Archaeological Excavation of a Souterrain at Farrandreg, Dundalk, County Louth

County Louth Archaeological and History Society

Archaeological Excavation of a Souterrain at Farrandreg, Dundalk, County LouthAuthor(s): Deirdre MurphySource: Journal of the County Louth Archaeological and Historical Society, Vol. 24, No. 2(1998), pp. 261-280Published by: County Louth Archaeological and History SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/27729832 .

Accessed: 10/06/2014 08:03

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

County Louth Archaeological and History Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extendaccess to Journal of the County Louth Archaeological and Historical Society.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 193.104.110.119 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 08:03:07 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=clahs

http://www.jstor.org/stable/27729832?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


Archaeological Excavation of a

Souterrain at Farrandreg, Dundalk,

County Louth

By Deirdre Murphy

During the course of construction of a residential development at Farrandreg, Dundalk, Co

Louth construction workers uncovered a narrow, drystone-built, lintelled passageway. Construction

ceased immediately and an archaeological assessment of the site began in July 1998. Following the

site assessment, it was recommended by Duchas, the Heritage Service, Department of Arts, Heritage,

Gaeltacht and the Islands that the entire site be excavated due to the risk of collapse in the future.

Excavation of the site, which was carried out by Archaeological Consultancy Services Ltd., commenced in October 1998 and was completed in November 1998.

The site is located in the north-west of Farrandreg townland which lies close to Castletown.

There is no evidence for Mesolithic activity in the locality, however traces of occupation have been

found in Rockmarshall three miles to the east. This consisted of some flint tools, d?bitage, and remains

of camp-fires, along with shell middens that lay on a narrow portion of land stretching into the sea,

which was much further inland at the time. More evidence may lie under the estuarine silts of the

Dundalk Bay area (Gosling 1991, 239). Late Mesolithic material has also been collected further south

down the coast at Salterstown (Hodgers 1994, 242). During the Neolithic period the area appears to

have been heavily forested which limited farming, although the presence of court tombs clustered

around the Cooley mountains suggests the location of communities further north. The area does not

seem to have been intensively settled until the late Neolithic-Early Bronze age transition (3,200-2,200

B.C). Late Neolithic flint tools have been located in the environs of the Ardee Road. Afulachtfiadh at Ballybarrack Hill, nine pit and cist burials and thirteen rock art locations (Gosling 1991, 241)

suggests considerable Early Bronze Age settlement in the area. The destroyed remains of a further

fulachtfiadh were located at Farrandreg just north of the present site (Murphy 1995a). At Castletown,

just north of Farrandreg, a standing stone is situated at the foot of Dun Dealgan or Cuchulainn's

Castle as it is known locally. A further stone was located at Bellew's Bridge. Two further standing stones are located at Tankardsrock (Fig. 1) and an Early Bronze Age cist burial is also known in this

townland. The former monument type may have formed Bronze Age reference points in the landscape

(Gosling 1991, 242). An ancient routeway, the Slighe Miodluachra, running through the mountains

and connecting Ulster and Leinster may have extended through this area.

In the early historic period the earliest mention of the area in the annals refers to Dun Delca

in 1000 AD which is almost certainly located at Castletown, perhaps close to the mound or motte. It

appears to have been a major assembly site and may have been similar in form to Emain Macha or

Navan fort in County Armagh. This site was a major complex of monuments used for inaugural and

religious ceremonies and was a tribal focus. Given its location on the borders of Ulster it was probably of symbolic and strategic importance. There have been no material remains equated with this early site. However a souterrain is located within the mound suggesting a pre-1170 origin. The word

souterrain is derived from the French sous terrain which means under ground and refers to artificial

underground structures either built from drystone walling and covered with stone lintels, or cut into

bedrock or hard boulder clay (Buckley and Sweetman 1991, 100). These structures are often referred

261



262 County Louth Archaeological and Historical Journal

{Stondinastone

Fig. 1. Farrandreg Souterrain: location of site and record of monuments in surrounding area.

Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey by permission of the Minister for Finance.



Excavation of Souterrain at Farrandreg, Dundalk 263

to locally as caves, a translation of the Irish uaimha. The predominant type of construction in Co

Louth is of drystone due to the ease of splitting the local Silurian greywackes. These monuments have

been associated with ringforts, ecclesiastical and open settlements, and with promontory forts

(Edwards 1990, 29). There are two souterrains incorporated within the passage tomb at Knowth (ibid.,

44) which was evidently an important centre of power in early medieval Ireland. Some ringforts, such as that at Dunmore, Co Kilkenny, are located above natural caves, and the recovery of numerous

human bones probably associated with the plundering of the cave by the Vikings in 928 (Harbison 1970, 129) would suggest temporary occupation at the same period. This may suggest a possible link

between caves and souterrains in the minds of those who constructed them. It is thought that they were

used as places of refuge in times of frequent raiding which is suggested by their complex morphology.

Many have different levels entered by narrow passageways known as creeps, or through dropholes, and several incorporate dead ends and sharp right-angled turns. Changes in roof height are common,

allowing for slow progress, while many include beehive-shaped corbelled chambers. Souterrains may have been used for storage although artefacts are rarely found within the chambers and it is probably

only occasionally that they have been used for this purpose. Monuments of similar type have been located in Cornwall, Brittany and Scotland

(particularly the Western Isles). These structures have largely been dated to the Iron Age. However the

Irish examples are seen as later in the series, with one dated by dendrochronology to 822 + 9 AD

(Edwards 1990, 32). There are 151 recorded souterrains in Co Louth with a further 139 possible

examples (Buckley and Sweetman 1991, 100). A large proportion of these are isolated and not

associated with ringforts, however some examples may have had destroyed enclosures. There is a

dense concentration of these monuments between the Fane and Castletown rivers and it has been

suggested by Buckley that this was the territory of the Conaille Muirtheimne, a tribal group located in

this area around the first millennium BC (Gosling 1991, 247). An association of many of these north

Louth sites with ceramics known as Souterrain Ware illustrates a link with Counties Antrim and

Down. Historical sources also suggest a link between the Conaille Muirtheimne tribal group and the

Ulaid tribal grouping to the north.

There is no current evidence to suggest anything but a heavily concentrated dispersed rural

settlement pattern associated with these monuments. It is worth noting that no less than ten souterrains

are located within a one mile radius of the site at Farrandreg. The area around Farrandreg was

extensively settled and cultivated during the medieval period following the Anglo-Norman invasion

of 1169-70. The land in this part of Louth was granted to Bertram de Verd?n who erected a motte

castle at Castletown c.1185. This location became the focus of a borough settlement which was

eventually eclipsed by the market town situated at Dundalk (Gosling 1991, 253-62). The site is located on a significant south-facing natural slope and overlooks the town to the south-east and the Cooley

mountains to the north (Fig. 1). The northern half of the slope has been levelled recently as part of the

adjoining housing development.

ARCHAEOLOGICAL EXCAVATION

An initial investigation of the site was carried out in July 1998. On arriving at the site the

topsoil had already been stripped. The location of the proposed house was a split-level site and therefore the machine had removed 0.70m of ground. A drystone, lintelled passageway was visible in the western section and it did not appear to have been damaged by the machine. This passage was a

maximum of 0.41m in width and 0.24m in height (Fl). The side walls consisted of three courses of flat well-cut blocks of greywacke averaging 0.09m wide by 0.08m high. These supported a heavy lintel of the same stone which was 0.49m wide by 0.24m in height. A further dump of large stones up to 0.26m in height lay over this lintel. This was in turn covered by redeposited natural which was



to 2

Fig. 2. Excavated areas of souterrain.




mixed with 20% brown clay with sparse small flecks of charcoal (F2). This was contrasted with the

natural sandy yellow extremely compact boulder clay which contained frequent small angular stones

(F3). The passageway continued sloping downwards and appeared to be clear for 1.60m of its length.

Beyond this point it seemed to be blocked. The sloping floor of the passageway had been scarped out

of the natural. The extent of the passage above the ground could be traced as F2 could be distinguished from the natural ground. The topsoil was completely stripped in the vicinity of the site to establish the

extent of the souterrain. A wide band of F2 up to 2.0m in width continued both north and south of the

passageway and perpendicular to it. The staining (F2) terminated at 11.70m east of the passageway. A

grouping of irregularly shaped angular greywackes with average dimensions of 0.3m by 0.2m was

located just north of the passageway underlying F2 (F4). This deposit was not removed. Beyond these

stones the stain changed to a mid-brown humic soft clay which contained frequent flecks of charcoal, occasional flecks of bone and lenses of burnt clay (F5). This deposit contained a small looped bronze

object (95E109:5:1). This stain could be traced for three further right-angled turns. To ascertain

whether this stain formed the path of the souterrain a rectangular test trench was excavated.

Up to 0.6m of fill was removed at which point large, roughly-squared blocks of greywacke were encountered. These constituted the side walls of the passageway (F6). There was a maximum

width of 0.8m between these walls with a slight narrowing to 0.6m at the northern end of the trench.

The walls were a single course thick with blocks up to 0.30m thick and 0.32 m in height and 0.54 m

in length. These walls had up to six courses and measured a maximum of 1.10m in height. The western

wall was curved inwards while the eastern wall was relatively vertical. The space between the walls

was filled with F5 to a depth of 1.45m below existing ground level. At this point a compact flat surface

composed of sterile redeposited natural was encountered (F7). This layer was up to 0.9m in thickness

and overlay a flat flag which was 0.67m across, with the western edge lying flush with the wall of the

passage (F8). Beneath this flag was a cavity. The flag was not lifted however and using a hand tape it was noted that the depth below measured a further 0.52m. To the east of this slab F5 overlay a flag which was angled downwards with its eastern side flush to the eastern wall some 1.45m below

existing ground level (F9). To the north of this flag were three flat stones which sat in a ledge cut into

the natural (F10). The remainder of the floor consisted of levelled natural ground. North of this again a flat slab was uncovered within the matrix of F5. This slab was some 1.18m in length and 0.4m in

width. Excavation of this area did not proceed any further.

A further small trench, 0.4m in width, was excavated in the north corner of the site to

determine whether this area was connected to the souterrain. A layer of dark brown humic clay, with

inclusions of sparse fragments of bone, and lenses of red burnt clay was exposed. This layer was up to 0.20m in thickness (Fl 1). This overlay a layer of redeposited natural with inclusions of charcoal

and burnt bone (F12). It contained a lens of dark humic material. The layer was excavated to a depth of 0.62m below existing ground level. It was decided to halt excavation at this point as this material was stratified and probably formed the fill of a further section of the passage.

Complete excavation of the souterrain began on Monday, 28 September 1998. On return to

the site the flag discovered on the floor of the original test trench had collapsed and two overlapping

passages were located running south-west. A decision was made with the consent of Duchas to

excavate the exposed filled-in portion of the souterrain and the interior of the lower passages. For the

purposes of description the souterrain is divided into Area One, Two, Three, Four and Five according to its component parts (Fig. 2).

AREA ONE (Figs. 3, 4) Area One was located at the east of the site. A deposit of redeposited natural up to 0.26m in

thickness, which was visible following site clearing, was removed. This consisted of a mid-brown,

sticky silty clay which contained frequent shattered chips of greywacke and frequent charcoal flecks



to 0\

Fig. 3. Plan of souterrain showing section and elevation lines.




and sparse fragments of animal bone (F17/F12). As this was removed the top stones of a rectangular

shaped chamber became apparent. The F12 deposit overlay a layer of soft dark brown sticky clay which had a relatively high organic content (F16). It contained occasional lenses of ash, frequent small

(up to 0.05m in diameter) fragments of charcoal, lenses of redeposited natural and occasional large, flat broken slabs of greywacke (up to 0.74 by 0.21m). It also contained moderate quantities of animal

bone, shell, i.e., fragments of oyster and cockle shell, and occasional snail shell fragments, along with

a broken rotary quern, two bronze stick pins, a hollow bone cylinder, fragments of iron slag and a

corroded tanged knife. It was between 0.81 and 1.08m in thickness and overlay the natural boulder

clay which formed the souterrain floor (F19). It extended between the chamber walls. The souterrain

in this area was rectangular with rounded corners, up to 2.8m north-south in internal diameter, 4.4m

east-west, and had a central dividing wall which created two narrow passages which could be accessed

from either end. The souterrain walls were a maximum of 1.0m in height and were constructed from

drystone. The northern, eastern and southern walls of the chamber were built from reasonably regular,

roughly-cut, greywacke blocks (average 0.40 by 0.08m). Some small fragments of a decayed granular, dark coloured stone, probably granophyre were used (F21). The walls were corbelled outwards

gradually with the rise of the wall. The central dividing wall was 0.91m in width and was constructed

from several very large blocks of stone. In the south-west of the chamber a rectangular feature was

located. A huge rectangular block with clean cut faces (0.6m in height and 0.4m in width) formed the

eastern wall of the feature and was angled to the north-west. The feature was 0.81m north-south and

had a clay rear wall cut into the natural clay with an undercut edge. On the top of this clay cut wall

were a row of small stones. The floor sloped slightly at the rear of this ante-chamber. A large quantity of packing, consisting of stone and redeposited natural, could be seen behind the souterrain walls

within this feature (F22). The cut was visible behind this packing (F18). The floor in the north of the

chamber sloped westwards towards the creep. There were no features noted in the floor, apart from a

pit located in the north-east which contained a large stone.

AREA TWO (Figs. 3, 4) This area consisted of the entrance and the creep. The fill consisted of a soft, dark brown,

silty clay which was the same as F16 in Area One (F5 - see Area Three). It extended between the

souterrain walls and overlay the top of them and was between 0.4 and lm in thickness. The deposit increased in thickness from east to west. Artefacts encountered within this fill consisted of a red flint

scraper and fragments of souterrain ware along with fragments of animal bone and a whetstone. The

entrance was a small loop-shaped feature entered through a slope cut into natural which was defined

by low stone walls 0.46m in height with an internal width of 0.9m. An oval slot (0.4m north-south by 0.21m east-west and 0.38m in depth with a flat bottom and filled by F5) was located alongside the

northern wall (F20). The entrance sloped gradually downwards entering the creep running east while

the ground level rose to the west before dropping. The original height of the hill prior to stripping was

14.98m OD while the entrance walls were located at 14.09m OD. The creep was constructed in the

same way as the entrance with the floor level dropping to the east and west. It was a maximum of 0.8m

in internal diameter and at the west the wall had a semicircular end which was corbelled upwards. The

walls ranged from 0.28m in height to 1.01m. A single clay-cut step was located approximately halfway

along the western section of the creep. At the western end the creep met the wide chamber in Area

Three through a further clay-cut step.

AREA THREE (Figs. 3, 5) Area Three consisted of a wide north-west/south-east running chamber filled by F5 which

was first uncovered during testing. The fill contained several large flat greywacke fragments (up to

1.3m by 0.8m by 0.3m) and was up to 1.45m in depth and overlay the souterrain walls. The chamber




ELEVATION OF AREA t. WESTERN SECTION: A-A1

+ Tl3MmOD

AREA 1: WEST SECTION B-B1

AREA 2: NORTH SECTION: CREEP SECTION CCI

Fig. 4. Sections and elevations of area 1 and area 2.




had walls up to 1.28m in height and 1.8m in width and was entered from the creep via a further clay cut step. The walls were corbelled outwards and the western facade was constructed from a series of

very large, roughly hewn, boulders while the eastern facade was built from more regular stones. It was

clear that a considerable quantity of stonework had collapsed from the walls. The difference between

creep and chamber again seemed to be demarcated by large, almost rectangular, boulders. The

chamber utilised natural as its floor at 12.7m OD. The central feature in this chamber was a

rectangular drop hole with a semi-circular end which terminated under the eastern wall of the

chamber. The western portion of this drop hole was originally roofed with the lintel noted during

testing (F8) while the eastern area was open. A rectangular wall cavity was located in the eastern wall

above the drop hole (Fig. 5). It was up to 0.61m in depth and 0.2m in width. There were no

corresponding slots in the western wall. A massive boulder, 1.24m in width and 0.58m in height, lay

directly above the western profile of the drop hole. At the southern end of the chamber the stonework was limited to two courses in height and the chamber led into Area Four.

AREA FOUR (Figs. 3, 5) Area Four consisted of a southward-running passage cut into the natural clay (F23). Its length

depends on where one demarcates it from Area Three. It was up to 1.0m in depth and was filled with

F2 which was found to contain a single bead along with occasional bone fragments and sparse flecks

of charcoal. A number of stones were located along the western and eastern walls underlying F2 at the

south end of the passage abutting the northern wall of the air vent (F25). The floor sloped gradually northwards towards Area Three and was similar to the floor of the souterrain elsewhere, i.e.,

compacted natural clay with sparse charcoal flecks with a moderate amount of grey silt (F24). The air

vent ran from south-east to north-west and a section up to 4.4m in length was exposed (F14). The

walls measured up to 0.26m in height and lintels were missing from its length. A portion of the

northern wall had previously been removed. The air vent extended for a total length of 6.5m to its

terminal point in the upper passage of Area Five. It had been partially filled with a sticky, mid-brown,

clay loam which had sparse flecks of charcoal and a roughly-worked bone blade and was

contemporary with F2 (F26).

AREA FIVE (Figs. 3, 5) Area Five consisted of the two lower passages or chambers which were accessed through the

drop hole in Area Three.

Upper Passage: The upper passage was accessed through the drop hole described in Area Three. The

length of the passage measured 8.5m from the north wall of the drop hole to the rear of the

passageway. It ranged from 1.04m in height at the drop hole to 1.5m in the centre to 1.05m at the end.

The passageway was an average of 1.3m in width. A deposit of dark brown humic clay mixed with

gravel was noted within the drop hole and extended for elm into the passage (F27). This contained

large fragments of stone including a large flat greywacke slab (which was 0.6 by 1.06m by 0.16m). It

contained occasional small charcoal fragments, animal bone and a decorated bone pin. The floor of

the drop hole sloped from north-east to south-west at a sharp angle before levelling off in the

passageway from 11.70m OD to 10.11m OD. The passage was constructed from randomly-coursed blocks of regular size. At 6.5m along its length a semicircular drop hole was evident. This was very similar to the drop hole in Area Three. Three lintels spanned the passage beyond the drop hole to the

corbelled semicircular end of the passage. The air vent entered the souterrain high in the eastern wall

just above the drop hole. Four rectangular slots were visible, two either side of the drop hole which

contained small quantities of charcoal (F31). A single charcoal sample taken from this feature

submitted for radiocarbon dating to Queen's University, Belfast yielded a date of 1061 + 44BP, which

when calibrated to two sigma provides a date range of AD 888-1027. The remainder of the floor in




ELEVATION OF SECTION D-D1: AREA 3

ttna?r

m futoaor +

ELBtAmNOfAmvarr. southface:B*i

SECTION THROUGH LOWER

SECTION THROUGH UPPER PASSAGE: AREAS

Fig. 5. Sections and elevations of area 3, area 4 and area 5.




this passage was natural clay and contained no features or artefacts.

Lower Chamber: As noted above, this chamber was entered through the drop hole. The floor dropped away sharply from the drop hole and the chamber took a sharp turn westwards. The chamber was a

total of 7.8m in length and ranged from 1.2m in width to 2.0m at the western end. The chamber was

between 1.7m in height at the drop hole increasing to 2.1m at its end. The floor of the souterrain was

cut into bedrock (F35) and sloped considerably from the drop hole upwards from 9.16m OD to 9.54m

OD. A charcoal-rich clay was located at the north-western end of the chamber (F28). This overlay the

thin, mid-brown, clay deposit which in turn overlay bedrock and extended throughout the lower

chamber (F15). This was up to 0.08m thick and had sparse charcoal flecks and two bone needles

which became lodged in this deposit which had accumulated in a natural groove in the bedrock close

to F28. The charcoal-rich clay was up to 0.50m across and 0.40m north-west to south-east. A large

part of a broken tub-shaped souterrain-ware pot was evident within this layer along with a single

edged composite bone comb. At the north-east of the chamber two pits were found dug into the natural

(F29, F30). The fill of these pits comprised a thin deposit of tiny bones, probably rodent bones, which

overlay a layer of mid-brown clay which contained frequent rock chips and was up to 0.4m in depth (F33, F34). The pits were of irregular section. The walls were of similar construction to the upper

passage but incorporated bedrock into the lower walls on either side. A rectangular-sectioned

cupboard/recess was noted in the southern wall which was some 0.62m in depth (F32).

Finds

The finds assemblage consisted of objects of bronze, copper alloy, iron, stone, flint, bone, and pottery sherds. A single, looped, bronze object (95E109:5:1), which was possibly a buckle, was

recovered from the site. A copper-alloy stick pin with curving pointed shaft, which belongs to class

three, was also recovered (95E109:16:2). The decoration on the head of the pin consisted of a type three division (O Rahilly 1998, 24) with a dot between each line. This decorative technique is identical

to that found on a similar pin from Waterford which dated to the mid-twelfth century (Scully 1997,

438). A rectangular-sectioned copper-alloy implement with a curving head, possibly a toilet or medical

instrument, was also recovered from the same feature (F16) (95E109:16:3). The reverse of the

implement has a panel decorated with cross hatching. Iron finds from the site consisted of four

corroded objects, fragments of iron slag and a corroded iron whittle tanged blade (95E109:16:4). Four

other iron objects were also recovered which included an oblong object, a flat, iron, sub-rectangular

object and a looped iron object which thickened considerably at the unlooped end and was possibly an iron weight (95E109:5:4). Stone finds included a semicircular whetstone (95E109:16:1), a rounded

stone which was possibly a hammer stone (95E109:16:6), and a sandstone rotary quern fragment

(95E109:16:5). This rotary quern had a central perforation and a handle hole which was burnt on one

side (Fig. 7). The flint finds consisted of a single, red, flint end-scraper with steep retouching on the

cutting edge (95E 109:5:2; Fig. 6). Finds of bone consisted of a bone handle, three bone needles, a

bone comb and a bone blade. The bone handle consisted of a hollow bone cylinder, cut from long bone

with perforation and external polish (95E109:5:3; Fig. 6). A roughly-cut bone blade and a polished bone pin beater with expanded perforated head was also among the assemblage. The bone comb

consisted of a single-sided, composite class F type, with slightly arching back (classification after

Dunlevy 1988). The side plates of the comb are held in place by three iron rivets. It dates to the early to late twelfth century (Fig. 6). The pottery consisted mainly of sherds which were divided into

seventeen body sherds and two rim sherds of souterrain ware. A fragmentary souterrain-ware vessel

was recovered from the lowest passage chamber. This consisted of the remains of approximately

three-quarters of a tub-shaped souterrain-ware vessel, dark brown to black fabric, with mica inclusions

and voids. The vessel has a flat base and gently curves outwards and then inwards at its rim. The vessel




-m

-m

V-,?l a

i %

T 95E109:27:1 ii 95E109:15:3

95E109:26:1 95E109:15:1

95E109:5:2

95E109:15:2

95E109:5:3

Fig. 5. Finds: bone blade, bone needle, bone pin beater, bone needle, bone comb, flint end-scraper,

copper-alloy stick pin, bone cylinder.




Plate 1. Finds: comb, bone blade, bone needles and pin beater.

is undecorated except for a protruding lip around the rim. The fragments are badly scorched (Fig. 7;

95E109:28:1).

List of Finds

95E 109:2:1 Small black circular bead with central hole. 95E109:5:1 Looped bronze object, possibly a buckle. 95E109:5:2 Red flint end scraper with steep retouching on cutting edge (Fig. 6). 95E109:5:3 Hollow bone cylinder, cut from long bone with perforation and external polish (Fig. 6). 95E109:5:4 Looped iron object, thickening considerably at the unlooped end, possibly a weight. 95E109:5:5 Grass-marked body sherd of souterrain ware, light grey external and internal surface, with

dark grey core with voids, gravel inclusions and mica flecks. The external surface is grass-marked while the internal surface retains evidence for brushing or a similar technique to keep the surface even.

95E109:5:6-7 Body sherd, dark brown fabric, grass marks externally, evenly fired with small stone

inclusions, souterrain ware.



95E109:16:5 Quern ?tone

10cm

" '- if-:

Scm

95E109:28:1 Souterrain ware

Fig. 7. Finds: portion of a rotary quern, fragmentary souterrain-ware vessel.




95E 109:5:8 Rim sherd, thick at rim and tapering downwards, dark brown core, grey interior, grass marked externally, evenly fired with small stone and mica inclusions, souterrain ware.

95E 109:5:9 Body sherd, dark brown fabric, evenly fired with small stone inclusions, souterrain ware.

95E 109:5:10 Rim sherd, dark brown core, grey interior, pinkish-red interior, with small stone and

mica inclusions, souterrain ware.


95E109:5:12 Body sherd, orange fabric, external grass marking, reddish-grey core with small stone

and mica inclusions, souterrain ware.


95E109:5:14-16 Body sherd, orange fabric, external grass marking, reddish-grey core with small

stone and mica inclusions, souterrain ware.

95E109:15:1 Bone needle with expanded head (Fig. 6). 95E109:15:2 Fragment of a single-sided, composite, Class F, bone comb with slightly arching

back.The side plates are held in place by three iron rivets. (Classification after Dunlevy 1988)

early-late twelfth century (Fig. 6). 95E109:15:3 Polished bone needle with triangular expanded head (Fig. 6). 95E109:15:4 Oblong iron object. 95E109:15:5 Flat iron sub-rectangular object. 95E109:15:6-7 Two corroded unidentifiable iron objects. 95E109:16:1 Semicircular whetstone.

95E109:16:2 Copper-alloy stick pin with curving pointed shaft which belongs to class three (non functional kidney ringed). Decoration on head consists of a type 3 division (O Rahilly 1998, 24) with a dot between each line. This decorative technique is identical to that found on E527:1338:9

found in Waterford which dated to the mid-twelfth century (Scully 1997, 438) (Fig. 6). 95E109:16:3 Rectangular-sectioned copper-alloy implement with curving head, possibly a toilet or

medical instrument, the reverse has a panel decorated with cross hatching.

95E109:16:4 Corroded iron whittle tanged blade.

95E109:16:5 Sandstone rotary quern fragment with central perforation and handle hole, burnt on one

side (Fig. 7). 95E109:16:6 Rounded stone, possible hammerstone.

95E109:16:7-9 Fragments of iron slag. 95E109:16:10-13 Body sherds, dark brown fabric with gritty inclusions, souterrain ware.

95E109:16:14 Body sherd, orange interior and exterior, dark grey core, souterrain ware.

95E109:16:15-16 Body sherds, orange sandy fabric, souterrain ware.

95E109:16:17 Iron object. 95E 109:26:1 Roughly cut bone blade (Fig. 6). 95E109:27:1 Polished bone pin beater with expanded perforated head (Fig. 6). 95E 109:27:2 Corroded iron object 95E 109:27:3 Corroded iron object. 95E 109:28:1 Fragmentary souterrain-ware vessel, consisting of the remains of approximately three

quarters of a tub-shaped, souterrain-ware vessel, dark brown to black fabric, with mica inclusions

and voids. The vessel has a flat base and gently curves outwards and then inwards at its rim. The vessel is undecorated except for a protruding lip around the rim. The fragments are badly scorched

(Fig. 7).

List of Feature Numbers

Fl Drystone lintelled passage. F2 Redeposited natural in south of site. F3 Natural compact boulder clay.



County Louth Archaeological and Historical Journal

Plate 2. Overall aerial view of souterrain.

Stone dump.

Dark humic clay. Stone walls of souterrain.

Redeposited natural within passage. Flat flag on base of souterrain.

Collapsed slab/flag. Corbels providing support for F9. Dark humic clay in the north of the site.

Redeposited natural.

Unstratified. Air vent.

Deposit on the lower chamber floors.

Primary fill of Area One.

Redeposited secondary fill of Area One.

Original cut for the souterrain. Floor of the souterrain in Areas One, Two and Three. Oval cut into natural in entrance feature.

Masonry walls of Area One.

Packing material between masonry and cut.

Cut for passage in Area Four. Floor deposit in Area Four.

Stone walling in Area Four. Fill of air vent.

Blocking on the floor of drop hole in Areas Three/Five.

F4

F5

F6

F7

F8

F9

FIO Fil

F12 F13 F14 F15 F16 F17 F18 F19 F20 F21 F22 F23 F24 F25 F26 F27




F28 Charcoal-rich clay in north-west of lower chamber, Area Five.

F29 Pit in floor of lower chamber, Area Five.

F30 Pit in floor of lower chamber, Area Five.

F31 Rectangular slots above drop hole.

F32 Rectangular wall cupboard. F33 Fill of pit F30.

F34 Fill of pit F29.

F35 Bedrock.

Discussion

As already mentioned Farrandreg is one of a large number of souterrains in the

Dundalk/north Louth area. The suggested method of construction would be the excavation of large trenches into which stones were lowered with the interior being filled with earth. This allowed the

walls to be corbelled outwards. The lintels were lowered into position and the earth removed with the

trench subsequently being backfilled (Warner 1979, 107). This would account for the large construction trench located around the souterrain cut into natural ground. Some of the stone was

clearly quarried locally and was largely split longitudinally. There is a large quarry located to the west

of the site on the ridge. The construction trenches clearly yielded a certain quantity of natural bedrock.

Large boulders are also available in the surrounding boulder clay. The large oval slot in the entrance

feature was probably the location for a large upright stone in the absence of traces of wood and may have further restricted access. The original height of the creep is unknown, however it would clearly be very restricted. The downward slope would probably direct the uninitiated individual into the

rectangular chamber in Area One. Again the original roof height of this section is unknown. The lintels

recorded within the upper passage in Area Five would easily span either side of the central supporting wall in Area One. A feature very similar to this, although not fully recorded, was noted in a souterrain

located in Demesne townland, a short distance southwards (Tempest 1933, 95). This suggests local

traditions of building techniques. The earth-cut feature with the large cut 'jamb' has the distinct

appearance of an entrance and may have formed a false access suggesting further passageways to the

intruder. The clay-cut steps evident in the western creep are paralleled in a number of souterrains with

rock-cut examples being present at Marshes Upper. The chamber in Area Three probably stood to a

similar height to that in Area Five. The 'chambers' in the souterrain have little differentiation in

construction apart from gradually widening and increasing in height. This seems to be common with

souterrains in north Louth (Gowen 1992, 109). It seems that the clay cut in Area Four was a destroyed passage, the basal stones of which

were visible at its southern end. The robbing of the air vent must have taken place at this time. The

different fill and the robbing of the side walls suggests that this episode took place at a different period to the robbing of the lintels and back-filling of the remaining souterrain. The dark loam layer filling the souterrain seems to have accumulated over a short period of time after robbing of the lintels. The

composition of this layer containing ash, charcoal, domestic artefacts and iron slag suggests

occupation debris from a settlement. It remains a significant possibility that this debris derived from

a settlement somewhere on the hilltop. It is similar to the primary fill encountered during excavations

at souterrain B, Marshes Upper which also contained closely comparable domestic artefacts and had

its lintels robbed (Gowen 1992, 87). The artefact assemblage suggests that the souterrain was

backfilled in the twelfth century. It also suggests that the overlying settlement had a similar range of

activities to the enclosed sites at Marshes Upper. The souterrain ware reinforces the predominance of

this ceramic type in north County Louth and the links with Counties Antrim and Down at a time when

the remainder of the country did not commonly use native pottery (Gosling 1991, 246). This crudely made pottery, with simple grass marks from the drying process or a cordon below the rim, dates to

between the eighth and the twelfth centuries (Edwards 1990, 74). The difference in the material



m^r**

Plate 3. Area 3: chamber and drop-hole from the south-east.

00 n

Plate 4. Area 5: view of lower chamber from north-east.




culture, and the distinct shape of the souterrains, without any major differentiation between passage and chamber (unlike those with beehive chambers), further illustrates the variation in the often

thought homogenous culture of the period and may provide avenues for research into the relationship between artefacts, monuments and social practice in the future.

A large area either side of the souterrain had been stripped by machine and revealed no

evidence for an enclosing ditch. This was supported by the original extensive test trenches (Murphy 1995b). The section along the hillside showed sod lying over ploughsoil which came directly down

on to natural. The lower chambers were largely undisturbed. The plans of both drop-holes are similar

in construction to those at Marshes Upper. The four rectangular slots are also paralleled in souterrain

B, Marshes Upper and can be interpreted as slots for wooden beams which could have incorporated some form of trapdoor. The recess in the lowest chamber is paralleled in numerous examples (Warner 1979, 110). The occupation material located in the lower chamber yielded very personal ornaments

such as the comb, pot and needles -

perhaps provisions for times of refuge. It seems certain that a

conscious decision was made, no later than the twelfth century, to abandon or in-fill the souterrain.

The reason for this decision is unknown. Clearly the robbing of lintels would be both a convenient source of cut stone and the simplest way of decommissioning a souterrain prior to back-filling. The

digging of ground to find souterrains is attested to in historical sources (Lucas 1971-3, 174).

Farrandreg in its Wider Landscape

Farrandreg is the fifteenth souterrain to be excavated in Co Louth. The others are the

Ballybarrack complex (Buckley and Sweetman 1991, 103-5, nos 270-2), Donaghmore (ibid., 120-1, no. 313), the Marshes Upper complex (ibid., 128-9, nos 356-63) and Millockstown (ibid., 130-1, nos

366-7). Out of these, three were unenclosed. Similarly, analysis of souterrains in Co Meath suggests that between 65% and 75% of souterrains were unenclosed (Clinton 1998, 125). Studies in Cork found that 40% of souterrains were unenclosed (Monk 1998, 37). Unenclosed souterrains with house sites are known from Antrim (Edwards 1990, 46). Some 42.6% of the ringforts in Co Louth are enclosed

by a single bank with no external fosse (Buckley and Sweetman 1991, 152). In this case intense

agricultural activity may have destroyed many examples. In the 10.4 square kilometres around

Farrandreg the most common monuments are unenclosed souterrains. Three souterrains are now

known from Farrandreg townland, three from Lisnawully, three from Demesne, two from

Newtownbalregan, one from Tankardsrock and six from Donaghmore (Fig. 2). The only ringfort in this area is at Tankardsrock although the place name Lisnawully may imply a further monument. In the townland of Castletown there is a souterrain located within the motte of Dun Dealgan. This site also occupies a gap in the otherwise dense distribution of enclosures and ringforts in northern Co Louth. Given that many of the townlands may relate to their Early Historic predecessors this suggests a significant settlement density taking into account the problems of which examples are contemporary.

The size and complexity of Farrandreg compares well to those excavated at other locations. The focus

of a large grouping of souterrains in this area may be attributable to the location of Dun Dealgan as an assembly site in the early medieval period. It seems highly likely that further investigation in the townlands around this site will yield yet more examples of this monument type.

Bibliography

Abbreviations

C.L.A.J./C.L.A.H.J. County Louth Archaeological (and Historical) Journal

P.R.I.A. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy

Buckley, V.M. and 1991 Archaeological Survey of County Louth, Dublin.

Sweetman, P.D.



Ray T. Garvey, "HmslPue' The Michiglan Avenue

Haberdasher "NEW-HAT-ING" 'The noe hats this seaston Boom to thtV~o-Thtit Something I-In their etylo and ntaite-up

| hich moo{-t of US 10oo; for anid Of Course, It'. Our Duty

theoo days. nas novor before, to get all the good moto~t and noevino found In tho srorid's Borsalino world's bs. .. . $10-$12 Mallory next best.$6-$10

New Cloth Hatse.. .$4 5 Juot thron hoandiinoro of a. s'ryl.lliABI.F: lIA~T'SIIoWING andl as 00501L titre, Is thalt Sodden Service Fetoture tha~t osnnes holur sood titoo at iRAY

T. GARVEY & CO.

38 Miehigeon. Open Evtenings ! hiic 01 SoC .sto.-o see 1~d hloosee =oro =OI=C

Clinton, M. 1998 'The Souterrains of County Dublin" in C. Manning

(ed.), Dublin and Beyond the Pale: Studies in honour of

Patrick Healv, Bray, 11 7-28.

Dunlevy, M. 1988 'A Classification of Early Irish Combs', PR.I.A., 88C, 341

422. Edwards, N. 1990 The Archaeology of Early Medieval Ireland, London.

Gosling, P. 1991 'From Dun Delca to Dundalk: the topography and archaeology of a medieval frontier town A.D. c. 1 187

1700', C.L.A.H.J., xxii, 3, 221-353.

Gowen, M. 1992 'Excavation of Two Souterrain Complexes at Marshes

Upper, Dundalk, Co. Louth', P.R.IA., 92C, 55-121.

Harbison, P. 1970 Guide to the National Monuments in the Republic of

Ireland, Dublin, 129.

Hodgers, D. 1994 'The Salterstown Surface Collection Project', C.L.A.H.J., xxiii, 2, 240-68.

Lucas, A.T. 1971-3 'Souterrains: The Literary Evidence', BWaloideas, 39-41,

165-9 1. Monk, M. 1998 'Early Medieval Secular and Ecclesiastical Settlement in

Munster' in M.A. Monk, and J. Sheehan (eds.), Early

Medieval Munster: Archaeology, History and Society, Cork,

33-52. Murphy, D. 1995a Archaeological Assessment of Proposed Housing

Development at Farrandreg, Dundalk, County Louth 95E

113 (unpublished report submitted to National Monuments

Service, OPW).

Murphy, D. 1995b Archaeological Assessment of Proposed Housing

Development at Farrandreg, Dundalk, County Louth 95E

109 (unpublished report for Margaret Gowen & Co.

submitted to National Monuments Service, OPW).

0 Rahilly, C. 1998 'A Classification of Bronze Stick-Pins from the Dublin

Excavations 1962-72' in C. Manning (ed.), Dublin and

Beyond the Pale: Studies in honour of Patrick Healxy Bray.

Scully, 0. 1997 'Metal Artefacts' in M.F. Hurley, O.M.B. Scully, and

S.W.J. McCutcheon (eds.), Late Viking Age and Medieval

Waterford: Excavations 1986-1992, Waterford, 43 8-552.

Tempest, H.G. 1933 'Three Souterrains', C.L.A.J., viii, 1, 95-6.

Warner, R. 1979 'The Irish Souterrains and their Background', in H.

Crawford (ed.) Subterranean Britain, London, 100-144.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This excavation was funded by Dermot O'Callaghan of Dowen Construction Ltd. and I would like to

thank Mr Michael Clarke for his co-operation and assistance during the excavation. I am indebted to

John Murray and to Martin Halpin, who prepared the drawings, to my photographer Ian Russell, and

to Brendan Matthews, Kieran Norton and Liam Darcy for their help on site. Above all I am deeply

grateful to my supervisor, Matthew Seaver, without whom the excavation, post-excavation analysis

and report compilation could not have been successfully completed. I would also like to thank Noel

Ross for his assistance in seeing this paper through to publication.



Documents

Archaeological Excavation of a Souterrain at Farrandreg, Dundalk, County Louth