation of the archaeological sediments.Thanks to Eavan O’Dochartaigh for all illustrations andto Amy Bunce for drafting the stratigraphic report.Thanks must also go to Colm Maloney, who project-managed the excavation, and to Damian Shiels, whomanaged all post-excavation work. Sincere thanks toJerry O’Sullivan, NRA Project Archaeologist, and alsoto Martin Jones, NRA Assistant Project Archaeologist,who provided welcome comment and guidance at allstages of the project. Thanks to the staff of RPSConsulting Engineers for their assistance throughoutthe project—Senior Resident Engineer TomPrendergast, Resident Engineer Niall Healy andResident Archaeologist Ross MacLeod. We would alsoboth like to extend thanks to Jean Price for herpatience with the final editing of this text. Special andfinal thanks are reserved for our team of excavators,who braved the storms through three cold months onwhat has to be the windiest hill in County Galway.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Acsádi, G. and Nemeskéri, J. 1970. History of human lifespan and mortality. Budapest.

Baker, C. 2007. Excavations at Cloncowan II, Co.Meath. Journal of Irish Archaeology 16, 61–133.

Ballin, T. 2007. The lithics from Carrowkeel, Co.Galway. Unpublished report for HeadlandArchaeology Ltd.

Becker, M.J. 2007. Childhood among the Etruscans:mortuary programs at Tarquina as the indicator ofthe transition to adult status. In A. Cohen and J. B.Rutter (eds), The construction of childhood in ancientGreece and Italy, 281–92. Athens.

Boddington, A. 1987. Raunds, Northamptonshire:analysis of a country churchyard. World Archaeology18, 411–25.

Bondioli, L., Corruccini, R.S. and Macchiarelli, R.1986. Familial segregation in the Iron Agecommunity of Alfedena, Abruzzo, Italy, based on

osteodontal trait analysis. American Journal of PhysicalAnthropology 71, 393–400.

Buczacki, S. 2002. Fauna Britannica. Hamlyn.Buikstra, J. and Ubelaker, D. (eds) 1994. Standards for

data collection from human skeletal remains. Arkansas.Cardy, A. 1997. The human bones. In P. Hill (ed.),

Whithorn and St Ninian: the excavation of a monastictown 1984–1991, 519–92. Stroud.

Clark, J. (ed.) 1995. Medieval finds from excavations inLondon 5: the medieval horse and its equipment, c.1150–1450. London.

Clarke, D.V. 1971. Small finds in the Atlantic province:problems of approach. Scottish Archaeological Forum3, 22–54.

Clarke, L. 2002. An early medieval enclosure andburials, Johnstown, Co. Meath. Archaeology Ireland16(3), 13–15.

D’Arcy, G. 2006. The animals of Ireland. Dublin.Dennehy, E. 1997. The ceallunaigh of County Kerry: an

archaeological perspective. Unpublished MA thesis,University College Cork.

Edwards, N. 1990. The archaeology of early medievalIreland. London.

Egan, G. 1998. Medieval finds from excavations in London6: the medieval household, daily living c. 1150–1450.London.

Finlay, N. 2000. Outside of life: traditions of infantburial in Ireland from cíllín to cist. World Archaeology31, 407–22.

Goodall, I.H. 1993. Iron currying and leather-workingtools. In S. Margeson (ed.), Norwich households: themedieval and post-medieval finds from Norwich Surveyexcavations 1971–1978, 189–90. Norwich.

Gorsky, M., Bukai, A. and Shohat, M. 1998. Geneticinfluence on the prevalence of torus platanius.American Journal of Medical Genetics 75, 138–40.

Hamlin, A. and Foley, C. 1983. A women’s graveyard atCarrickmore, Co. Tyrone, and the separate burial ofwomen. Ulster Journal of Archaeology 46, 41–6.

Hodkinson, B.J. 2003. First draft final report on theexcavations at Cormac’s Chapel, Cashel, 1992 and1993. http://homepage.tinet.ie/~dunamase/Dunamase.html. Accessed 23-05-07.

Holbrook, N. 2005. An early-medieval monasticcemetery at Llandough, Glamorgan: excavations in1994. Medieval Archaeology 49, 1–92.

Jones, M.O. 1999. Finger-rings, bracelets and latchets:towards a sociology of jewellery from laterprehistoric and early historic Ireland to c. 800 AD.Unpublished MA thesis, National University ofIreland, Galway.

Kelly, F. 1997. Early Irish farming. Dublin.Knüsel, C. 2000. Activity-related skeletal change. In A.

Fiorato, C. Knüsel and A. Boylston (eds), Blood redroses: the archaeology of a mass grave from the Battle of


Towton AD 1461, 103–18.Oxford.Lalonde, S. 2007. Preliminary report on the human

skeletal remains from a cemetery and settlement atCarrowkeel, County Galway, on the route of theN6 Galway to Ballinasloe National Road Scheme.Unpublished report by Headland Archaeology Ltdfor Galway County Council.

Lewis, M. 2007.The bioarchaeology of children: perspectivesfrom biological and forensic anthropology. Cambridge.

Lewis, S. 1997. A simple procedure for investigatingdifferences on sexual dimorphism betweenpopulations. In S. Anderson and K. Boyle (eds),Computing and statistics in osteoarchaeology, 35–8.Oxford.

McCarthy, M. 2003. The faunal remains. In R. M.Cleary and M. F. Hurley (eds), Cork City excavations1984–2000, 375–89. Cork.

Mays, S. 1998. The archaeology of human bones. London.Mytum, H. 1992. The origins of Early Christian Ireland.

London. O’Brien, E. 1984. Late prehistoric–early historic

Ireland: the burial evidence reviewed. UnpublishedMPhil. thesis, University College Dublin.

O’Brien, E. 1999. Post-Roman Britain to Anglo SaxonEngland: burial practices reviewed. BritishArchaeological Reports, British Series 289.Oxford.

Ossenberg, N.S. 1976. Within and between racedistances in population studies based on discretetraits of the human skull. American Journal of PhysicalAnthropology 45, 701–16.

O’Sullivan, A. and Harney, L. 2008. EMAP:investigating the character of early medievalarchaeological excavations, 1970–2002.Unpublished report for the Heritage Council.

O’Sullivan, J. 1994. Excavation of an early church anda women’s cemetery at St Ronan’s medieval parishchurch, Iona. Proceedings of the Society of Antiquariesof Scotland 124, 327–65.

Parker Pearson, M. 1999. The archaeology of death andburial. Stroud.

Raftery, B. 1981. Iron Age burials in Ireland. In D. ÓCorráin (ed.), Irish antiquity, 173–204. Cork.

Reimer, P.J., Baillie, M.G.L., Bard, E. et al. 2004. Intcalversion 4.14. Radiocarbon 46, 1029–58.

Scheuer, [J.]L. and Black, S. 2000. Developmental juvenileosteology. London.

Scheuer, J.L., Musgrave, J.H. and Evans, S.P. 1980. Theestimation of late fetal and perinatal age from limbbone length by linear and logarithmic regression.Annals of Human Biology 7, 257–65.

Seaver, M. 2006. Through the mill—excavation of anearly medieval settlement at Raystown, CountyMeath. In J. O’Sullivan and M. Stanley (eds),Settlement, industry and ritual, 73–88. Archaeologyand the National Roads Authority MonographSeries 3. Dublin.

Stout, M. 1997. The Irish ringfort. Dublin. Swan, L. 1983. Enclosed ecclesiastical sites and their

relevance to settlement patterns of the firstmillennium A.D. In T. Reeves-Smyth and F.Hamond (eds), Landscape archaeology in Ireland,269–80. British Archaeological Reports, BritishSeries 116. Oxford.

Tourunen, A. 2007. The faunal remains fromCarrowkeel, Co. Galway. Unpublished report byHeadland Archaeology Ltd for Galway CountyCouncil.

Tyrrell, A. 2000. Skeletal non-metric traits and theassessment of inter- and intra-population diversity:past problems and future potential. In M. Cox andS. Mays (eds), Human osteology in archaeology andforensic science, 289–306. London.

Ucko, P.J. 1969. Ethnography and the archaeologicalinterpretation of funerary remains. WorldArchaeology 1, 262–90.

White Marshall, J. and Walsh, C. 2005. IllaunloughanIsland: an early medieval monastery in County Kerry.Bray.


APPENDIX 1: SUMMARY OF FAUNALREMAINS AULI TOURUNEN

A total of 13,631 animal bone specimens were analysedfrom Carrowkeel (Table 6). Of these, 8,437 specimenswere recovered by hand-picking and an additional5,194 were found in soil samples. The high number ofunidentified specimens reflects both the highfragmentation rate and the sieving of the soil samples.

In both quantification methods used (NISP,Number of Identified Specimens, and MNE,Minimum Number of Elements), the assemblage isdominated by cattle. According to MNE figures, inenclosure phase 1 66.1% of the bones derive fromcattle, 18.6% from sheep or goat and 15.3% from pig.Comparison of enclosure phase 2 was hampered by thepresence of bones from the articulated skeletons, mixedwith disarticulated remains. Specimens categorised aslarge ungulates, deriving mostly from ribs andvertebrae, are likely to derive from both cattle andhorse, but most of these bones probably belong to cattleand they are included in cattle figures. Sheep is the nextmost common species. As goat is represented by onlyone specimen, it is probable that most of the specimensin the ‘sheep or goat’ category derive from sheep, aswell as many of the specimens in the small ungulatecategory. Pig was the least common of the three maindomesticates.

As the site was intensively sampled, a large numberof bird, small mammal and lizard bones were recovered.The hunting of wild animals did not play an importantrole in the economy, nor did fishing. Bones of domesticfowl, quail and possibly red grouse (or grey partridge,but the former species is more likely: the size of thebone matches better with red grouse) are likely torepresent consumed birds. Bones of larger songbirdslike thrushes may also indicate consumption, but theycould derive from natural deaths too. Some passerine(perching bird, ‘songbird’) bones derive from such asmall species that their consumption is unlikely.

Variations observed in the species representation orin the anatomical representation within features andphases might be the result of changes in the depositionpattern inside the site or changes in the subsistencepattern. The higher number of small ungulates in themain enclosure ditch is likely to represent theirincreased importance compared to the earlier phase(Table 7). There seems to be a change in consumptionpattern, as more young cattle are represented in thematerial during the later phase. Ditch 1260 containedthe articulated skeletons of eleven sheep, whichprobably died in an accident or from disease.

Two house mice mandibles were radiocarbon-datedto 1115 ± 35 uncal. BP, cal. AD 860–1020 (SUERC-

14057, GU-15327), and 1245 ± 45 uncal. BP, cal. AD670–890 (SUERC-14234, GU-15326). This is theearliest dated house mouse from Ireland andcategorically confirms the presence of the species inIreland in the early medieval period. The history of thehouse mouse (Mus musculus) in Ireland is not yet fullyunderstood. Mice bones, interpreted to be those of thehouse mouse, were recovered in thirteenth-centurydeposits in Cork with some rat bones (McCarthy 2003,381). The house mouse had already arrived in Britainduring the Iron Age (Buczacki 2002, 474). Some claimthat it was introduced into Ireland during the Normanperiod (D’Arcy 2006, 8). According to Kelly (1997,243), the early Irish written sources mention the housemouse as a significant vermin. There was someuncertainty about this before now, however, becausethe Irish word for mouse, luch, seems also to have beenapplied to rats (ibid., 244).

Table 6—Species representation (NISP) in material. Rabbit andrat are likely to be later intrusions. Specimens deriving fromcomplete skeletons are in brackets.

Species NISPCattle 846Sheep 49 (318)Goat 1Sheep/goat 432Pig 196Horse 31Dog 58 (36)Cat 4 (96)Rabbit 8Rat 1Mouse 188Shrew 46Rodent 3Large ungulate 728Small ungulate 425Carnivore 6Small mammal 19Small animal 192Bird 172Fish 29Lizard 22Unidentified 9,725Total 13,631

Table 7—Proportion of cattle, sheep or goat and pig in featuresand areas (% NISP).

Phase Cattle Sh/g Pig NPhase 1 84 8 8 270Phase 2 (main 69 17 14 336enclosure ditch)


APPENDIX 2: SUMMARY OFENVIRONMENTAL REPORTSUSAN LYONS

IntroductionA comprehensive sampling strategy was employedwhereby a total of 158 bulk soil samples were taken,representing all significant fills and deposits. Onehundred and forty-three of these soil samples wereselected for the recovery of palaeobotanical remainsand small finds, and the results are presented below.

MethodologyOne hundred and forty-three soil samples wereselected for the recovery of palaeobotanical remainsand small finds. Each sample was subjected to a systemof flotation in a Siraf-style flotation tank. The floatingdebris (flot) was collected in a 250µm sieve and, oncedry, scanned using a binocular microscope. Anyremaining material in the flotation tank (retent) waswet-sieved through a 1mm mesh and air-dried. Thiswas then sorted by eye and any material ofarchaeological significance removed.

An assessment of each sample was made todetermine whether it would benefit from any moredetailed analysis.

Results summaryThe soil samples assessed from Carrowkeel contained amixed assemblage of archaeological andarchaeobotanical material, reflecting the domesticmaterial associated with occupational debris. Thebotanical remains were preserved by charring in allcases.

All samples contained wood charcoal in low to highconcentrations. A higher concentration of woodcharcoal was recorded from samples associated with theexcavation of ditch features, pit/linear features, post-holes and deposits associated with skeletal remains.

Barley, wheat and oats were all identified and are allcrops collectively cultivated since the early medievalperiod. The grains, which were altogether recorded insmall numbers, were randomly scattered across the sitein ones and twos and were not associated with anyconflagration deposits. This suggests that the material isthe result of secondary, or even tertiary, deposition ofcrop-processing debris, which would have enteredstructural deposits and grave fills via local waterchannels, through wind and human activity, or duringinfilling of open features.

The archaeological material recovered fromCarrowkeel reflects the typical refuse associated withdomestic activities, which has been discarded ordumped into open features around the site.

APPENDIX 3: THE METAL FINDSJULIE FRANKLIN

IntroductionThere were eighteen metal finds, most of which werefound in the enclosure ditch. Two finds came fromgrave fills, where they appear to be deliberateinclusions, and a handful more from the generalgraveyard soil and other features, possibly displacedfrom other graves or chance losses by visitors.

The dating for the cemetery runs from c. 700 to c.1450. It is assumed that the enclosure ditches were inuse during the earliest cemetery and silted up over thecourse of the cemetery’s lifespan.

Copper alloyBoth these objects are from the enclosure ditch. Thering is extremely robust and in very good condition. Itssize might suggest that it was intended as a toe-ring.There have been examples found in situ on the toebones of skeletons (Jones 1999, 95). Spiral rings have avery long lifespan and wide distribution (ibid.; Clarke1971). Examples are found all over Britain and Irelandand far further afield from as early as the Bronze Agethrough the Iron Age, Roman and early medievalperiods. The earliest examples tend to be of gold, laterones of copper alloy. The fact that they are extremelysimple to make and easily adjusted for any size of digithas ensured the survival of the type as other fashionshave come and gone. It would seem to date from theearliest use of the cemetery, whether displaced from anearly burial or a chance loss by a mourner.

1. Spiral finger-ring. Large heavy ring made fromtwo revolutions of thick ovoid-sectioned plainrod, with rounded terminals. Diam. 26mm,internal diam. 18mm, thickness 3.5mm. SF2,context 1029, fill of enclosure ditch 1023 (Fig. 3).

2. Strip. Rounded end with large rivet, broken atother end. Length 57mm, width 18mm. SF2,context 1030, fill of enclosure ditch 1023 (notillus.).

IronFinds from the ditchesFinds nos 5–7 are from the fill of the enclosure ditch,which is assumed to have silted up over the course ofthe cemetery’s use, while finds nos 3–4, both knives, arefrom another, probably earlier, ditch. Knife no. 6appears to have been damaged by being used as a leverto prise something up or open. Another lost tool, no.5, is an awl, used for piercing holes in leather (cf.Goodall 1993, 189, fig. 141:1478). This may originallyhave been buried in the grave of a craftsman, as a toolof his trade. Other finds are of less certain


Two tablesmentionedhere butnot sup-plied soref deletedOK?

identification. No. 6 probably formed a decorativefinial, such as are commonly found on candle prickets(cf. Egan 1998, 141). No. 7 may be part of themouthpiece from a horse-bit (cf. Clark 1995, 49).

3. Knife. Complete pointed single-sided blade.Whittle tang, possibly broken at end. Overalllength 148mm, length of blade 93mm, width ofblade 21mm. SF1, context 1315, secondary fill ofditch 1317 (Fig. 3).

4. Knife. Blade broken and bent at tip. Tang broken.Overall length 85mm, width of blade 14mm. SF1,context 1316, primary fill of ditch 1317.

5. Awl. Double-pointed tool, tapering evenly fromcentre to a square-sectioned point, and on theother side to a round-sectioned blunted point.Length 112mm, max. width 10mm. SF4, context1029, fill of enclosure ditch 1023.

6. Curling finial. Short length of wrought iron rolledinto tight curl. SF1, context 1076, fill of enclosureditch 1023 (Fig. 3).

7. Horse-bit? Length of iron, with remains of twobroken loops at each end in perpendicular planes.Length 69mm. SF1, context 1029, fill of enclosureditch 1023 (Fig. 3).

Finds from gravesBoth the finds from graves are a little enigmatic. Thereis little to identify the use of no. 8, as there is noapparent means of attaching it to anything. It may havebeen part of a strap end. No. 9 may be a pin, forsecuring either clothing or a shroud. Ringed pins are acommon find in early medieval Ireland, but aretypically in copper alloy (Edwards 1990, 141). This maybe a baser version of the same, in iron, possibly with anorganic ring.

8. Strip with possible rivet at wide end, tapering to arounded point at other. SF1, context 1437, fill ofgrave, SK100, younger child (18mths–2yrs),

beneath legs, phase 1 (650–850), 14C 765–895(Fig. 3).

9. Pin? Long thin pointed shaft, curled into a loop attop. Length 66mm. SF1, context 1518, fill of grave,SK116, younger child (5–6yrs), undisturbed stone-lined grave-cut, under left scapula, phase 3(1050–1250), 14C 1037–1192 (Fig. 3).

Nails and coffin fittingsThere appear to be very few coffin nails in theassemblage and none at all from grave fills, suggestingthat wooden coffins were a rarity at the cemetery.There were only seven nails from the site, spreadthrough the graveyard soil, pits and other features. Oneis very large and is more likely to be part of some kindof structural work than from a coffin. Of the remainder,four are small, suitable for fixing down coffin lids, whiletwo are larger and could have been used in theconstruction of coffin walls. Only one of the smallerexamples (from pit fill 1468), however, has mineralisedwood remains adhering to the shaft, a feature oftenfound in coffin nails where the wood decays with thenails in situ.

There are also two flat strip fragments, which maybe part of corner brackets or other coffin fittings. One,from the graveyard soil (1098), appears to bedecoratively shaped but is too fragmentary to be certainof its use or shape.

DiscussionThe finds from the ditch seem to form a more variedand interesting collection than those from graves,including tools, fittings and the large finger-ring.Unfortunately, most are of little help in terms of dating.Even the ring is of a type current for such a long timethat it cannot be taken as definitive dating evidence.There is little evidence of grave-goods. Two ironobjects may be dress accessories, or may be coffinfittings or shroud-fastenings.


OK? or1315


Site Ctxt CnMaterialSF Qty Description Box

2.25 1024 XR11Fe001 1 Plate fragment 2

2.25 1029 XR11Fe004 1 Awl. Double-pointed tool, tapering evenlyfrom centre to a square-sectioned point, andon the other side to a round-sectionedblunted point. Length 112mm, max. width10mm.

2

2.25 1030 XR10C07-0037

Cu002 1 Strip. Rounded end with large rivet, brokenat other end. Length 57mm, width 18mm.

2

2.25 1098 XR11Fe001 1 Plate fragment 2

2.25 1098 XR11Fe002 1 Nail shaft 2

2.25 1098 XR11Fe003 1 Nail, complete, round shaft, small flat roundhead

2

2.25 1098 XR11Fe004 1 Fragments 2

2.25 1217 XR11Fe001 1 Nail shaft? Round-sectioned. 2

2.25 1315 XR11C07-0038

Fe001 1 Knife. Complete pointed single-sided blade.Whittle tang, possibly broken at end. Overalllength 148mm, length of blade 93mm, widthof blade 21mm.

2

2.25 1316 XR11C07-0040

Fe001 1 Knife. Blade broken and bent at tip. Tangbroken. Overall length 85mm, width of blade14mm.

2

2.25 1324 XR11Fe001 1 Pin/wire/nail shaft 2

2.25 1468 XR11Fe001 1 Nail, small, with wood adhering to shaft(coffin nail?)

2

2.25 1493 XR11Fe001 1 Nail, complete, clenched tip, small roundhead

2

2.25 1029 XR11C07-0039

Fe001 1 Horse-bit? Length of iron, with remains oftwo broken loops at each end inperpendicular planes. Length 69mm.

3

2.25 1029 XR10C07-0036

Cu002 1 Spiral finger-ring. Large heavy ring madefrom double spiral of thick ovoid-sectionedwire. Diam. 26mm, internal diam. 18mm,thickness 3.5mm.

3

2.25 1076 XR11C07-0042

Fe001 1 Curling finial. Short length of wrought ironrolled into tight curl (e.g. from pricket?).

3

2.25 1437 XR11C07-0041

Fe001 1 Strip with possible rivet at wide end, taperingto a rounded point at other. From beneathlegs of SK100.

3

2.25 1518 SK116.XR11C07-0043

Fe001 1 Pin? Long thin pointed shaft, curled into aloop at top. Length 66mm.

3

Table 8—Iron finds from Carrowkeel.

APPPENDIX 4: NOTE ON OSTEOLOGICALTERMS

Age estimation is an assessment of biological ratherthan chronological age. It should be remembered thatit is not a precise science, using age categories ratherthan exact age estimations.

Younger adult: 18–25 yearsYounger middle adult: 25–35 yearsOlder middle adult: 35–45 yearsOlder adult: 45+ years

The age estimation of non-adults is easier, as thegrowth and maturation of the skeleton has been widelystudied. There are several systems used in thecategorisation of non-adult remains. In this case theywere placed into one of seven age categories, as used byskeletal biologists and clinicians (Scheuer and Black2000).

Foetus: 3rd foetal month until birthPerinate: around the time of birthNeonate: birth–2 monthsInfant: birth–1 yearYounger child: 1–6 yearsOlder child: 7–12 yearsAdolescent: 13–17 years


APPENDIX 5: RADIOCARBON DATES

Notes1. All of the sample material from Carrowkeel isunburnt human bone from inhumation burials, apartfrom two samples of mouse bone recovered from theprimary deposit of the main enclosure ditch (1023).

2. The calibration programme for dates fromCarrowkeel is that of Reimer et al. (2004).


Table 9—Radiocarbon dates.

Lab code Site Sample Yrs BP Calibrated date range

UB-7410 Carrowkeel Foetus 499 ± 29 One sigma AD 1415–1436 Two sigma AD 1400–1477UB-7411 Carrowkeel Child 1129 ± 31 One sigma AD 888–970 Two sigma AD 782–989UB-7412 Carrowkeel Adult 1186 ± 32 One sigma AD 781–885 Two sigma AD 721–960UB-7413 Carrowkeel Foetus 1148 ± 31 One sigma AD 785–968 Two sigma AD 780–975UB-7414 Carrowkeel Child 1156 ± 31 One sigma AD 783–960 Two sigma AD 779–971UB-7416 Carrowkeel Infant 1125 ± 31 One sigma AD 890–970 Two sigma AD 783–991UB-7417 Carrowkeel Adult 1228 ± 31 One sigma AD 717–865 Two sigma AD 689–884UB-7418 Carrowkeel Infant 1214 ± 31 One sigma AD 774–871 Two sigma AD 693–890UB-7419 Carrowkeel Foetus 638 ± 30 One sigma AD 1293–1388 Two sigma AD 1284–1396UB-7420 Carrowkeel Adult 1264 ± 31 One sigma AD 689–773 Two sigma AD 667–861UB-7422 Carrowkeel Foetus 815 ± 31 One sigma AD 1211–1261 Two sigma AD 1169–1269UB-7423 Carrowkeel Adult 1244 ± 32 One sigma AD 688–808 Two sigma AD 682–872UB-7424 Carrowkeel Child 1182 ± 32 One sigma AD 781–887 Two sigma AD 726–964UB-7425 Carrowkeel Adolescent 1250 ± 34 One sigma AD 687–802 Two sigma AD 676–870UB-7426 Carrowkeel Infant 830 ± 31 One sigma AD 1186–1254 Two sigma AD 1159–1265UB-7427 Carrowkeel Adult 940 ± 31 One sigma AD 1034–1153 Two sigma AD 1024–1161UB-7428 Carrowkeel Adult 906 ± 31 One sigma AD 1045–1170 Two sigma AD 1038–1208UB-7429 Carrowkeel Child 1104 ± 31 One sigma AD 896–981 Two sigma AD 885–1013UB-7430 Carrowkeel Child 1185 ± 31 One sigma AD 781–886 Two sigma AD 723–951UB-7431 Carrowkeel Child 1193 ± 34 One sigma AD 779–881 Two sigma AD 710–949UB-7432 Carrowkeel Child 1261 ± 33 One sigma AD 688–775 Two sigma AD 668–864UB-7433 Carrowkeel Adult 954 ± 31 One sigma AD 1026–1151 Two sigma AD 1022–1156UB-7434 Carrowkeel Infant 1215 ± 32 One sigma AD 773–873 Two sigma AD 692–890UB-7435 Carrowkeel Child 1203 ± 32 One sigma AD 778–870 Two sigma AD 694–936UB-7436 Carrowkeel Adult 1193 ± 31 One sigma AD 780–880 Two sigma AD 716–943UB-7437 Carrowkeel Infant 949 ± 32 One sigma AD 1028–1152 Two sigma AD 1023–1158UB-7438 Carrowkeel Adult 935 ± 31 One sigma AD 1039–1153 Two sigma AD 1024–1165UB-7439 Carrowkeel Child 1168 ± 32 One sigma AD 781–934 Two sigma AD 775–968UB-7440 Carrowkeel Adult 1301 ± 31 One sigma AD 667–766 Two sigma AD 660–772UB-7441 Carrowkeel Adult 1182 ± 31 One sigma AD 781–887 Two sigma AD 728–962UB-7442 Carrowkeel Child 907 ± 30 One sigma AD 1045–1168 Two sigma AD 1037–1207UB-7443 Carrowkeel Adult 1305 ± 34 One sigma AD 665–766 Two sigma AD 658–773UB-7444 Carrowkeel Child 1113 ± 32 One sigma AD 894–974 Two sigma AD 832–1015UB-7445 Carrowkeel Adult 1196 ± 35 One sigma AD 779–880 Two sigma AD 694–946UB-7446 Carrowkeel Infant 1223 ± 33 One sigma AD 723–869 Two sigma AD 689–887UB-7447 Carrowkeel Foetus 1193 ± 33 One sigma AD 780–881 Two sigma AD 712–947UB-7448 Carrowkeel Human bone 1249 ± 31 One sigma AD 688–801 Two sigma AD 678–869UB-7449 Carrowkeel Human bone 1113 ± 32 One sigma AD 894–974 Two sigma AD 832–1015UB-7482 Carrowkeel Human bone 1127 ± 1432 One sigma AD 889–971 Two sigma AD 782–991UB-7483 Carrowkeel Human bone 1227 ± 31 One sigma AD 718–866 Two sigma AD 689–884SUERC-14057 (GU-15326) Carrowkeel Mouse bone 1245 ± 45 One sigma AD 680–820 Two sigma AD 670–890SUERC-14057(GU-15327) Carrowkeel Mouse bone 1115 ± 35 One sigma AD 890–850 Two sigma AD 860–1020

Documents

An early medieval settlemt/cemetery at Carrowkeel, Co. Glaway