Late Iron Age and "Roman" Ireland 1905569866, 9781905569861

Citation preview

0-DPR8(prelims)_prelims DPR6 16/10/2014 12:48 Page i

LATE IRON AGE AND ‘ROMAN’ IRELAND

0-DPR8(prelims)_prelims DPR6 16/10/2014 12:48 Page ii

0-DPR8(prelims)_prelims DPR6 16/10/2014 12:48 Page iii

LATE IRON AGE AND ‘ROMAN’ IRELAND Discovery Programme Reports: 8

Wordwell

0-DPR8(prelims)_prelims DPR6 16/10/2014 12:48 Page iv

First published in 2014 by Wordwell Ltd Unit 9, 78 Furze Road, Sandyford Industrial Estate, Dublin 18 www.wordwellbooks.com

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any electronic, mechanical or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or otherwise without either the prior written consent of the publishers or a licence permitting restricted copying in Ireland issued by the Irish Copyright Licensing Agency Ltd, The Writers’ Centre, 19 Parnell Square, Dublin 1. ISBN 978 1 905569 86 1 British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data. A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. Typeset in Ireland by Wordwell Ltd Copy-editor: Emer Condit Printed by Gemini International, Dublin. The publisher acknowledges a grant towards the cost of printing this book by the Discovery Programme. Front cover image: Hawthorn tree on summit of Freestone Hill, Co. Kilkenny (© Nick O’Keeffe Photography). Back cover images: Sunrise over Lambay, Co. Dublin (image courtesy of Robert Shaw) and a late third- or early fourth-century incised and gilded plate brooch with conical green glass inset from Newgrange, Co. Meath (© National Museum of Ireland).

0-DPR8(prelims)_prelims DPR6 16/10/2014 12:48 Page v

CONTENTS

PREFACE

AND LIST OF DIRECTORATE

VI

RÉAMHRÁ

VIII

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS LIST

X

OF FIGURES AND LIST OF TABLES

XI

ABBREVIATIONS

XV

1. The LIARI Project: aims, methodology and collaborative research

Jacqueline Cahill Wilson, Ger Dowling and Michael Ann Bevivino

2. Romans and Roman material in Ireland: a wider social perspective

Jacqueline Cahill Wilson

11

3. Geophysical investigations at Drumanagh and Loughshinny, north County Dublin

Ger Dowling

59

4. Investigations on Lambay, Co. Dublin

Jacqueline Cahill Wilson, Gabriel Cooney, Ger Dowling and Ian Elliott

91

5. Reflections on a lake: a multi-proxy study of environmental change and human impacts at Lough Lugh, Uisneach, Co. Westmeath

Roseanne Schot, Ingelise Stuijts, Seamus McGinley and Aaron Potito

113

6. Investigating mobility and migration in the later Irish Iron Age

Jacqueline Cahill Wilson, Christopher Standish and Elizabeth O’Brien

127

7. Landscape and settlement in late Iron Age Ireland: some emerging trends

Ger Dowling

151

8. Findings and priorities for future research

Jacqueline Cahill Wilson

175

1

Bibliography

185

Index

208

v

0-DPR8(prelims)_prelims DPR6 16/10/2014 12:48 Page vi

PREFACE

Since its inception in 1991 the Discovery Programme has championed the use of innovative methods, applied scientific approaches and new technologies in archaeological research in Ireland. The Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland (LIARI) Project was started by the Discovery Programme in 2011 and this report outlines the results of the initial eighteen-month period of research up to March 2013. The overview of the aims, objectives and methodology highlights the importance of collaborative interdisciplinary partnerships, the underpinning framework of which has become synonymous with research completed for the Discovery Programme. Divided into a series of interrelated chapters, the report outlines investigations from the late Iron Age through the Roman period and into the beginning of the early medieval period in Ireland informed by evidence from Britain and the Continent. A priority for the investigations in this initial period was the collation of all existing data, published and unpublished, from over fifteen years of recent excavations throughout Ireland. Assembling a large data set into a master database allowed the LIARI team to map and model geographical distribution of finds and sites, and this forms the basis of the wide-ranging evidence discussed in detail throughout each of the chapters. In exploring past and present scholarship relating to the first five centuries AD, the LIARI team’s research offers new insights into the relationships that were developed and maintained between communities in Ireland and those under the administration of Rome. In so doing, the report brings together work of individual scholars from Ireland as well as those working in related fields of research on Roman material beyond the frontiers of Rome, some of which may not have been otherwise accessible to the general interested reader. In offering a reconsideration of both native Irish material and imported finds, the research as presented discusses the likely role played by Roman cultural influences on communities in Ireland. It presents new landscape investigations conducted through targeted

vi

geophysical surveys undertaken to answer discrete research questions about landscape use, continuity and change. A new study of mobility and migration in communities of the period conducted through isotope analysis on skeletal evidence for both human and faunal material adds greatly to our knowledge of population movement in this period. Historical sources indicate that internal political developments and other factors such as marriage alliances resulted in the movement of people; this new research offers scientific evidence that this can be demonstrated for the late Iron Age and early medieval period in Ireland. Collaboration with environmental scientists and archaeologists in NUI Galway involved taking a lake sediment core from Lough Lugh on the Hill of Uisneach, Co. Westmeath. This project has shown how the latest approaches to palaeoenvironmental studies continue to unlock new lines of investigation into landscape use across wide temporal periods. Such collaborative and multidisciplinary approaches allow the Discovery Programme to continue to push forward the boundaries of archaeological research in Ireland. The LIARI Project has successfully combined traditional approaches to investigations with the most up-to-date applied scientific methods in archaeological research, with some ground-breaking results, as outlined throughout this volume. Much of this work would not have been possible without the ongoing support and generosity of their collaborative partners, whose role is gratefully acknowledged throughout. By focusing on material culture in its truest sense and on the people, their environment and their possessions, the discussions in this volume revolve around explaining why and how changes began to emerge in apparently long-held social practices and behaviours in Ireland. The core question is whether these changes were triggered by both proximity to and direct engagement with the Roman Empire. As this preface is being written in July 2014, the project team has just completed its final fieldwork surveys with the help of colleagues from the RömischGermanische Kommission of the Deutsches Archäol-

0-DPR8(prelims)_prelims DPR6 16/10/2014 12:48 Page vii

ogisches Institut (German Archaeological Institute) in Frankfurt. These were conducted at Tara, Co. Meath, with Conor Newman, Joe Fenwick and Roseanne Schot (Tara Research Project, NUI Galway) and at Freestone Hill and Stoneyford, Co. Kilkenny, with Cóilín Ó Drisceoil (Kilkenny Archaeology). The idea for collaborative surveys came about during discussions with Dr Hans-Ulrich Voss and Dr Knut Rassman, following the former’s contribution to the LIARI ‘Ireland in a Roman World’ conference hosted at Trinity College Dublin in October 2012. The Discovery Programme is grateful to our German colleagues for their enthusiasm and support of the LIARI Project, and early results of the surveys have revealed an array of previously unrecorded archaeology at all of the sites investigated. We look forward to the publication of the results. Late last year the Discovery Programme launched its new Strategic Plan (2014–2017). Central to the organisation’s past success have been the monograph and report series, which together formed the core of published outputs on each of the research projects undertaken by the Discovery Programme since 1991. As we move forward, however, and embrace the future, it has been agreed that, alongside our traditional

publications, new media should also be used to disseminate our research more quickly. Many of the agreed outputs of the ongoing Phase 2 of LIARI (2013–15) will be published as shorter peer-reviewed articles in relevant journals and proceedings. Furthermore, the team is working to ensure that all of the data collated for the project will be made available through two on-line searchable databases, and these will be launched before the completion of LIARI in early 2015. Along with a comprehensive rebranding and repositioning of the Discovery Programme, which will be completed by the end of 2014, these changes are both exciting and essential to securing the future of Ireland’s only publicly funded centre for research in Irish archaeology. The LIARI team are to be congratulated, not just for the success of the research but also for the long hours and dedication that have resulted in the timely delivery of this important report. We are confident that, along with the outputs from LIARI Phase 2, DPR8 will make a valuable contribution to this emerging new field of research, which places Ireland within the wider Roman world. Professor Terry Barry Chairperson

Discovery Programme Directorate Prof. Terry Barry (Chairperson) Mr Cormac Bourke Mr Ian Doyle Mr Conleth Manning Dr Rachel Moss Dr Tomás Ó Carragáin Dr Elizabeth O’Brien Dr Graeme Warren Dr Stuart Jeffrey

vii

0-DPR8(prelims)_prelims DPR6 16/10/2014 12:48 Page viii

RÉAMHRÁ

Ón am a bunaíodh an Clár Fionnachtana i 1991 bhí úsáid modhanna nuálacha, cur chuige eolaíocht fheidhmeannach agus teicneolaíochtaí úrnua i leith taighde in Éirinn mar bhun-aidhm ag an gclár. Cuireadh tús leis an togra ar an Iarannaois Dhéanach agus an ré ‘Rómhánach’ in Éirinn (LIARI) i 2011 agus tugann an tuairisc seo fáisnéis ar an mbliain go leith tosaigh taighde go Márta 2013. Tarraingíonn an forbhreathnú seo aird ar aidhmeanna agus modhanna an togra agus go háirithe ar thábhacht chomhpháirtíocht chomhoibríoch idirdhisiplíneach atá mar bhunchreat coiteann ag an taighde uile atá curtha i gcrích ag an Clár Fionnachtana. Tá an forbhreathnú seo roinnte i sraith chaibidil idirghaolmhara a rianaíonn taighde ón Iarannaois Dhéanach go tréimhse na Rómánach agus go tús na luath mheánaoise in Éirinn, feasach ar fhianaise ón mBreatain agus ó mhór-roinn na hEorpa. Céadtosaíocht ag an togra ab ea comhthiomsú sonraí, foilsithe agus neamhfhoilsithe, de bharr cúig mbliana déag de thocailtí seandálaíochta ar fud na hÉireann. Chuir bailiú sonraí fairsingeach dá leithéid i máistirbhunachar ar chumas fóirne LIARI dáileadh geografach na bhfríotha agus na láithreáin a rianú ar léarscáil agus a dheilbhiú, agus foirmíonn sé seo bunús an fhianaise leathan a bhfuil cíoradh grinn déanta air sna caibidil éagsúla. Tré iniúchadh a dhéanamh ar léann an aimsir atá caite agus ar léann an lae inniu a bhaineann leis an tréimhse AD 1–500, tugann taighde LIARI léargasaí nua ar na ceangail a d’fhás agus a d’fhorbair idir phobail in Éirinn agus iadsin a bhí faoi scáth riarachán na Róimhe. Sa bhealach seo, bailíonn an forbhreathnú taighde scoláirí Éireannacha le chéile, maraon leo sin a oibríonn in ábhair gaolmhara ar chultúr Rómhánach lasmuigh de limistéirí na Róimhe agus nach bhfuil a gcuid léinn ar fáil go forleathan don léitheoir coiteann. San athbhreithniú seo ar chultúr dúchasach Éireannach agus ar na fríotha allmhairithe déantar cíoradh tré’n taighde ar an ról dealraitheach a bhí ag tionchair cultúrdha Rómhánach ar phobail in Éirinn. Cuirtear measúnú nua tírdhreacha a stiúradh tré suirbhéanna geoifisiceacha sonraithe i láthair le freagraí

viii

a fháil ar cheisteanna faoi leith i dtaobh múnlú tírdhreacha, leanúnachas agus athraithe thar ama. Cuireann staidéar nua i dtaobh soghluaisteacht agus imirce phobail an tréimhse sin a stiúradh tré ainailís iseatópach ar chnámharlaigh daonna agus fánúil go mór lenár n-eolas ar shoghluaiseacht daonra an ama. Léiríonn foinsí staire go raibh tionchar ag forbairtí polaitiúla agus tosca eile, ina measc comhghuaillíochtaí tré phóstaí, ar na soghluaisíochtaí seo agus dearbhaíonn an taighde nua tré fhianaise eolaíoch gurab amhlaidh a bhí san Iarannaois Dhéanach agus sa mheánaois luath in Éirinn. I gcomhar le heolaithe comhshaoil agus le seandálaithe Ollscoil Éireann Gaillimh tógadh croíleacán dríodair as Loch Lugh ar Uisneach, Co. na hIarmhí. Thaispeáin an togra seo conas gur féidir leis na modhanna eolaíochta pailéachomhshaoil is nuaaimseartha bealaí nua a fhionnadh le tuiscint a fháil ar úsáid tírdhreacha tré na haoiseanna éagsúla. Éiríonn leis an Clár Fionnachtana limistéirí taighde i seandálaíocht na hÉireann a bhrú chun cinn tré chomhpháirtíocht chomhoibríoch idirdhisiplíneach dá leithéid seo. Ina chéad thréimhse d’éirigh le LIARI modhanna traidisiúnta taighde a chomhtháthú le modhanna nua a bhaineann úsáid as eolaíocht fheidhmeach i dtaighde seandálaíochta, agus mar a fheictear tré’n bhforbhreathnú seo le forbairtí úrnua dá bharr. Ní fhéadfaí mórán den obair seo a thiomnú gan tacaíocht leanúnach agus flaithiúlacht ár gcomhpháirtithe agus tugtar aitheantas dá réir dóibh sna caibidil éagsúla. Tré díriú go sainiúil ar chultúr ábharach agus ar an daonra, a dtimpeallacht agus a seilbh, is é fócas an plé san imleabhar seo ná míniú a fháil ar na hathraithe dealramhacha a tháinig chun cinn in Éirinn i mbéasanna buan-sheasta agus in iompraíocht shóisialta. Ag croílár an phlé seo ardaítear an cheist: ar eascair na hathraithe seo as gaireacht agus ceangail díreach le hImpireacht na Róimhe. Agus an réamhrá seo á bhreacadh síos i mí Iúil 2014, tá deireadh curtha ag an bhfoireann lena suirbhéanna allamhaigh i bpáirtíocht lena gcomhleacaithe as an Römisch-Germanische Kommission, Institiúid Seandálaíochta na Gearmáine i

0-DPR8(prelims)_prelims DPR6 16/10/2014 12:48 Page ix

Frankfurt. Stiúraíodh na suirbhéanna seo i gcomhar le Conor Newman, Joe Fenwick agus Roseanne Schot (Togra na Teamhrach, Ollscoil Éireann Gaillimh) i Teamhair, Co. na Mí, agus le Cóilín Ó Drisceoil i Cnoc Ghráinseach Chúil Phobail, Co. Chill Chainnigh, agus Áth Stiún, Co. Chill Chainnigh. D’eascair na suirbhéanna allamhaigh seo as comhráití leis an Dr Hans-Ulrich Voss agus an Dr Knut Rassman a tharla nuair a thug an Dr Voss páipéar ag an gcomhdháil ‘Éire sa domhain Rómhánach’ a d’eagraigh LIARI i gColáiste na Tríonóide, Baile Átha Cliath, i mí Deireadh Fómhair 2012. Tá an Clár Fionnachtana anbhuíoch d’ár gcomhleacaithe sa Ghearmáin dá ndíograis agus dá dtacaíocht do thogra LIARI, agus is cosúil ó na torthaí luath gur nochtaigh na suirbhéanna sraith láithreáin seandálaíochta nár aithníodh go dtí seo. Táimid ag tnúth go mór le foilsiú a gcuid oibre linn. Ag deireadh na bliana seo caite, sheol an Clár Fionnachtana Plean Straitéiseach (2014–2017). Go dtí seo b’iad na monograif agus an sraith tuairiscí a d’fhoilsigh an Clár mar chuid dá dtograí go léir ó 1991 a bhí mar chuid lárnach dá rath acadúil. Agus muid ag bogadh chun cinn as seo amach, feictear dúinn go

gcaithfear na meáin nua atá ar fáil anois a úsáid maraon lenár ngnáth fhoilsiúcháin chun ár gcuid taighde a scaipeadh go tapaidh. Foilseofar méid áirithe de thorthaí oibre LIARI in altanna piarmheasúnaithe in irisí éagsúla. Thairis sin, tá an fhoireann ag obair go dian le ionas go gcuirfear na sonraí uile a bailíodh le linn an togra ar fáil go coiteann tré dhá bhunachar sonraí inchuardaithe ar an idirlín agus seolfar iad seo roimh dheireadh an togra i mí Márta 2015. Maraon le hathbhrandáil agus le hath-suíomh an Chláir Fionnachtana a chuirfear i gcrích faoi dheireadh 2014, tá na hathraithe seo riachtanach agus spreagúil chun an Clár, an t-aon ionad taighde seandálaíochta atá urraithe tré mhaoiniú poiblí, a bhuanú sa todhchaí. Caithfear tréaslú le foireann LIARI, ní hamháin ar rath a gcuid taighde, ach chomh maith ar na huaireanta fada agus a ndíograis a chinntigh seachadta tráthúil na fáisnéise seo. Táimíd muiníneach go gcuirfidh DPR 8, maraon le torthaí eile togra LIARI, go mór leis an taighde nua atá ag teacht chun cinn i dtaobh áit na hÉireann i ndomhan na Róimhe. An tOllamh Terry Barry Cathaoirleach

ix

0-DPR8(prelims)_prelims DPR6 16/10/2014 12:48 Page x

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The LIARI team would like to express our sincere thanks to all the colleagues and collaborators who contributed in various ways to this research. We are especially grateful to the Project Committee, Elizabeth O’Brien (Chair), Cormac Bourke, Ian Doyle, Tomás Ó Carragáin and Rob Sands, for their valuable advice and support over the course of the project. This volume would not have been possible without the dedication and enthusiasm of all the contributors: Gabriel Cooney, Ian Elliott, Roseanne Schot, Ingelise Stuijts, Seamus McGinley, Aaron Potito, Chris Standish and Elizabeth O’Brien. During the writing of this volume the LIARI team welcomed Edel Bhreathnach as Chief Executive Officer of the Discovery Programme, and we are very grateful for her expert advice on the text. We are also indebted to an anonymous peer reviewer for insightful comments and suggestions. The assistance and technical support provided by our colleagues in the Discovery Programme, especially Robert Shaw, Ian McCarthy, Patrick Griffin, Gary Devlin and Anthony Corns, are also gratefully acknowledged. The fieldwork undertaken by the LIARI Project relied on the generous support of many local landowners and postgraduate volunteers, to all of whom we are very grateful. We would like to express our heartfelt thanks to the O’Callaghan family at Drumanagh and to the Baring family on Lambay for facilitating the surveys on their lands. We are also indebted to Jane Whittaker, Kevin McGuinness, Liam McGuinness, Brenda Deevy, and Walter and Antoinette Ruigrok in the wider Drumanagh–Loughshinny area. Jane Whittaker, Gerry Clabby and Christine Baker provided invaluable local information and assistance, and Fingal County Council kindly made the lidar data of the Drumanagh–Loughshinny landscape available to the Discovery Programme. The Discovery Programme and our colleagues in the School of Geography and Archaeology, NUI Galway, also wish to thank David and Angela Clarke for permission to undertake coring at Lough Lugh, Uisneach. The National Roads Authority generously made available its extensive catalogue of unpublished final

x

excavation reports and we are indebted to Ronán Swan and James Eogan for additional assistance and information. For facilitating access to artefact collections, we would also like to acknowledge the assistance of our colleagues in the National Museum of Ireland, National Museums Northern Ireland and the Hunt Museum. The LIARI team wish to acknowledge the valuable contributions of all the speakers and participants in the ‘Ireland in a Roman World’ Conference (TCD, October 2012) and, for subsequent discussions, special thanks are due to Hans-Ulrich Voss, Thomas Grane, David Mattingly, Richard Hingley, Fraser Hunter and Richard Warner. For granting permission to reproduce images, we are grateful to the Bodleian Library, University of Oxford; the Administrators of the Haverfield Bequest, University of Oxford; the National Museum of Ireland (especially Mary Cahill and Finbarr Connolly); National Museums Northern Ireland (especially Greer Ramsey and Michelle Ashmore); the National Museum of Denmark (especially Xenia Pauli-Jensen); the Royal Irish Academy (especially Helena King and Amy Hughes); the Ordnance Survey of Ireland; the Geological Survey of Ireland (especially Koen Verbruggen); the Portable Antiquities Scheme; Annette Wagner; the National Roads Authority (especially James Eogan); Valerie J. Keeley Ltd; Fintan Walsh; the Frontiers of the Roman Empire Culture 2000 project (2005–2008); Cheshire West Museums; Bristol Museums, Galleries and Archives; Raoul McLaughlin; History Today (especially Tim Aspden); Mark Holloway, Bournemouth Parks; the Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland; the Trustees of the British Museum; UCD School of Archaeology (especially Rob Sands); David and Angela Clarke; Melanie McQuade; Angela Wallace; the ESRI; and Fingal County Council. This research would not have been possible without the support of the Heritage Council. Jacqueline Cahill Wilson (Project Director) Ger Dowling (Assistant Project Director) Michael Ann Bevivino (Research Assistant) Philippa Barry (Research Assistant)

0-DPR8(prelims)_prelims DPR6 16/10/2014 12:48 Page xi

LIST OF FIGURES

Fig. 2.1—Map of the frontiers of the Roman Empire c. AD 150.

finds from Ireland and correlation of distribution of natural mineral resources.

Fig. 2.2—The Keshcarrigan bowl, with distinctive bird-head handle.

Fig. 2.15—Insignia of the Comes Litoris Saxonici per Britanniam from the Notitia Dignitatum.

Fig. 2.3—Map of key sites in Roman Britain mentioned throughout text.

Fig. 2.16—Detail of ornate terminal of the Attymon horse-bit, three-link Irish type in bronze, Raftery type E, found in County Galway.

Fig. 2.4—Inscribed lead pipe from the legionary fortress of Deva Victrix, Chester. Fig. 2.5—Dragonesque brooch (second century AD) from Charterhouse-on-Mendip, Somerset. Fig. 2.6—A map of Britain and Ireland from Ptolemy’s coordinates listed in his Geographia (c. second century AD). Fig. 2.7—The extent of the trade routes between the Roman Empire and the rest of the known world, based on classical sources and archaeological finds. Fig. 2.8—An orthoimage of the impressive promontory fort of Drumanagh at Loughshinny, Co. Dublin. Fig. 2.9—Aerial view of the promontory fort of Hengistbury Head on the Dorset coast.

Fig. 2.17—A fourth-century bronze balustrade bifurcate toilet implement (or nail-cleaner) from Clogher hillfort, Co. Tyrone. Fig. 2.18—A fine example from Worcestershire of the Roman ‘trumpet’ fibula of the later first to second century AD. Fig. 2.19—A ‘lug-eared’ or umbonate-type Roman plate brooch of the late first century or second century AD from Hampshire. Fig. 2.20—Graduated distribution map of single coins and coin hoards from Ireland. Fig. 2.21—The Balline hoard, found in a bog in County Limerick in the twentieth century.

Figs 2.22 and 2.23—Two examples of late third- or Fig. 2.10—The Iron Age sword from Lagore Crannog. early fourth-century incised and gilded plate brooches with conical green glass inset, from Newgrange, Co. Fig. 2.11—An example of the suggested RomanMeath, and Nettleton Temple, Wiltshire. type parallel for the sword from Lagore (Fig. 2.10) from the vast bog deposits of Illerup Ådal. Fig. 2.24—The famous depiction of orantes in highly detailed painted plaster from Lullingstone Roman Fig. 2.12—Map of sites beyond the limes frontier in villa in Kent. Germany and Denmark that offer evidence of the reach of Roman influences on local societies. Fig. 2.25—Detail of Chi-Rho stamped within the officinae mark on one of the silver ingots from the Balline hoard. Fig. 2.13—The extraordinary site of Traprain Law, East Lothian, Scotland. Fig. 2.26—Detail of the Chi-Rho in the inscribed Fig. 2.14—Map showing distribution of all Roman ingot from the Balline hoard.

xi

0-DPR8(prelims)_prelims DPR6 16/10/2014 12:48 Page xii

Fig. 2.27—Rags tied to a ‘holy well’ at Doon, Co. Donegal.

gradiometry results.

Fig. 3.1—Oblique aerial view of Drumanagh.

Fig. 3.19—Area 1D (Drumanagh): interpretative plan showing principal geophysical anomalies.

Fig. 3.2—Lambay and Drumanagh, viewed from the summit of Popeshall hill.

Fig. 3.20—Area 1E (Rush): greyscale image of gradiometry results.

Fig. 3.3—View of Popeshall hill from Lambay.

Fig. 3.21—Area 1E (Rush): interpretative plan showing principal geophysical anomalies.

Fig. 3.4—The former copper mine known as ‘Smuggler’s Cave’, Lane townland, Loughshinny. Fig. 3.5—Visualisations of lidar data of Drumanagh promontory fort. Fig. 3.6—View across the interior of Drumanagh promontory fort, from the west. Fig. 3.7—Orthoimage of the Drumanagh area, showing location of survey areas 1A–1F. Fig. 3.8—Area 1A (Drumanagh): greyscale image of gradiometry results. Fig. 3.9—Area 1A (Drumanagh): interpretative plan showing principal geophysical anomalies. Fig. 3.10—Area 1B (Drumanagh): greyscale image of gradiometry results. Fig. 3.11—Area 1B (Drumanagh): interpretative plan showing principal geophysical anomalies. Fig. 3.12—Area 1B (Drumanagh): greyscale image of resistance data. Fig. 3.13—Area 1B (Drumanagh): interpretative plan of resistance data. Fig. 3.14—Area 1C (Drumanagh): greyscale image of gradiometry results. Fig. 3.15—Area 1C (Drumanagh): interpretative plan showing principal geophysical anomalies. Fig. 3.16—Area 1C (Drumanagh): greyscale image of resistance data. Fig. 3.17—Area 1C (Drumanagh): interpretative plan of resistance data. Fig. 3.18—Area 1D (Drumanagh): greyscale image of

xii

Fig. 3.22—Area 1F (Ballustree): greyscale image of gradiometry results. Fig. 3.23—Area 1F (Ballustree): interpretative plan showing principal geophysical anomalies. Fig. 3.24—Orthoimage of the Loughshinny area, showing location of survey areas 2–6. Fig. 3.25—View of the former quarry on the summit of Popeshall hill, from the south. Fig. 3.26—Area 2 (Popeshall): greyscale image of gradiometry results. Fig. 3.27—Area 2 (Popeshall): interpretative plan showing principal geophysical anomalies. Fig. 3.28—Area 3 (Thomastown): greyscale image of gradiometry results (0.25m by 1m spacing). Fig. 3.29—Area 3 (Thomastown): interpretative plan showing principal geophysical anomalies. Fig. 3.30—Area 3 (Thomastown): greyscale image of gradiometry results (0.25m by 0.5m spacing). Fig. 3.31—Area 4 (Lane): annotated greyscale image of gradiometry results. Fig. 3.32—Area 5 (Loughshinny): greyscale image of gradiometry results. Fig. 3.33—Orthoimage of area 6 (Blackland), showing cropmarks. Fig. 3.34—Area 6 (Blackland): greyscale image of gradiometry results. Fig. 3.35—Area 6 (Blackland): interpretative plan showing principal geophysical anomalies.

0-DPR8(prelims)_prelims DPR6 16/10/2014 12:48 Page xiii

Fig. 3.36—Orthoimage of area 7 (Blackland). Fig. 3.37—Area 7 (Blackland): greyscale image of gradiometry results. Fig. 3.38—Area 7 (Blackland): interpretative plan showing principal geophysical anomalies. Fig. 3.39—Combined gradiometry survey results and lidar map of Drumanagh. Fig. 3.40—Combined gradiometry survey results and lidar map of the Popeshall area. Fig. 3.41—Combined gradiometry survey results and lidar map of the Blackland area. Fig. 4.1—Aerial view of Lambay.

Fig. 4.14—Looking north-westwards towards the promontory forts at Gough Point and Scotch Point. Fig. 4.15—Area 3 (Scotch Point): greyscale image of gradiometry results. Fig. 4.16—Area 3 (Scotch Point): interpretative plan showing principal geophysical anomalies. Fig. 4.17—Area 4a/b (Gouge Point): results of gradiometry survey overlaid on an aerial image. Fig. 4.18—Area 4a/b (Gouge Point): results of electrical resistance survey overlaid on an aerial image. Fig. 4.19—Combined gradiometry survey results and aerial image of the western part of Lambay.

Fig. 4.2—The Lambay fibulae. Fig. 5.1—Location map of site. Fig. 4.3—Gold band from Lambay. Fig. 4.4—Openwork scabbard mounts from Lambay.

Fig. 5.2—Map of the archaeological complex at Uisneach.

Fig. 4.5—Lambay beaded torc.

Fig. 5.3—Lough Lugh, viewed from the east.

Fig. 4.6—Aerial view of the western part of Lambay, showing the location of survey areas 1–4.

Fig. 5.4—Early nineteenth-century watercolour of Lough Lugh and cottage. Fig. 5.5—Coring in progress at Lough Lugh.

Fig. 4.7—View of the South Point promontory, from the east.

Fig. 5.6—Stratigraphy of the sediment cores from Lough Lugh.

Fig. 4.8—Area 1 (South Point): greyscale image of gradiometry results.

Fig. 5.7—Preliminary pollen diagram.

Fig. 4.9—Area 1 (South Point): interpretative plan showing principal geophysical anomalies.

Fig. 5.8—Chironomid stratigraphy with loss-onignition (LOI).

Fig. 4.10—Area 1 (South Point): detail of gradiometry results recorded in the eastern quadrant of the survey area.

Fig. 6.1—Geological locations of sites discussed.

Fig. 4.11—Area 2 (harbour area): greyscale image of gradiometry results.

Fig. 6.3—87Sr/86Sr and δ18Odw in dental enamel for individuals discovered in County Meath.

Fig. 4.12—Area 2 (harbour area): interpretative plan showing principal geophysical anomalies.

Fig. 6.4—87Sr/86Sr and δ18Odw in dental enamel for individuals discovered from regions of Ireland outside County Meath.

Fig. 4.13—Area 2 (harbour area): greyscale image of resistance data.

Fig. 6.2—δ18O in Irish waters (‰ VSMOW).

Fig. 6.5—Ballygarraun West, Co. Galway: plan of inhumation burial in grave.

xiii

0-DPR8(prelims)_prelims DPR6 16/10/2014 12:48 Page xiv

Fig. 6.6—Ballygarraun West, Co. Galway: photograph of inhumation burial in grave.

Fig. 7.2—Distribution map showing dated late Iron Age enclosures, houses and cereal-drying kilns.

Fig. 6.7—Burial 4 (female) from Ballymacaward, Co. Donegal.

Fig. 7.3—Distribution of features dating from the first to the mid-fifth century AD by site type.

Fig. 6.8—Middle-aged adult female crouched inhumation (F238) in pit-grave. Found during archaeological excavations in advance of construction of the Anchorage, Bettystown.

Fig. 7.4—Post-excavation plan of house structures identified at Ballydrehid, Co. Tipperary.

Fig. 6.9—Older adult male inhumation (F181), with tightly flexed legs, in stone-lined grave. Found during archaeological excavations in advance of construction of the Anchorage, Bettystown. Fig. 6.10—Burial 48, the primary burial at Collierstown 1, Co. Meath. Fig. 6.11—Sketched plan of Farta, Co. Galway.

Fig. 7.5—Post-excavation plan of late Iron Age palisaded enclosure and internal features at Baysrath, Co. Kilkenny (site 53–54). Fig. 7.6—Composite image showing excavated ditches and plot of magnetometer survey of unexcavated portion of enclosure at Killalane, Co. Tipperary. Fig. 7.7—Lidar map of the Hill of Tara, showing the Rath of the Synods and the northern portion of Ráith na Ríg.

Fig. 6.12—Plans of Greenhills, Co. Kildare. Fig. 6.13—Burial B4 from Knowth, Co. Meath. Fig. 6.14—Burial BIII from Lehinch, Co. Offaly.

Fig. 7.8—Rectangular enclosure (‘structure 8’) at Kilmainham, near Kells, Co. Meath. Fig. 7.9—Image and plans of crouched inhumation burial and ring-ditch at Rath, Co. Meath (site 27).

Fig. 6.15—Aerial view of Ninch 2, Co. Meath. Fig. 6.16—Ninch 3.

Fig. 7.10—Late Iron Age cereal-drying kiln containing two quern-stones, Ratoath, Co. Meath.

Fig. 7.1—Distribution of dated Iron Age sites and features.

Fig. 8.1—Distribution of Roman finds of first–fourth-century AD date.

LIST OF TABLES Table 6.1—δ18Oc values used for calculation of County Meath baseline. Table 6.2—Summary of Sr and O isotope analyses.

xiv

0-DPR8(prelims)_prelims DPR6 16/10/2014 12:48 Page xv

ABBREVIATIONS

AHRC AI ASL BAR CLAHJ DEM DP EJA GIS HMSO IIRG INSTAR JAS JCKAS JIA JRA JRSAI LIAL LIARI Lidar MicroPIXE NMI NMNI NMS NRA nT

Arts and Humanities Research Council Archaeology Ireland Above sea level British Archaeological Reports County Louth Archaeological and Historical Journal Digital elevation model The Discovery Programme European Journal of Archaeology Geographic information system Her Majesty’s Stationery Office Irish Isotopes Research Group Irish National Strategic Archaeological Research Journal of Archaeological Science Journal of the County Kildare Archaeological Society Journal of Irish Archaeology Journal of Roman Archaeology Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland ‘Late Iron Age Lull’ Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland Light detection and ranging Particle-induced X-ray emission using focused beams National Museum of Ireland National Museums Northern Ireland National Monuments Service National Roads Authority Nanotesla (unit of magnetic measurement)

NUI Galway

National University of Ireland, Galway NUI Maynooth National University of Ireland, Maynooth OSI Ordnance Survey of Ireland PAS Portable Antiquities Scheme PPS Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society PRIA Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy OSL Optically stimulated luminescence QUB Queen’s University, Belfast RCAHMS Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland RCAHMW Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Wales/Comisiwn Brenhinol Henebion Cymru RGK/DAI Römisch-Germanischen Kommission, Deutsches Archäologisches Institut RIA Royal Irish Academy RIB Roman Inscriptions of Britain RSAI Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland TCD Trinity College, Dublin UCC University College, Cork (full official title UCC, NUI, Cork) UCD University College, Dublin (full official title UCD, NUI, Dublin) UJA Ulster Journal of Archaeology XRF X-ray fluorescence

xv

0-DPR8(prelims)_prelims DPR6 16/10/2014 12:48 Page xvi

In memory of the late Professor Barry Raftery, who brought the Iron Age to life.

1-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:50 Page 1

1. THE LIARI PROJECT: AIMS, METHODOLOGY AND COLLABORATIVE RESEARCH JACQUELINE CAHILL WILSON, GER DOWLING AND MICHAEL ANN BEVIVINO1

The Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland (LIARI) Project is a dedicated research programme designed to investigate the social, economic, religious and political developments among communities in Ireland during the first five centuries AD. In many respects, this latest research project is a natural extension of previous work undertaken by the Discovery Programme over the past twenty years, most notably on the landscapes of Tara, Co. Meath,2 and Mooghaun, Co. Clare,3 as well as the impressive stone forts of the Atlantic seaboard.4 The Tara Project, the North Munster Project and the Western Stone Forts Project, all initiated in the early 1990s, represent wide-ranging, multidisciplinary studies which have redefined our understanding of these outstanding sites and landscapes, highlighting in the process the significant local, regional and longdistance contacts that existed in later prehistory and the first millennium AD and how they helped to shape the social and cultural fabric of Irish society. The LIARI Project embraces the same multidisciplinary rubric, combining new site investigations, landscape assessment, artefact studies, isotope analysis, palaeoenvironmental research and social theory to characterise and critically assess developments in Ireland during the late Iron Age, including the nature and impact of interaction with the Roman world. Prior to the commencement of the LIARI Project, three scoping studies were commissioned by the Discovery Programme to identify priorities and themes for future research: a preliminary investigation of Iron Age settlement,5 a review of the environmental evidence for the period 1500 BC–AD 4006 and a study of the transition from the late Iron Age to the seventh century AD.7 While a number of different research projects were initially envisaged, it was decided (owing to funding constraints) to amalgamate all of the areas prioritised within the scoping documents into a single research project focusing on the first to fifth centuries AD. The LIARI Project began in September 2011 with the appointment of its Principal Investigator, Jacqueline Cahill Wilson, whose doctoral research and subsequent publications have focused on the late Iron Age, Roman cultural influences in Ireland and the use of applied scientific methods such

as isotope analysis in burial archaeology.8 A project committee was formed in October 2011 and Elizabeth O’Brien was appointed as its Chair.9 This was followed by the appointment of Ger Dowling as Research Archaeologist in December 2011,10 and Michael Ann Bevivino as Research Assistant in April 2012.11 Although the early centuries AD are central to understanding developments in art, literature, history and the role of Christianity in early medieval Ireland, and despite the increased number of publications over the last twenty years, the Iron Age is still widely perceived to be one of the most enigmatic periods in Irish history. In keeping with the Discovery Programme’s remit to focus archaeological research on areas where major research questions remain unanswered, the project was envisaged as a series of interrelated modules designed to address some of the key research questions surrounding the late Iron Age. The overall objectives of the LIARI Project are as follows: •

•

•

•

to characterise the environment, settlement patterns, social structures and ritual practices (both pagan and Christian) during the period AD 1–500; to assess the extent to which these differ from those of the last few centuries BC and how they changed over the course of the period under investigation, which includes the immediate aftermath of the collapse of Roman authority in Britain; to reassess the nature of interaction between Ireland and the Roman world and to consider the impact that such contact may have had on developments at this time; to compare and contrast the nature of Irish interaction with the Roman world with that of communities living elsewhere beyond the Roman frontier.

The impact of Roman and other external cultural influences on developments in writing, language, art, religion and political/social structures remains a key 1

1-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:50 Page 2

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland question for scholars of this period. In order to explore the nature of the changes taking place in Ireland at this time, the project based its research around four separate, but interrelated, themes:    

materialities and identities; fluid frontiers; sacral and secular landscapes; language and literacy.

These research themes provide a framework for our interrogation of the sites, landscapes and material culture of the period and help to contextualise the evidence for localised changes, as well as continuity, in social behaviour. Although it has been argued that the Iron Age in general, and the late Iron Age in particular, is no longer as ephemeral or indeed enigmatic as once thought,12 there are still many important questions to be answered—not least why it has proved so difficult to identify and characterise settlements of the period.13 The approach adopted here seeks to avoid assumptions based solely on perceived similarities in the Irish record by first assessing the specifics of the evidence in a local context. In this way, the research aims to identify local traditions and responses to change in order to consider the different ways in which people lived in Ireland during the period under investigation. As will be discussed elsewhere in this volume, there is also a need to assess whether the distribution of imported material reflects single episodes of contact or whether the presence of such material points to a longer period of contact suggestive of embedded social relations at key focal points.The project has sought parallels for relevant material from late pre-Roman, Roman and post-Roman Britain and Europe to better understand the nature of trade and exchange networks and to facilitate the identification of likely routes for material that was imported and exported during this period. Contemporary approaches in archaeology allow us to explore how shared ideas and value systems may have evolved over time and, by drawing on aspects of historical, sociological and anthropological discourse, how the factors that influence a person’s sense of self and identity in the present might also be relevant to the study of people of the past.14 A landscape-based approach also straddles past and present. Tilley, for example, described how mountains, hills and river valleys represent the ‘bones’ of archaeological inquiry, as such topographic features are likely to have changed little over time.15 Engaging with, and offering new perspectives on, the landscapes under investigation is central to this research. 2

The research methodology of the LIARI Project places strong emphasis on the importance of collaboration and interdisciplinarity, which are embedded within contemporary approaches to the study and interpretation of the late Iron Age. A day of workshops was held in November 2011 to encourage engagement and collaboration between the project and the wider research community in Ireland, including academics and other colleagues working in public institutions and the commercial archaeology sector. Many of the suggestions, ideas and collaborative partnerships proposed on the day were subsequently incorporated into the research strategy of the LIARI Project. A very successful international and interdisciplinary conference entitled ‘Ireland in a Roman world’ was hosted by the LIARI Project in October 2012 in Trinity College Dublin (TCD). This event was designed to publicise recent and ongoing research on aspects of the late Iron Age and to highlight our engagement with the wider dialogues taking place outside Ireland on the interpretation of Roman material beyond the frontiers of Rome. The conference brought together distinguished scholars from Ireland, England, Scotland, Germany, Denmark and the USA, and the papers covered a wide range of topics, all of which are relevant to our own consideration of Roman cultural influence on this island. As well as generating many lively discussions about the ideas and potential parallels that the project is seeking to investigate, the conference also provided an opportunity to foster new collaborative partnerships with colleagues at home and abroad.

Research period and nomenclature In a recent contribution, Newman reiterated the ephemeral character of Iron Age settlement evidence in Ireland and highlighted the difficulties of identifying the everyday dwellings and occupation sites of a people who ‘walked so lightly’ as to leave little trace in the archaeological record.16 While clarity about the nature of settlement and social organisation during this period is slow to emerge, the results of research outlined in this volume suggest the need to consider habitations of the late Iron Age as heterogeneous and organic rather than reflective of a largely mobile population.17 The present investigations comprised a reassessment of the material record, alongside comprehensive landscape analyses, and it is important to note here that the ‘Roman’ element is but one part of a more detailed consideration of the late Iron Age as a whole. There are regions of Ireland that on present

1-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:50 Page 3

The LIARI Project: aims, methodology and collaborative research evidence show little sign of the social and political developments seen in the east and south-east during the early centuries AD, and charting the varying trajectories of communities across different parts of the island is crucial to developing a deeper understanding of this period. Working to combine approaches across related disciplines has also highlighted a need to address the nomenclature and periodisations that are used in Irish archaeological discourse, such as late Iron Age, early medieval, early historic and Early Christian, as the overlap and interchangeability needs to be constantly qualified; more importantly, many of these are used for completely different periods outside Ireland.18 This uniqueness in Irish archaeological studies also appears to have perpetuated a false sense that Ireland remained different, isolated and separated from communities in Britain and Europe, and this is demonstrably not the case. There are various reasons why these approaches were adopted in the past (discussed in detail in Chapter 2), but there is now a growing need to move to a contemporary dialogue that includes, rather than excludes, parallels with other communities in Britain and Europe before, during and after the Roman period. It is hoped that by highlighting the issue here we might help to begin to break down some of the temporal and chronological boundaries that are also used for the transition into the fourth and fifth centuries AD, which in studies outside Ireland is referred to as the beginnings of the period of Late Antiquity. Although it is beyond the scope of the present work to offer a revised nomenclature for the centuries under investigation, the chronological parameters of the project (AD 1–500) encompass the period traditionally defined as the late Iron Age (c. AD 1–400) as well as the late Iron Age to early medieval transition, which roughly corresponds with the centuries referred to elsewhere as Late Antiquity (c. AD 300–600).

Research methodology This volume details the results of the first phase of LIARI research, which married the collation and analysis of existing archaeological data with new targeted research into the landscapes and material culture of the period. In keeping with the overarching aims of the project framework, the research focused primarily on the eastern counties of Ireland, with a particular emphasis on sites in the greater Dublin and Meath region that have yielded Roman-type finds. Building on the Discovery Programme’s reputation for advan-

cing innovative technologies in Irish archaeology, the LIARI Project employed the most up-to-date scientific techniques as part of its research strategy, including geophysical survey, isotope geochemistry and palaeoenvironmental analysis. The application of isotope geochemistry, coupled with a new programme of radiocarbon dating, is allowing a critical reassessment of a priori assumptions relating to the movement of people and material culture during the late Iron Age. Identifying a likely geographic origin for people, goods and the mineral resources (copper, lead, etc.) used to produce specific objects allows us to reconstruct the fluid pathways of contact and engagement that existed between Ireland, Britain and the Continent, and to provide new perspectives on the late Iron Age in Ireland. Since the commencement of the project, work has been under way on the collation of all available data pertaining to the period under investigation, with a view to generating a comprehensive data set for archaeological analysis. In order to manage the large quantities of data and store them in an easily accessible and usable format, all relevant information is being entered into a master database that was initially created as part of the Discovery Programme’s Preliminary Iron Age Settlement Project.19 The database, which is being continually expanded and will, in future, be made available as an on-line resource, gives priority to sites and features with absolute dates falling in the period c. 400 BC–AD 600, as well as associated artefacts from securely dated contexts. The wide date range of the archaeological evidence being considered reflects the need to characterise and assess developments during the late Iron Age within a broader chronological and cultural framework. Much of the information contained in the database was generated in recent years as a result of excavations undertaken in advance of large-scale development and major infrastructural projects. The wealth of new Iron Age sites and features identified as a result of this work has substantially augmented the evidence provided by research excavations and modern reassessments of antiquarian investigations, and has provided significant new insights into the period. The growing visibility of Iron Age activity in the archaeological record has been documented in a number of recent studies focusing on different aspects of the evidence. The most comprehensive of these include Katharina Becker, John Ó Néill and Laura O’Flynn’s report entitled ‘Iron Age Ireland: finding an invisible people’,20 which brings together a substantial corpus of settlement-related evidence for the period 700 BC–AD 400, and studies of the funerary record by the 3

1-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:50 Page 4

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland INSTAR Mapping Death Project21 and by Tiernan McGarry.22 The latter studies highlight the considerable diversity in burial practices evident across the Iron Age and the late Iron Age–early medieval transition period. All available information from these and other studies has been incorporated into the LIARI database as part of a comprehensive review of the archaeological literature produced up to 2013. This has involved consultation of a wide range of published and unpublished sources, including local, national and international journals, books and monographs, excavation reports and relevant websites. Both the Excavations Bulletin and the National Roads Authority (NRA) monograph series and associated on-line databases were particularly important sources of information,23 as were websites such as www.M3motorway.ie, which provides access to a range of final excavation reports associated with major road projects. Further information was obtained from an extensive catalogue of unpublished final excavation reports kindly made available to the Discovery Programme by the NRA. The Mapping Death Project’s on-line database24 and recent publications such as Christiaan Corlett and Michael Potterton’s edited volumes Death and burial in early medieval Ireland and Life and death in Iron Age Ireland also provided significant additional information on a variety of Iron Age sites around Ireland.25 The emphasis placed on the collation of data during the initial phase of the project provided a much clearer appreciation of the quantity and nature of late Iron Age sites and material recorded to date, paving the way for a more critical analysis of the evidence and the identification of priority areas for further study. A detailed overview of the evidence and some of the significant trends that are beginning to emerge are presented in Chapter 7. Moreover, in order to build on these new lines of research, the project expanded its database to include Roman, RomanoBritish and later imported material so that these objects can be mapped in GIS alongside other sites and finds of known (and suspected) late Iron Age date. An updated catalogue of Roman finds in Ireland is currently being prepared for on-line publication in early 2015. Following the seminal work of the late Barry Raftery,26 many scholars have highlighted the importance of imported material in the Irish archaeological record, and there is now a growing consensus that such material reflects direct engagement between communities in Ireland and the Roman provinces. Detailed research by various authors cited in this volume has generated, among other things, new classifi4

cations and revised chronologies for a range of objects and sites of the period, and has sought to explore and explain the likely social and cultural links between Ireland and Roman Britain. The contribution of historians and linguists to archaeological research also adds greatly to the study of the origin and dating of artistic styles, language and literacy in Ireland. In continuing to question the role of traditional epistemological and historiographical approaches to archaeology in Ireland, the work of the LIARI Project aims to build upon this past scholarship.

Landscape investigation and fieldwork The late Iron Age sites identified through excavation to date range from large, complex monuments like the Rath of the Synods at Tara to more discrete features such as kilns, pits and areas of burning. Almost all of these sites offer scope for further investigation, as we can reasonably assume that even features found in apparent isolation often reflect just one element of a broader web of settlement and activity within their respective landscapes. In keeping, however, with the remit of the first phase of the project, which was focused on illuminating the nature of contact with the Roman world, in particular Roman Britain, fieldwork was directed primarily towards the investigation of coastal sites in eastern Ireland, specifically in the region between the Boyne and Liffey estuaries. The coastal landscape of Drumanagh and Lambay, north Co. Dublin, was identified as offering the greatest potential to address some of the key research questions and was therefore targeted for detailed investigation using non-invasive technologies, including geophysical survey and remote sensing (lidar and photogrammetry). A description and interpretation of the geophysical survey results from the two study areas are provided in Chapters 3 and 4. Geophysical survey The survey strategy adopted by the LIARI Project has been aimed at investigating both specific monuments and sites with attested Iron Age horizons, as well as the archaeological potential of other areas in their surrounding landscapes. This approach has been designed to gain a clearer picture of the nature and extent of subsurface archaeological remains within the study areas and so provide a broader context within which to assess the existing evidence for late Iron Age activity and to identify potential targets for further investigation. The investigations in each area utilised two different, but complementary, geophysical techniques:

1-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:50 Page 5

The LIARI Project: aims, methodology and collaborative research magnetometry (magnetic gradiometry) and electrical resistance, which measure variations in the magnetic properties of the soil and changes in ground moisture respectively. Both techniques are routinely used in field investigations owing to their ability to detect a wide range of subsurface archaeological features, including ditches, pits and the remains of earthen/stone structures, while fired or burnt features such as furnaces, kilns and hearths are also especially susceptible to detection by magnetometry.27 Following the identification of target areas, the precise location of the individual survey grids was established in ArcGIS using a range of base mapping products, including Ordnance Survey of Ireland (OSI) vector and raster maps, orthoimagery and georeferenced historic mapping. The Irish National Grid (NGR) coordinates of the survey grids, comprising a series of 20m by 20m grid ‘panels’, were then transferred to a GPS survey datalogger, which was used in the field to ‘stake out’ the position of the panel corners. Real-time Kinematic (RTK) GPS was employed for the stake-out operation. The Discovery Programme operates a Trimble 5800 series instrument in conjunction with the VRSnow correction service. This service, received via a GSM phone link, provides the differential corrections required to correct the coordinates from a single receiver to an appropriate mapping accuracy. The accuracy achieved in absolute location of each position is ±10mm in x and y and ±20mm in z values, far in excess of the resolution of the geophysical instruments. This ‘primary’ control— i.e. the corner pegs—is the basis for the setting out of tapes and lines to guide the geophysical operator and it is highly desirable to work from such a strong, positionally accurate basis.The highly accurate positioning of the survey grids provides confidence when integrating the geophysical results with other data sets, such as lidar surveys, in GIS, and also ensures repeatability should further investigation of anomalies be required at a later date. The LIARI Project magnetometer surveys were conducted using Bartington Grad601-2 and Geoscan FM256 (dual sensor) fluxgate gradiometers, while a Geoscan RM15 configured as a 0.5m twin-probe array was employed for the electrical resistance surveys. The spatial resolution of the magnetometer surveys varied according to the nature and extent of the area being investigated (from 0.25m by 0.5m to 0.25m by 1m sample and traverse intervals) and was followed, where feasible, by detailed resistance survey (0.5m by 0.5m resolution) in areas of high archaeological potential. Basic processing of the survey data, using

Geoplot 3.0 software, involved clipping the dynamic range of the data set to enhance weaker, archaeological, anomalies, the edge-matching of adjacent survey panels and the removal of excessively large (and often spurious) values and defects such as striping in magnetic data. Where necessary, the data have been filtered to suppress broad-scale geological responses and to highlight any localised anomalies of archaeological potential. The magnetometer data presented as greyscale images in Chapters 3 and 4 have also been interpolated (from 0.5m to 0.25m and from 1m to 0.5m in traverse spacing) to improve the visual quality of the data set. The final geophysical data sets were formatted as raster data models to enable subsequent geospatial analysis and visualisation techniques, which cannot be carried out on two-dimensional geophysical imagery. This ability to directly correlate geophysical anomalies and topographical features provides a valuable aid to archaeological interpretation, though, as always, only excavation will confirm the precise nature and dating of the numerous archaeological features revealed by the surveys. All geophysical raster data sets generated by the LIARI Project will be digitally archived in accordance with best practice.28 ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS IN THE DRUMANAGH/LOUGHSHINNY LANDSCAPE, NORTH CO. DUBLIN

An extensive programme of geophysical survey was undertaken at the coastal promontory fort of Drumanagh, and at various locations in its wider landscape, between January 2012 and March 2013, the results of which are presented in Chapter 3. Despite its renown, no archaeological work had been conducted at Drumanagh since the National Museum of Ireland (NMI) commissioned a geophysical survey of its interior in the late 1990s, and the site’s hinterland remained largely unexplored. The LIARI survey thus represents an important step in reviving archaeological research at a site that is widely regarded as having the potential to redefine our understanding of the nature of contact between eastern Ireland and Roman Britain in the early centuries AD. The selection of survey areas was aided by lidar imagery of the Drumanagh area commissioned by Fingal County Council, who generously made the data available to the Discovery Programme in 2011. Processing of the lidar data to produce a high-quality digital terrain model of the Drumanagh landscape has brought previously unrealised levels of detail to surface features and has greatly facilitated the interpretation of the survey results.

5

1-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:50 Page 6

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATIONS ON LAMBAY, CO. DUBLIN

Gabriel Cooney’s extensive archaeological research on Lambay, off the coast of County Dublin, has included a reconsideration of the late Iron Age and early Romano-British finds from burials uncovered during the building of the harbour in the early twentieth century.29 Given the nature of our research and the past interpretation offered for these finds, Cooney extended an invitation to the LIARI Project to work with him to reassess the burials and to broaden the investigation of Iron Age activity on the island. As part of this work, an extensive programme of geophysical survey was conducted on Lambay in August 2012 that built on previous surveys undertaken by Cooney and Ian Elliott (see Chapter 4). The present geophysical investigations targeted areas of high archaeological potential based on historic finds30 and extant monuments, as well as the analysis of high-resolution aerial photogrammetry generated by the Discovery Programme for the School of Archaeology, University College Dublin (UCD), in June 2012. UCD had commissioned a set of 1:7,500 scale aerial photographs of Lambay, specifically for mapping purposes, which was flown in 2007. Since this original project was completed, the Discovery Programme has used a new processing algorithm that has greatly increased the resolution of Digital Elevation Model (DEM) that can be extracted through photogrammetric processing. Multi-ray path analysis, available in the ERDAS Imagine LPS eATE processing software, has provided the solution; while a ground resolution of 1–2m had been seen as satisfactory in previous methods, the same photography processed using this new approach resulted in a ground resolution of 0.14m. This vastly improved resolution, similar to that normally associated with lidar, has resulted in enhanced relief-shaded models that reveal far more detail of the surface topography of Lambay, including many new features of archaeological potential. A full discussion of the geophysical survey results and a new interpretation of the important early Roman material found with the burials on Lambay are presented in Chapter 4. Palaeoenvironmental research One of the key findings of the environmental scoping study completed in advance of the LIARI Project was the presentation of evidence that suggests localised variations in the impact and extent of the ‘Late Iron Age Lull’ (LIAL),31 a phase of woodland regeneration and agricultural decline evidenced in many pollen records in the centuries between c. 200 BC and AD 6

200. Although climatic deterioration has been suggested as a causative factor,32 a recent study by Coyle McClung not only emphasises other, social, factors that may have contributed to the changes evidenced in the pollen record during this period but also seriously challenges the traditional chronology, duration and extent of the so-called ‘Late Iron Age Lull’ in Ireland.33 The archaeological record likewise suggests considerable local and regional variation in the nature and extent of agricultural activity and land use during this period (see Chapter 7). In keeping with the research framework for LIARI, priority was given to initiating a programme of collaborative research aimed at investigating landscape use and environmental change at a local level. Initial research focused on sites with dating and/or artefactual evidence to indicate late Iron Age activity; this was followed by a field-based assessment of select sites to identify suitable locations for extracting sediment cores for palaeoenvironmental analysis. Lough Lugh, a small pond within the multi-period archaeological complex on the Hill of Uisneach, Co. Westmeath, emerged as the most promising site and was selected for investigation as part of this first phase of palaeoenvironmental research. Our partnership with Roseanne Schot, Aaron Potito and Seamus McGinley at NUI Galway has enabled the project to collaborate on new scientific analysis at this important ceremonial site. The team from the Discovery Programme was led by Ingelise Stuijts and a core of sediment was extracted from Lough Lugh in April 2012 for comprehensive palaeoenvironmental reconstruction and radiocarbon dating. A preliminary analysis and interpretation of the results, and how they may contribute to a broader understanding of the impact of past human activity in the Uisneach landscape, is presented in Chapter 5, together with an outline for further research. Investigating natural mineral resources and provenances through isotope geochemistry Christopher Standish34 and Alistair Pike35 generously shared their knowledge and expertise based on their continuing investigation of the sources of Irish gold in the late Bronze Age, using lead (Pb) isotope analysis. As past research has highlighted the probable correlation in distribution between clusters of Roman and Romano-British material and the occurrence of natural mineral resources such as copper and lead,36 our research has sought ways in which we might verify early exploitation of minerals in Ireland. There are three find-spots in Ireland of likely Romano-British plano-convex-style copper ingots, all of which have

1-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:50 Page 7

The LIARI Project: aims, methodology and collaborative research been found in close proximity to known natural copper sources; at least one of these ingots, from Drumanagh, is inscribed with Latin lettering.37 The objective of this part of the research was to conduct preparatory lead isotope analysis on geological samples from the copper deposits at Loughshinny. This was done in order to test whether this ore source was isotopically distinct from copper sources in Britain, such as Parys Mountain and the Great Orme in Wales, both sites which were exploited for the production of plano-convex-style copper ingots at this time.38 In order to create local comparative data in advance of any future analysis, geological fieldwork was undertaken in the coastal area north of Loughshinny by Standish, Cahill Wilson and Stuijts in March 2012. Both disseminated and vein-hosted chalcopyrite and galena were evident in abundance in the extraordinary geology of the north Dublin coastline, known as the Loughshinny Formation. Several samples were collected for analysis and analysed at the laboratories at the University of Bristol following classic lead isotope methodologies.39 The lead isotope ratios were then compared to existing data compiled by Standish for his doctoral research on the sources of gold in Bronze Age Ireland. We can now demonstrate discrete local signatures for the copper in the Drumanagh/Loughshinny area and differentiate these from the sources exploited in Roman Britain at Parys Mountain and the Great Orme.40 This work will be extended to establish comparative data for similar Romano-British ingots found in Britain to ascertain whether some were being exported from Ireland to the Roman world.The results of this initial analysis are presented later and it is hoped that this study might be extended to the analysis of the copper ingots from Ireland. It may be that the copper was being extracted locally using Romano-British technology, either adopted for the production of the ingots or organised by contractors who were Romano-British themselves. The benefit of using lead isotope analysis, rather than only conventional elemental concentration analysis such as XRF41 or microPIXE, is that it provides a second, independent means of sourcing the likely origins of ore deposits, using existing comparative data for lead isotope ratios for both Ireland and Britain.42 Mobility and migration in the later Iron Age and early medieval transition43 Understanding how identities may have been reformed and recreated through external cultural influences is a central theme of LIARI. The collaboration with Standish and Pike has enabled the project to offer new insights into the movement of people in the late

Iron Age, and the transition to the early medieval period, through the application of strontium and oxygen isotope geochemistry to Irish skeletal material (human and faunal). O’Brien’s considerable expertise and scholarship in burial archaeology has successfully challenged both classification and typology in past interpretation,44 and she is a key collaborator in our investigations and assessment of mobility and migration during the late Iron Age (see Chapter 6). Building on the success of the Mapping Death Project on-line open-access database, and the insights revealed by earlier research into the application of strontium and oxygen isotope analysis on burials of the later Iron Age and early medieval transition,45 the project included a carefully chosen selection of burials from around Ireland. Our first complete set of human and faunal samples was exported under licence from the NMI to the University of Bristol for strontium and oxygen isotope analysis. All of the selected samples from Irish burials have now been analysed for strontium and oxygen analysis, and our preliminary findings, interpretations and plans for future research are presented in Chapter 6, along with some new radiocarbon dates. Following an initial round-table meeting hosted by LIARI at the Discovery Programme, a new network has been formed: the Irish Isotopes Research Group (IIRG) is coordinated by Cahill Wilson and is actively encouraging collaboration across all of Ireland and the UK in order to standardise methods and create a comparative database for furthering isotope research in Ireland.46 Collaboration with museum services around Ireland and the United Kingdom Work is under way to identify any Roman, RomanoBritish or imported provincial objects in museum collections around Ireland, including unprovenanced finds that may previously have been overlooked or misclassified, as well as new artefacts that were found during recent excavations. To this end, museum directors, curators and specialists were contacted in the NMI, the National Museums of Northern Ireland (NMNI), county museums, private collections and other organisations (such as universities) that hold archaeological objects. The NMI houses the largest collection of archaeological material and the greatest number of relevant objects, followed by the Ulster Museum branch of the NMNI. Recent work by Claire Anderson, Raghnall Ó Floinn and their colleagues in the NMI has highlighted the need for further research into the provenance of objects from this period.47 This is especially important considering that many of the more important and highly decorated 7

1-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:50 Page 8

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland Iron Age objects from Ireland are antiquarian finds that were collected prior to the development of modern archaeological and museological practices. Owing to the historical circumstances regarding Irish museums and antiquarian collecting practices, institutions like the British Museum, the National Museum of Wales and the University of Cambridge Museums also hold Roman objects of potential Irish provenance, and we will be working closely with colleagues in these institutions to document these as part of the record of the late Irish Iron Age. This aspect of the LIARI Project will culminate in the creation of an on-line database of all known Roman and imported finds from this period that will, we hope, be the most comprehensive since J.D. Bateson compiled his influential catalogue in the early 1970s. Public engagement and outreach programmes As a public institution dedicated to pursuing advanced research in Irish archaeology, a key aspect of the Discovery Programme’s remit is to communicate its results to both the general public and the archaeological community.48 This is currently accomplished through a variety of media, and as part of the Discovery Programme’s Strategic Plan (2014–2017) there are plans to develop outreach and public engagement further.49 The LIARI Project is playing a major role in developing and implementing this strategic framework through the application of existing innovative technologies and the use of engagement and outreach initiatives alongside traditional methods of archaeological research. The fields of community archaeology and citizen science have been growing in the past few years,50 and the Discovery Programme has a proven track record in teaching, training and utilising volunteers, both in the office and in the field. In its preliminary phase of just eighteen months, the LIARI Project took on a number of volunteers, including a Transition Year student from a local Dublin school and the Education Development Officer of the Cruachan Aí Heritage Centre in County Roscommon. We also participated in the JobBridge National Internship Scheme51 with a nine-month placement for Philippa Barry, whose expertise and commitment to the research led to an

8

extension to her contract with LIARI. We hope that by our involvement in such programmes the LIARI Project can continue to train and encourage careers in academic and field archaeology. Successful public outreach in the Discovery Programme has led to volunteer and student participation on geophysical survey and excavations.52 Postgraduate researchers from UCD and TCD have already assisted in the LIARI surveys at Lambay and Drumanagh/Loughshinny, Co. Dublin. The project hosted a Master’s student placement for Alexandra Guglielmi from UCD for three months in the summer of 2013. Members of the LIARI team regularly give public lectures and seminars to local historical societies, university students and community groups. We have also taken part in various outreach events, such as the Dublin Garden Squares Day and Merrion Square Open Day, that have allowed us to showcase the work of the project to a wider public. The LIARI Project has also been working to develop a strong sense of public engagement in social media. The project now maintains a presence on Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter, with Facebook being arguably the most popular way to engage with members of the public.The LIARI Facebook page was created in July 2012 and provides a forum for archaeologists, students and the wider public to learn about the ongoing work of the project, and to ask questions and give feedback.53 In January 2014 the page was being followed by people in Ireland, the USA, Britain, Germany, Greece, India, the Netherlands, Spain and other countries around the world. It is accessible and interactive and has greatly increased the dissemination of information on Irish archaeological research to different audiences. Publication remains one of the major modes of dissemination for the research undertaken by the Discovery Programme, in both traditional and more innovative media. Members of the team have already published on elements of the project,54 and we hope that this current volume will be of interest not only to academics and the wider heritage community but also to students and the general interested reader.

1-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:50 Page 9

The LIARI Project: aims, methodology and collaborative research NOTES 1. With contributions from Christopher Standish, University of Bristol, and Robert Shaw, Discovery Programme. 2. Bhreathnach 1995; 2005a; Newman 1997; Fenwick and Newman 2002; Roche 2002. 3. O’Sullivan 2001; Grogan 2005. 4. C. Cotter 2013. 5. Dowling and McCarthy 2011. 6. Reilly and Stefanini 2010. 7. Comber and Dawson 2011. 8. Cahill Wilson 2010. Cahill Wilson was appointed as Project Director for Phase 2 of the project. 9. O’Brien is a member of the Discovery Programme Directorate and an expert on burial practices in Ireland. 10. Dowling was appointed as Assistant Project Director for Phase 2 of the project. See Dowling 2006; 2009; 2011. 11. Bevivino brought additional expertise in the reception of classical art and archaeology to the project. Our second Research Assistant, Philippa Barry (taken on initially as a JobBridge intern in July 2012), is a bioarchaeologist and this has proved invaluable in helping to coordinate the Irish Isotope Research Group (IIRG). We are also grateful to Steven McGlade, who undertook preliminary research into glass beads of the period, assisted in the fieldwork and helped to update the project database. 12. Becker et al. 2008; Becker 2012. 13. Following Raftery 1994 and his use of the phrase ‘the invisible people’. 14. See Gosden 2004 on first-hand cultural encounters and shared value systems. 15. Tilly 1994, 73. 16. Newman 2012. 17. Pace Lynn 2003a; Armit 2007, 135; Becker 2012, 11. 18. For example, the late Iron Age period varies between different European countries but usually refers to the period before the consolidation of the Rhine limes; or in northern Europe and southern Scandinavia this is the later Roman Iron Age. 19. Dowling and McCarthy 2011. 20. Becker et al. 2008. 21. Funded by the Heritage Council’s Irish National Strategic Archaeological Research (INSTAR) scheme, 2008–10. 22. McGarry 2009; 2010. 23. See www.excavations.ie/Pages/HomePage.php; www.nra.ie/ archaeology/nra-archaeological-database/. 24. See www.mappingdeathdb.ie. 25. Corlett and Potterton 2010; 2012. 26. See, for example, Raftery 1983; 1984; 1994. 27. On the principles and methods of geophysical survey see, for example, Clarke 1990; Gaffney and Gater 2003; Aspinall et al. 2009. 28. Nevin 2012; Schmidt and Ernenwein 2012. 29. Cooney 2009a. 30. Rynne 1976. 31. Reilly and Stefanini 2010. 32. For example, Baillie 1993; Weir 1993.

33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42.

43.

44. 45. 46.

47.

48. 49.

50.

51. 52.

53. 54.

Coyle McClung 2013. University of Bristol. University of Southampton. Cahill Wilson 2010, 214–17. E.P. Kelly, pers. comm. (JCW, 2013). Timberlake 1994. Darling et al. 2010. Fletcher et al. 1993; Rohl and Needham 1998. Ponting et al. 2003. The most significant research undertaken to date on copper sources and prehistoric mining in Ireland is that of William O’Brien (University College Cork), who has published widely on this subject; see, for example, W. O’Brien 2014. Collaborative partners were Elizabeth O’Brien (Mapping Death Project), Christopher Standish and Alistair Pike (University of Southampton). E. O’Brien 1990, 37–8; 1999b; 2009a; E. O’Brien and Bhreathnach 2011. See, for example, Cahill Wilson 2012a; Cahill Wilson et al. 2012; Montgomery and Grimes 2012. The IIRG network is currently working towards standardisation of both methods and practices, and an online comparative database through a collaborative all-Ireland and UK partnership. Ó Floinn 2009. The Inventory Project of the Irish Antiquities Division, NMI (as part of the Documentation Plan), began work on a full inventory of the NMI’s collections in 2009, and this process is ongoing at the time of writing. The project has the potential to yield a significant amount of new material. For more information see Anderson et al. 2013. See www.discoveryprogramme.ie/about.html. Copies of the Discovery Programme’s Strategic Plan (2014–2017) are available for consultation (see www.discoveryprogramme.ie for further information). See, for example, Carver 2011. The Heritage Council is leading this area of development in Ireland and is guided by various European Union and UNESCO conventions. See www.jobbridge.ie. For example, the Discovery Programme’s Medieval Rural Settlement Project’s research excavations at Tulsk, Co. Roscommon, involved over 200 volunteers and students in the summers from 2004 to 2009. See www.facebook.com/LateIronAgeAndRomanIreland. See, for example, Cahill Wilson 2012b; Dowling and Cahill Wilson 2014; Lacey et al. (forthcoming). Various on-line reports include an interview with Cahill Wilson on the educational website Ancient History Encylopedia (www.discoveryprogramme.ie/research/currentprojects/late-iron-age-roman-ireland/184-jacqueline-cahillwilson-interviewed-by-ancient-history-encyclopedia.html, accessed May 2014) and an overview of recent archaeological discoveries at the Hill of Lloyd, near Kells, Co. Meath (www.discoveryprogramme.ie/ research/currentprojects/late-iron-age-roman-ireland/222-newarchaeological-discoveries-by-liari.html, accessed May 2014).

9

1-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:50 Page 10

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 11

2. ROMANS AND ROMAN MATERIAL IN IRELAND: A WIDER SOCIAL PERSPECTIVE JACQUELINE CAHILL WILSON1

As mentioned in the previous chapter, the four research themes and the overall aims of the LIARI Project were designed to allow us to engage with the wider dialogues taking place both inside and outside Ireland in studies relating to how we interpret finds of Roman material from areas outside the frontiers of the empire. The interrelated themes allowed us to review the archaeological evidence from Ireland within a framework of contemporary material culture studies, and to offer a different way to examine not just the mechanisms by which material came to Ireland but also how we might read the evidence of local responses that were similar—or different—to those of other communities that lay within the borderlands of the Roman Empire.2 Although this chapter focuses on the material evidence and the social context of its parallels elsewhere, it must not be dislocated from its landscape setting; it is therefore cross-referenced to the more detailed research presented throughout this volume. Contemporary theoretical approaches in archaeology help us to understand the malleable nature of the shifting and changing identities of the communities living in different parts of Ireland, and our research has begun to explore how these were developed, maintained or revised in the light of cultural, social or political influences—especially from the Roman world. We felt that this was essential to our enquiries, given the oft-cited reference to the seemingly ‘invisible’ nature of communities in the period.3 Our preliminary research has addressed what relevant material has been found in Ireland, and where it was found, along with a comprehensive review of how it has been interpreted in the past.4 This is the basis on which this chapter has been written, and the points raised here are reiterated, developed and integrated within the rest of our research findings in Chapters 7 and 8. As this volume is designed for the interested reader, as well as for those involved in academic research, it was felt that a longer general chapter was needed at the outset to bring together scholarship, past and present, for the period, and that it was also important to outline contemporary approaches to Roman studies. The aim here is not to try to offer a comprehensive study of what is a wide body of existing interdisciplinary liter-

ature and scholarship in both the late Iron Age and Roman period, but instead to introduce readers and researchers to some of the key concepts and debates in contemporary research that have altered greatly how we interpret Roman archaeology and Roman influences elsewhere (as this is directly relevant to our research period). This work does not seek to replace the exceptional catalogue published by the late Professor Raftery in 1983 and his key reference work on Iron Age material from Ireland, published in 1984.5 Rather our aim has been to build on the parallels he, along with other distinguished Iron Age scholars such as E.M. Jope, have drawn between some of the material from the late Iron Age in Ireland and that from Britain and Europe in the Roman period. In so doing, we are combining the most relevant aspects of these older studies with contemporary theoretical debates and more recent examples from related fields of research. We begin by summarising the extent of our knowledge and understanding at the point at which this research commenced, before moving to discuss how this informed our investigations.

What do we mean by ‘Roman’? The image of the Roman centurion, resplendent in lorica segmentata, plumed helmet, red tunic and polished greaves, remains the image associated with the Romans in Ireland and elsewhere, and it is this image, and all that it represents, that has in part hindered detailed consideration of Roman influences in Ireland. The answer given by members of the LIARI team to the most frequently asked question in relation to the project, ‘Were the Romans in Ireland?’, has not always met with approval,6 as our responses tend to be qualified by what exactly is meant by the term ‘the Romans’. The Roman Empire at its greatest extent under the expansionist Emperor Trajan (AD 98–117) stretched from the grey skies and green fields of northern Britain to the dust and searing heat of southern Mesopotamia, across Egypt and all of northern Africa (Fig. 2.1). Within this vast ‘superstate’, a 11

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 12

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland

Fig. 2.1— Geographical map of the frontiers of the Roman Empire c. AD 150 (courtesy of the Frontiers of the Roman Empire Culture 2000 project (2005–8)).

Roman way of life was imposed initially through military conquest and then encouraged through formal administration of the senatorial and imperial provinces.7 Part of the long-term success of Roman imperialism can be credited to the diplomatic relations nurtured with client kings, who negotiated a place technically within the territorium of Rome and who were used as a useful buffer between the imperium and the farther barbaricum. James has recently described this process as a policy of the ‘sword and the open-hand’8 and the position of these client states was never guaranteed, as there are numerous instances where excuses were found for punitive raids or full-scale military aggression that led to formal annexation.9 In the more recent past, communities and societies beyond the formal frontiers and borderlands were regarded as being outside the influence of Rome, and their archaeology was studied without reference to the social, political and economic developments taking place within the Roman provinces.10 This, as we shall see, is no longer a valid approach and there is now a wide body of research and scholarship that has sought 12

to explore and explain societal changes and the archaeological evidence both at the interface and well beyond the formal frontiers. In keeping with how other societies that were regarded as beyond the reach of Rome were treated, much that was identified as Roman, Romano-British or Gallo-Roman in Ireland was classified separately to that which was regarded as of local origin, often referred to as ‘Celtic’ or ‘Irish’, and treated separately from wider considerations of the material of the late Iron Age or early medieval periods.11 Contemporary scholarship has underlined the difficulties in attempting to segregate material in this way, especially given the problems that are inherent in making any assumptions about ethnicity based on artefacts alone.12 From the century before and during the early period of our research, these difficulties are highlighted by what is regarded as local Iron Age material, such as ‘Irish’ high-status decorative metalwork, given that there are good arguments and sound archaeological evidence to suggest that at least some of this material may have an origin in Britain and Scotland.13 Yet, despite the wide

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 13

Romans and Roman material in Ireland: a wider social perspective

Fig. 2.2—The Keshcarrigan bowl (max. D. 15.3cm; H. 7.2cm), with distinctive bird-head handle: of likely Irish craftsmanship, although parallels have been drawn between this and first-century AD bronze bowls from Britain (© National Museum of Ireland). recognition and acceptance of this fact within scholarship of the Iron Age, this material—unlike the Roman types—has always been accepted as forming part of the personal repertoire of the Irish élite in this period.14 Our preference throughout this research is to refer to material as ‘Romano-British’ or ‘GalloRoman’ if this is where the clearest parallels appear, and to use ‘provincial Roman’ or ‘Roman-type’ when material forms part of a wider range of artefacts that are common across the western provinces. By using the term ‘Roman’ in our description of material it is intended to refer to a common form, fabric or type of material that appears to have originated within a Roman cultural milieu; it should not be used to infer the ethnicity of its user or maker.The origin and complex social biography15 that each and every object might provide, whether a contemporary import or the consequence of antiquarian interest, is of equal importance to our studies, but this is only achievable once a visual inspection of each object has been completed. This work is in progress. We have now included all known material on our master database and have rehabilitated for further enquiry some of that which J.D. Bateson thought questionable or that he rejected

in his review in 1973.16 All of the material will be located, reviewed and reclassified using contemporary typologies and approaches to the study of Roman material found outside the frontiers.

Contemporary dialogues in Roman studies Contemporary scholarship in Roman studies has successfully challenged the grand, overarching narrative of ‘Romanisation’ and its inherent homogenisation of what was in reality a patchy, disparate and constantly evolving society under the rule of Rome.17 There were many ways to be Roman, even in Rome itself, but most especially within the western provinces, where the incoming system of formal administration, taxation and civic status relied greatly on the existing social framework, settlement patterns and places of importance within the landscape at that time. It is against this background that we should view the impact of the campaigns of both Julius Caesar and Claudius on Iron Age Britain. There is a growing corpus of likely imported material in Ireland that dates from the period from the first century BC to the first century AD and it forms 13

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 14

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland the beginning of our discussion of the external cultural influences that are evident in the late Iron Age in Ireland. Some of the small finds have been found in burial contexts, and these include glass and ceramic beads, Continental-style fibulae and several bronze vessels or bowls.18 The well-known bronze Keshcarrigan bowl or drinking vessel (Fig. 2.2), while not associated with a burial, exemplifies both late La Tène craftworking and design, as well as a new technological development in the finish, which involved burnishing on a lathe or wheel. A close parallel for this vessel is a similar bowl found among the grave-finds at Birdlip in Gloucestershire, England; although Raftery argued that the stylistic parallels for the cast bird-head handle were entirely among native Irish craftworking,19 it remains a possibility that it may have been an import from Britain.20 Perhaps of greater importance are the links that this material suggests between people across a wide geographical area of Britain and Ireland. It implies a greater reach of new cultural influences into areas of Ireland that were regarded as far removed from the more obvious coastal contact points in the past. In highlighting the existing connections and entangled nature of much that has previously been classified as La Tène or Celtic, or even native or foreign, perhaps it is timely that we shift the focus from trying to establish chronological or typological progenitors and focus instead on how these contacts may have worked in practice at a social level, inevitably helping to shape and reshape the power and politics of individuals with access to this material in early Ireland. The vessel from Keshcarrigan and other examples of bronze bowls (discussed later), and some earlier ‘pot-belly’-type cauldrons such as those from Ballymoney, Co. Antrim, or Ballyedmond, Co. Galway, also appear to map well onto the distribution of important items such as Irish-type horse-bits and Yshaped pendants (both decorated and undecorated) and beehive querns.21 For most of these we have no absolute dates and few contexts recorded. There are also many early finds in museum collections in Ireland and Britain recorded as having been found in Ireland, but there remains a question as to whether these, and at least some of those thought to be late Iron Age imports, were brought into Ireland by antiquarian collectors. Research is ongoing in this area and, until such time as it is completed, it is important that these are not automatically discounted from our considerations. They include a recently published ‘Etruscan’-type (or perhaps Roman, given that it was published as dating from the second or first century BC) harpago or flesh-hook from the collections of the National Museum of Ireland (NMI) that was found in 14

Saintfield, Co. Down, and a further similar find from County Sligo.22 There are several small Etruscan-style figurines that may also be of Roman date; these were discussed by Jope in an important paper in which he put forward a convincing case for imported goods into the northern counties even in this early period.23 Several other Roman figurines of uncertain date are known, including a suggested Venus figurine from Carrowmore passage tomb in County Sligo, a figurine of Mars thought to have been found in Roscommon, a small winged figure (depicting Cupid/Eros) found in a bog near Golden in Tipperary that appears to have been a fitment for a much larger object, a figurine of a lar found in the River Boyne (a domestic Roman household god, not Hercules as published) and a figurine of Mercury that was found at Caugh Hill, Co. Derry.24 Just over ten miles north of Caugh Hill is Limavady, where the famous Broighter hoard was discovered in 1896.This contained a mix of late La Tèneand Roman-style necklaces and a small boat complete with oars (all made of gold) that is believed to date from around the first century BC.25 The Broighter hoard is considered to be a contemporary import, based on the place and manner of its finding. There is also the well-publicised evidence of the skull of a Barbary macaque ape, from a dated third-century BC context at Navan Fort, Co. Armagh, and when all of these single finds are considered together it suggests a line of importation direct from north Africa or the Mediterranean region even in this early period.26 The inland distribution of some of the finds appears to focus on the upper extent of the River Shannon, its tributaries and the interconnected lakes of the midland and northern counties. Notable among these is the bronze vessel from Fore, Co. Westmeath, as it is a close parallel to a vessel found in a ditch at Spetisbury Rings, Dorset, that was dated to the first century AD.27 Although the site of Fore is better known for its later monastery, it is located less than a mile from Lough Lene, where a small boat of Mediterranean-type construction was found and dated to the first century AD.28 Some of the material that has up to now been included within broader discussions of Roman material in Ireland might be better described as belonging to this early group, such as the Continental-type fibulae from Dún Ailinne (Knockaulin), Co. Kildare.29 Importantly, many of the burials in which the small finds around Ireland have been discovered appear to share greater affinity with burial practices more commonly found in Britain in both the pre-Roman Iron Age and early Roman periods. These links will be discussed in full later, as they are central to our new research on mobility and

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 15

Romans and Roman material in Ireland: a wider social perspective

´

Fig. 2.3—Map of key sites in Roman Britain mentioned throughout text (shaded relief model base © ESRI, GTOPO30).

Ardoch r occh ch Trapain p n Law

m mu muir Pennymuir Corbridge C brrridge riidge

C isl Carli islee Carlisle thh Penrith

Yorkk Y Meols Meols

Bryn EEryr B ryr Aberffffraw Aberffraw

Bu Farm FFa Bush

ter Chester

Witham th tham

Wroxeter xe r Icklingham h m c er Cirencester Bagendon Uley L Lydney

Trelis lissey Trelissey

Tintag g gel Tintagel Nanstallon Chysauuster u r Chysauster

Colchester S Albans a St S Sh ak no Shakenoak Londonn W Wallll

Goosbecks Gosbecks

am mills ills Seamills Lul Lu uullingstone l ngstone ng one o Lullingstone wys Dinass Powys Nettleton c s r Silchester Crandonn R c h ough Richborough Wanborough Bridge rd hee Porchester a Hinton St Mary o o gh Pulborough Calstockk estorrm esto Restormel

C Carvossa

Spet Spetisbury R s Rings

F ne n Fishbourne H ngis bury Hengistb b Hengistbury Head

Trethurgy

100km

migration that is presented in Chapter 6.30 Links between communities in Ireland and Britain are evident in the immediate pre-Roman Iron Age, but until recently it was rare for authors to offer a view of what was happening in Britain for comparative purposes (Fig. 2.3). It is now widely accepted that aspects of Roman culture had been adopted before the Roman conquest of Britain under Claudius,31 and this can be read through the complex archaeology of late Iron Age sequences at sites such as Hengistbury Head in Dorset, Silchester in Hampshire, Gosbecks in Essex and Fishbourne in Sussex, where excavation revealed a pre-conquest Roman ditch.32 In his reconsideration of the pre-conquest evidence from Silchester, Creighton discussed how past interpreta-

tions might have placed too great a reliance on the traditional historical narratives of its development into an important civitas without due regard to its earlier origins.33 At Silchester an example of lorica segmentata was discovered in a closed context of late Iron Age (pre-Claudian) date.34 Creighton argued that it was entirely likely that individuals who had either resided in or were part of the Roman military in Gaul, which was already an established Roman province by this time, might also have worn correct Roman uniform once in residence at Silchester or elsewhere. Research on the role that élites played in negotiating and securing their position within the new administration has highlighted the need to recognise and appreciate that responses to Roman conquest 15

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 16

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland

Fig. 2.4—Inscribed lead pipe from the legionary fortress of Deva Victrix, Chester (full pipe L. 502.9cm) (© Cheshire West Museums). would have differed greatly throughout various parts of Britain, dictated to a large extent by the fabric of existing social structures.We also need to consider factors such as distance (both socially and geographically) from impact points, as this would have served to create bonds of obligation in some instances and eschewal elsewhere. In recent work, Mallory has drawn attention to the parallel between the excuse used to justify the Claudian invasion and what he saw as the preparatory use of an Irish regulus in the company of Agricola, as recorded by Tacitus.35 The role of Agricola and his seasons of campaigning may have been given too great an importance in the past, however, a point to which we will return later in a consideration of the imposition of the frontier and frontier policies in northern Britain and Scotland. The impact of Roman culture is said to be much less visible in those societies in parts of south-western, western and north-western Britain, and it has been argued that Roman impact was never as great as it was in the south-east.36 This, however, may be partly based on past assumptions about what constitutes Roman-ness and a reliance on the classical sources; certainly the archaeology at sites such as the Ditches (near Bagendon in Gloucestershire) suggests that we need to rethink even our knowledge of villa development in Roman Britain.37 Throughout the entire Roman period in Britain, just as in the rest of the provinces, there were communities within which Roman mores were adopted wholeheartedly,38 but it is also clear from the archaeological evidence that there was a constant interchange of ideas and technologies—reflected not just in the archaeology of places and buildings but also in the archaeology of personal identities—that 16

indicates the increasing diversity of local communities across Roman Britain.39 By exploring the engagement of powerful aristocracies and kings with all that was Roman before the first century AD through the archaeological evidence in southern Britain, we can begin to think differently about how individual roles and the lives of communities in Ireland may have been reshaped through these cultural contacts in the first century AD. It is also important to remind ourselves of the sheer scale of the military forces that were encamped just across the Irish Sea from Ireland. At the time of the Claudian conquest in AD 43, the Roman military in Britain would have totalled in the region of 45,000 men: around 20,000 in its four forward-striking legions (Legio II Augusta, Legio IX Hispania, Legio XVI Gemina and Legio XX Valeria Victrix), along with an equal number of auxiliary units, cavalry units known as alae (or wings), additional legions brought by Claudius himself, and an unspecified number of people who travelled alongside the military, such as specialist manufacturers and traders, opportunists and slaves.40 At the beginning of the first century AD the legions were composed exclusively of Roman citizens, a great proportion of whom were traditionally recruited from the provinces of Gaul and Hispania. By the end of the first century AD the legions were reduced to three in Britain, and would never exceed this level again. Detachments of smaller legionary units, known as vexillations, moved between the existing legionary fortresses in Britain and campaigns elsewhere in Europe, and these were regularly substituted and replaced by vexillations of other legions and cohorts of auxiliaries from the provinces. We know from documentary sources and a

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 17

Romans and Roman material in Ireland: a wider social perspective

2cm

Fig. 2.5—The perfect example of hybridisation in style, form and function—the dragonesque brooch—reflecting both Roman and native British influences: this example was found outside the normal northerly distribution, second century AD from Charterhouse-on-Mendip, Somerset (courtesy of the Bristol Museum and Art Gallery). variety of inscribed media of the period—including antefixes from roofs, dedicatory inscriptions, altars, centurial stones on foundations of walls and even lead pipes from Deva Victrix at Chester (Fig. 2.4)—which units were stationed where in Roman Britain at key times (although we do not know exact numbers of men). From the additional information gleaned from the extraordinary written tablets found at Vindolanda, we know that a great proportion of the frontier garrison on the Stanegate was made up of auxiliaries (i.e. non-citizens).41 These men were drafted from within the provinces but also from outside Roman territory, and they were awarded citizenship after 25 years of service.The award of citizenship was extended to their wives and children, allowing their sons to join the ranks of the legions if they so chose.42 In AD 212 the constitutio antoninianus, or Edict of Caracalla, awarded citizenship to all free men in the provinces, and in essence removed the distinction between legion and auxiliary ranks.43 The inscriptions and dedications that these men left behind remind us that, although they were paid for their service in the Roman military,

their provincial identity remained very important to them.44 The forts and fortresses throughout Britain and Europe housed a professional standing army which, if not constantly active, could quickly grow disgruntled. A rigorous training regime was essential to maintain discipline and to avoid a repeat of incidents such as the revolt of the Batavi in Europe in AD 69–7045 and the mutiny of the Usipi in northern Britain c. AD 82.46 Alongside the many permanent bases in northern Britain and Scotland are the slighter remnants of numerous overlying practice or training camps, such as those at Pennymuir, near Jedburgh, and Ardoch in Perthshire, both in Scotland,47 which have left a remarkable palimpsest in these landscapes. We tend to see the permanence and immutable nature of these forts and fortresses as built to guard against an incoming attack, and they were perfectly capable of doing this, but (as recently argued by James) they were also designed to contain many thousands of armed and dangerous soldiers under a tight discipline. The inward-looking towers of these forts suggest that they were also designed to monitor any clandestine movement on the forts’ interior road, the Via Sagularis.48 By the middle of the second century AD the military is estimated to have numbered around 55,000 troops in Britain, and garrison on the entire frontier was characterised by the sheer diversity in origin of those who were stationed there.49 The intermingling of local and Roman culture is reflected in the archaeology of small finds in the form, function and design of small personal objects such as brooches, pins and toilet implements that create a provincial Roman material culture exemplified in many respects by the design and form of the dragonesque brooch (Fig. 2.5). It is important that we do not assume that all artistic designs, whether classified as ‘Celtic’, ‘Germanic’ or ‘Roman’, are diagnostic, in the sense of being pre- or post-invasion in date, or that they denote the likely ethnic origin of their wearers, as the reality is far more complex and often multilayered.50 The difficulty in using only artistic style in small finds to date contexts is highlighted by the continued use of the triskele in plate and openwork objects, enamelled objects that reflect local and classical styles such as the pelta on brooches and horse phalarae, and the use of the later raised relief of trompetenmuster form, common throughout the Roman period in Britain but also as far afield as Dura Europos in modern-day Syria.51 These decorative styles form part of the repertoire of Roman and local artistic styles that developed throughout the provinces.52 The generic description of ‘Roman’ that is given to material from the provinces can be somewhat mis17

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 18

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland leading, however, given that the distinctive red pottery known as Samian ware was made in south, central and eastern Gaul (modern-day France and Germany) but also in Britain;53 some of the fine wares, such as Nene Valley colour-coated ware or the Rheinish wares, as their names suggest, were made in Britain and eastern Gaul respectively, and most of the amphorae probably arrived from Gaul and Spain. Roman brooches, such as the fibulae and little plate brooches that have been found in Ireland, were mostly of Romano-British manufacture, produced usually, but not exclusively, for a local market; although some types may have originated in other provinces, they do not have an origin in Rome or Italy. Even the important change in burial practice—from cremation to inhumation— described by Tacitus as the Romanas mos (the Roman custom of burial) is likely to have been influenced in the second century AD by the Emperor Hadrian’s admiration of all things Greek.54 Before moving away from this point, there is one further generalisation that has been used to reject any Roman influence in Ireland: the expectation of uniformity and standardisation in architecture, infrastructure and, indeed, social practices such as bathing, dining and even burial throughout the earlier period.55 This can be used to characterise both the art and the architecture of the burgeoning upper echelon of Romano-British society,56 the military and the increasingly urbanised spaces at new towns and settlements in Roman Britain, but recent demographic estimates of those who lived in Roman Britain has demonstrated that this reflects the archaeology of about 3% of the entire population.57 In the last decades of excavation and dedicated research, many scholars have highlighted just how unrepresentative this is of the lives of the other 97% of people who lived under the administration of Rome. Similarly, in regard to architecture, most early buildings throughout all of the provinces were timber, post-built structures that only gradually moved to more permanent stone footings over time. Indeed, some were never built in stone.58 Roman period buildings are not all rectangular, either; for example, many homes were in the vernacular architecture of the roundhouse (some that started life as late as the third century AD).59 The orthogonal grids revealed in aerial photography and geophysical survey, and from which the number of insulae has been used to calculate sizes of the urbanised populace, have now been questioned through archaeological excavations demonstrating that not all the insulae were occupied at the same time, and that some were left empty or used as likely cottage gardens or areas of manufacture.60 Roman military roads were 18

surveyed and engineered and built in straight sections (not straight lines), and often deviate where necessary. The Stanegate mentioned earlier actually weaves its way across northern Britain; roads in Wales similarly deviate and do not have the double ditch and agger expected from military roads elsewhere; and not all the smaller interconnecting roads, the diverticuli, were either straight or metalled.61 As elsewhere, there remains a wide grey area of interpretation that needs to be bridged in Irish archaeological approaches between the emphasis on essentially local and Iron Age material and the treatment of all that has been classified as British or Roman. The overall quantity of provincial Roman material in Ireland remains small, but then so too is that which might be regarded as of local Iron Age character. When the archaeology of the period is so slight, each and every potsherd, pin or bead needs to be considered as relevant to our enquiries. Besides, cultural influences are not always easily read through recognisable diagnostic material such as Samian ware sherds, and it remains a fact that in the absence of any expectation of a Roman context at a site in Ireland it is entirely likely that less obvious, culturally entangled artefacts (that have proven difficult to interpret even among Roman specialists outside Ireland) may have been missed in the past.62 It is important that, before we turn to the specifics of the new research outlined in the following chapters, we offer a contemporary approach to the study of Roman material in Ireland, drawing parallels with communities that lay just beyond the frontiers or limes that helped shape—and, in turn, were influenced by—all that was evolving within the imperium. Before doing so, however, it is also important to consider the background to why it has proved difficult to offer new approaches to this area of research in Ireland and why the question of all things Roman in Ireland has become somewhat controversial in recent years.

The development of the archaeological narratives Until quite recently there has been a reluctance to include finds of Roman material from Ireland as anything other than ‘intrusive’, ‘random’ or the results of raiding (i.e. booty).63 There is no record in the classical histories of an official Roman campaign into Ireland and, given the Roman propensity to celebrate with triumphs even the most pyrrhic of victories,64 it was thought reasonable to assume that the defeat of Irish warriors and kings would have been celebrated

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 19

Romans and Roman material in Ireland: a wider social perspective

Fig. 2.6—Widely used as the starting point for the discussion of classical sources: a map of Britain and Ireland from Ptolemy’s coordinates listed in his Geographia (c. second century AD). This version (Ptolomaei Cosmographia ... (Rome, Petrus de Turre, 1490), Prima Europe Tabula (detail)) is based on Ptolemy’s description but using Latin names (by permission of the Royal Irish Academy, © RIA). and duly recorded for posterity. The Roman classical histories are not, however, a complete linear record and there are obvious gaps in the sources for certain key periods. Perhaps more importantly, they were not written as an ethnographic study of the people outside Roman territory. As discussed by Raftery and Warner in their reviews of this period,65 there are few surviving sources after Agricola was recalled to Rome at the time of Emperor Domitian’s accession (AD 81–96) until we reach the time of Hadrian’s rule (AD 117–38), where we hear that in the neighbouring province ‘the Britons could not be kept under control’.66 There is an early reference to Ireland in Caesar’s Commentaries on the Gallic War, in which he describes the size and distance of the sea crossing between Britain and Ireland, noting that the island of Mona lay in between; this knowledge is likely to have been gained from those who had sailed the trading routes across the Irish Sea.67 Most of the discussions of Roman material in Ireland, however, are prefaced with the work of the Alexandrian Graeco-Roman geographer Claudius Ptolemaeus (Ptolemy), as this is

the earliest detailed record for Ireland. Ptolemy’s Geographia is likely to have been compiled some time in the mid-second century AD and is clearly based on information gleaned from traders and merchants who had spent some time in Ireland (Fig. 2.6). We know from the writings of Tacitus that there was enough Roman interest in Ireland to warrant a detailed passage in which he recalled the possible invasion of Ireland by his father-in-law Agricola (the Roman general and later governor of the province of Britannia).68 Some of Ptolemy’s coordinates for Ireland have been shown to be more accurate than those for Scotland, and his work has been the subject of much scholarship across the disciplines over many years.69 It is clear that his coordinates were derived to a great extent from the work of Marinus of Tyre, who in turn is believed to have gained much of his information from Philemon, who recorded the original accounts from traders in the period before the Claudian invasion in the early first century AD.70 Much academic debate surrounds the evidence provided by Ptolemy and, indeed, as with other classical accounts, how readily it has been used to support 19

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 20

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland archaeological interpretation without the benefit of specialist scrutiny, but further discussion is beyond the scope of this chapter. What is generally agreed is that some of the ‘Celtic’ places and names can be accepted as authentic and contemporary, and it is interesting that virtually all of these are linked to key geographical features, such as rivers, promontories, natural harbours and islands.71 Perhaps the most interesting element is Ptolemy’s reference to the length of daylight hours in winter and summer in Ireland.72 This shows an unexpectedly detailed level of knowledge of Ireland at this time and suggests that at least some of these merchants had spent longer periods of time there. There are many references to Ireland, as Hibernia in Latin or Iuvernia in Greek, among classical accounts, and the most comprehensive consideration of these is that by Freeman.73 Some of the references are well known and often cited, such as those of Juvenal and Symmachus.74 Among the many other, albeit fragmentary, references there is one often-overlooked example that can be found in the compilation of imperial biographies known as the Historia Augusta.75 The record suggests that the portents had indicated that a proconsul (a position usually awarded after service as a magistrate in Rome itself; the office-holder was the most senior administrator and governor in a senatorial, rather than an imperial, province) would be sent to Ireland.76 Here Ireland is called by the Greek name Iuvernia rather than by the Latin term Scotia, widely used to identify references to Ireland within the later classical sources.77 With due regard to the arguments that these accounts may have been fabricated to serve various propaganda purposes,78 or that this may simply be a literary topos to glorify the sheer reach of Rome,79 it is difficult to dismiss completely a reference of such a casual nature relating to Roman involvement or perhaps diplomatic contacts at a high level with Ireland in the fourth century AD. The reception of the classics and the classical histories has been the subject of much recent academic research and debate in Roman studies and related subjects in Britain.80 In consideration of how archaeology appears increasingly to challenge the perception of a homogenising ‘Romanisation’ of the people in the western provinces, it has been cogently argued that our engagement with the classical world has been coloured by historic teaching methods and an earlier scholarship that was deeply rooted in Victorian imperialism. Reviewing both perception and reception within the approaches of archaeologists, classicists and historians in the more recent past has led to a dialogue about the manner in which the 20

perceived wisdom was to contrast and compare the innately civilising nature of Roman imperialism with all that was regarded as ‘barbarous’, framed within a political ideology of nineteenth- and early twentiethcentury British imperialism. The uncritical approach in the past, coupled with a widening division between specialisms,81 has led to a splintering in research, with a focus on individual aspects of the period rather than a holistic approach. As mentioned earlier in the discussion, criticisms have also been levelled at many archaeologists’ unfamiliarity with the original Latin and Greek texts that are nevertheless cited frequently in archaeological interpretation, given that the sources used are often translations written decades earlier and in the context of the existing knowledge and approaches of that time.82 A recent review of the classical sources that offer information on Roman Britain has highlighted the fact that these comments are given as parts of much larger documentary sources, and that we should be cautious in using them uncritically without reference to the purpose of the original text, whether that be biographical, panegyrical or eulogistic.83 There is now a growing academic consensus that we need to move away from generalisations such as ‘Romanisation’, but also from the persistent use of dichotomous or oppositional pairing in terms such as Roman vs native (or Celtic in an Irish sense), or indeed military vs civilian, and move back to an approach that is properly interdisciplinary. Older studies and the past treatment of Roman material in Ireland similarly reflect not just the training and expertise of the authors but often how discussions were framed within the social and political contexts of what was happening in Ireland at any given time. In 1900 a debate took place in the Classical Review between two distinguished classical scholars: Francis Haverfield in England and Alfred Gudeman in Germany.Theirs was an oppositional stance; Gudeman suggested likely Roman interest in Ireland, while Haverfield’s complete disagreement echoed a rather Victorian attitude towards the civilising nature of Roman conquest (and by inference the perceived lack of it in Ireland). In 1913 Haverfield wrote once more about ‘Ancient Rome and Ireland’ and this time he firmly dismissed the evidence of Roman material from Ireland as ‘trifling’.84 In the 1930s an American team from Harvard University worked closely with the newly established government of the Irish Free State.85 Commonly referred to as the Harvard Expeditions in Irish archaeology, the research conducted by this group was known in the United States as the Harvard Mission. Although the excavations carried out in Ireland were

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 21

Romans and Roman material in Ireland: a wider social perspective led by Hugh O’Neill Hencken and Hallam Movius, the ‘mission’ was directed by a eugenicist by the name of Earnest Hooton, whose research was recently described by Carew86 as anthropogenic87. Hooton believed that the Irish race was pure and the ‘mission’ had a stated aim to create a single, unified, anthropological history for Ireland; their agenda is most generously described as less than objective.88 Permission was granted by both the Dublin and Belfast governments to complete a series of excavations at some of the most important archaeological sites in Ireland between 1932 and 1936, and these remain some of the most influential excavations ever carried out in Ireland. The publication of many of these sites formed the basis for many of the various typologies for early medieval material used in Irish archaeology to this day. The results of the excavations, which produced a vast collection of material, were published in the Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy and the Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland over many years.Within the published reports for Ballinderry, Co. Offaly, and Lagore Crannog, Co. Meath,89 there is a record of material that was identified by Hencken as Roman in origin; Hencken, however, stressed the ‘long-lived’ nature of the material and dismissed many of the imports as having parallels among other ‘Celtic’ peoples.90 As regards Lagore, Hencken did not believe that these imports bore any direct relevance to the overall interpretation of the site, or indeed to the seventh- to tenth-century AD dating that he ascribed to it from the early medieval Irish sources.91 Interestingly, we now have dates that confirm that Iron Age sequences were not recognised at Lagore and we have identified more possible Roman material that supports a late Iron Age phase at the site.92 Following the discovery of a Roman silver hoard at Balline, Co. Limerick, in 1940, and his excavations at Garranes, Co. Cork (1942), and Lough Gur and Carraig Aille, Co. Limerick (1949) (both of which uncovered Roman material), Seán P. Ó Ríordáin published the first catalogue of Roman material found in Ireland.93 His nuanced treatment of the material included a discussion of objects that he thought formed part of a Hiberno-Roman artistic style, and his work would not be out of place among contemporary approaches to material culture studies used today.94 Between 1952 and 1953 Ó Ríordáin led an excavation at the Rath of the Synods on the Hill of Tara to assess the damage inflicted on this monument by the British Israelites in their futile, and immensely destructive, hunt for the Ark of the Covenant at the turn of the twentieth century (ironically at the same time that Haverfield was arguing with Gudeman).95 During these excavations Ó

Ríordáin recovered a further collection of important Roman material and he was well qualified to comment on its importance, given his earlier review of finds from Ireland. Much of the material presented in Ó Ríordáin’s catalogue was, however, dismissed by Bateson in his 1973 review, and it is Bateson’s work that remains the most widely cited reference in any discussion of Roman material in Ireland.96 There are problems with Bateson’s catalogue, not least with the inconsistency of his treatment of different types of material, and his acceptance of some objects and complete rejection of similar material in other instances. Interestingly, Bateson published once more on the material from Ireland following a colloquium on the topic held in 1974. Although this paper is often cited alongside his catalogue, there is little reference to the revised view he put forward in this later paper, in which he reflected on what he appears to have regarded as a worrying consensus (among those who took part in the colloquium) to dismiss much of the material from Ireland as ‘residual’; he cautioned strongly against any such generalisations without the benefit of additional study.97 During the 1980s and 1990s several important papers and books were published that revisited the typologies for common finds such as the early penannular brooches,98 along with some important theoretical papers that challenged many of the approaches in Irish archaeology at that time.99 In several of these contributions, the authors challenged Hencken’s dating of sequences at sites and highlighted the likely Romano-British influences on Irish material and Irish society.100 The 1990s also saw the emergence of a fractious international debate over the deconstruction of the concept and use of the term ‘Celt’ to signify and unify the pre-Roman population of Europe, Britain and Ireland.101 In 1994 Barry Raftery reviewed the Roman material as part of his book Pagan Celtic Ireland, in which he offered some insightful comments on how and why such material was consumed by only some elements of societies. He also drew attention to the likely important role of Drumanagh promontory, Co. Dublin.102 The following year saw the publication of a radically different approach from Richard Warner, in which he suggested that a small unofficial campaign took place at the time before Agricola’s fifth season of campaigns in Roman Britain. Warner hypothesised that perhaps the regulus recorded by Tacitus (as having been befriended and kept in the company of Agricola) was the legendary Irish king Túathal Teachtmar, who is recorded as a returning émigré in the seventeenthcentury Annals of the Four Masters.103 Warner’s paral21

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 22

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland lel between Drumanagh and Richborough Roman fort, however, led to a somewhat sensationalised article in the Sunday Times in 1996 that announced that a Roman fort had been found in Ireland; it also proposed that a revision was needed in Irish history.104 The negative publicity, and the rather personalised nature of the subsequent responses, effectively halted further research on the material from Drumanagh and, one might argue, any willingness to engage in what had become a politicised and controversial debate on Roman cultural influence on Irish society. In more recent years, many important individual contributions have been written on sites and finds around Ireland that demonstrate Roman influences, but although these have been influential in shaping the debates in academic scholarship they do not appear to have found their way into mainstream knowledge of the period.105 A new research group called ‘Ireland and the Roman World’ was recently formed under the direction of Conor Newman at NUI Galway and has been instrumental in pushing forward contemporary approaches through doctoral research and the scholarship of early career researchers, many of whom are referenced throughout this volume. In 2005 Waddell published an important contribution on the history of the discipline of archaeology in Ireland. In this work he argued for a greater critical and theoretical awareness among Irish archaeologists of the problems he regarded as inherent within the historical interpretations of much material and many sites in Ireland.106 More recently, Warner has written on Tara and its environs and the role of the Drumanagh promontory, drawing attention once more to the importance of this site and its Roman and Irish finds. We hope that the details provided later on the material and our geophysical survey will add greatly to the knowledge about likely activity on this site.107 Many of the problems that have been highlighted in Roman studies in Britain are also evident in Irish approaches and, given that much of the material was sent to specialists in Britain for review, it is unsurprising that some of the finds were originally dismissed or thought unimportant. It has also been argued, however, that the treatment of ‘stray’ Roman finds from sites that were assumed to date from the later ‘Early Christian’ period may also reflect how archaeology developed as a discipline in Ireland after the creation of the Free State and the resurgence of Irish national identity that followed separation from Britain.108 At this time, and for many decades subsequently, nationalist, political and religious ideology coloured our interpretation of the past. This led to an idealised retrospective of our heroic ancestors and the 22

notion of an essentially independent Celtic pagan Ireland delivered into a glorious golden age with the onset of Christianisation.109 Easier to reconcile within this later narrative was the concept of Roman material within ‘Early Christian’ Ireland, and most older excavation reports classify not only sites but also material as such. Indeed, it was argued that the finds of Samian ware around Ireland were linked to Irish monks collecting Roman soil from consecrated ground at ecclesiastical centres and shrines in Europe.110 The idea of treating material finds and sites as pagan or Christian may seem somewhat outdated now, but the reality is that although the term itself gradually lost favour the periodisation has lingered; we simply replaced ‘Early Christian’ with the term ‘early medieval’ and kept the nominal date of St Patrick (c. 432) as a terminus for the Iron Age. What becomes apparent after a short review such as this is that the late Iron Age in Ireland has understandably been studied in keeping with the traditions and methods used for prehistoric societies. As recently noted by Cooney, however, it is probably more appropriate to consider this as the point at which Ireland moves out of prehistory into an early historic period.111 Our work has sought to include the parallels between people and their material through contemporary interdisciplinary scholarship in Ireland, Britain and Europe, and, unless otherwise demonstrated, Roman material is here treated as meaningfully constituted within the study of the late Irish Iron Age.112

Understanding Roman relations with Ireland The first set of terms that we might set aside from further use in archaeological discussions are those that imply that Ireland remained outside Roman influences, as these terms were based on past quantitative and historical approaches and they offer little in terms of furthering our understanding of the archaeological evidence for the period. There is nothing ‘random, or trifling’,113 nor anything offering clear evidence of ‘booty’,114 in the material from Ireland, and there is no longer any need to use the term ‘intrusive’;115 the Roman material forms part of the dialogue on the material culture of the late Iron Age and Late Antique period and should no longer be treated as merely an adjunct to it.116 We need to be mindful of the fact that adoption, emulation and adaptation, along with consumption, discarding or deposition, were likely the outcome of the circumstances and occasions in which a variety of exchanges were taking place. The follow-

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 23

Romans and Roman material in Ireland: a wider social perspective

Fig. 2.7—The extent of the trade routes between the Roman Empire and the rest of the known world, based on classical sources and archaeological finds (courtesy of Tim Aspden, History Today, and Raoul McLaughlin).

ing discussion outlines the likely mechanisms for these, set within a framework of what was happening elsewhere in the same period.117

Traders and ports of trade Roman objects found in Ireland are often referred to as ‘imports’ within a few brief sentences that mention occasional trade or refugees.118 It is reasonable to suggest that, in the ancient world, there was nothing simplistic about trade relations, as they were necessary to support the economies and politics of both the exporter and the recipient and were underpinned by a complex web of agents, diplomats and negotiators who were present throughout the network.119 From Roman caravans sent to the Baltic to purchase amber to build Nero’s lavish Domus Aurea in Rome to gemstones and black pepper from India to adorn both the élite and their dining tables, bulk cereals shipped from ports in Egypt to feed the troops on the Rhine limes and the provisioning of local beer for the after-hours drinking among the garrison at Vindolanda, these acts of trade were negotiated by imperial permission but were also carried out on a smaller scale by independent middlemen (Fig. 2.7).120 In Tamil Sangam literature Roman traders were known as Yavanna, and they conducted commerce for black peppercorns, spices

and gemstones out of ports such as Muziris (probably modern Pattanam, outside Kerala in south-east India).121 We know, from contemporary Roman accounts, of a growing fashion for gossamer-thin silks amongst the fashionistas and upper-class women in Roman society; the demands and costs of such longdistance trade, including the intermediaries needed to import these fabrics from China, were matched only by the growing outrage of the senators at such indecency.122 Records from Han Dynasty China show that the Roman Empire was known to them as Da Qin or ‘treasure country’—a recognition among Chinese dynasts that their power was at least rivalled by the Roman Empire.123 The role that these traders and merchants played in the transmission of Roman culture, both within and beyond the territories of Rome, cannot and should not be underestimated, and is important in any consideration of the impact of cultural encounters.124 Trade connections should not be limited, however, to discussions about the transfer of material objects, as we also have to recognise the less archaeologically visible impact that these would have had on conceptions of power, politics and probably religions, and the role they played in the creation of shared value systems.125 Various suggestions have been proposed for the nature of practical engagement with traders in Ireland and the uses of Roman material within existing social 23

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 24

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland constructs.126 Foremost is the emphasis placed on the probable status acquired from access to exotic imports in the development of the emerging élite, and these would indeed have imparted a certain public value. Apart from the finds from Newgrange and the Rath of the Synods, there is little evidence in Ireland of exquisite items of gold and silver jewellery, or of drinking vessels and complete dining services, and there are no known elaborate swords and metalwork from burials; all of these have been found elsewhere in areas that are well beyond the frontier zone in Europe.127 Individualising the nature and circumstances of trade and exchange leads us to the questions surrounding the function and impact of the Roman state economy in relation to local and long-distance trade. Detailed consideration of the Roman economy is quite beyond the scope of this chapter, but one point has emerged from the recent debates that is important for understanding the relationship between coins and coin usage outside the Roman provinces. In the most recent discussions, the key focus of the debate relates to whether it is appropriate to continue to use the influential substantivist model put forward by Finley,128 who characterised the economy of ancient Rome as primarily one of local production and consumption, agriculturally based and somewhat underdeveloped. In his view, successful trade for the upper classes resulted in greater levels of individual wealth, additional status and political power, but there was no overriding concern for long-term investment. In essence, the Roman economy was one based on taxation of the provinces and exploitation of their natural resources to pay for the biggest single draw on the treasury, which was, ironically, the garrisons stationed around the provinces. In recent years individual authors have started to challenge the nature of this economic model, with some arguing that there were progressive characteristics of the Roman economy that also need to be understood. We know that monetisation existed in Rome and the provinces, and that coinage underpinned the Roman economy. In the areas beyond the provinces, however, there remain questions about how we should interpret the distribution and patterning of coin loss. Does this reflect engagement, at least in part, with a monetary economy, or as a ‘commodity’ of the Roman state, in that coins circulated (along with other commodities) as a means by which people exchanged goods and services?129 This might be true for coins of intrinsically higher value, such as those of gold or silver, but it does not explain the single coin losses of the later period that are mostly copper issues.130 In recent work 24

Mattingly has argued that there were different aspects to the economy, based in part on whether it is viewed as the imperial economy, driven by direct revenue sources from taxation and exploitation of land, people and resources mostly in the provinces.131 There is an important distinction in whether this is seen as the provincial economy, responding to taxation levied and opportunities for wealth creation within a free-market economy and some monetisation, or as the extraprovincial economy, which was empire-wide but also included those beyond the formal frontiers in both opportunity for state supply and gift exchange. By looking at possible differences in economic models, we can investigate whether different types of coin loss reflect different mechanisms of exchange and circumstances in Ireland. The types of coins from Ireland are considered in detail later in this chapter. We know that trade was formalised with those willing and able to supply produce and livestock from beyond the frontier; one good example of this is what has been interpreted from the site of Feddersen-Wierde in the modern Netherlands. Although there remain problems with the techniques used to excavate the site, there appears to be a direct correlation between the growth, expansion and changes to the living accommodation of its occupiers and the increasing number of stalls for their livestock, which has been interpreted as reflecting direct engagement and subsequent acquired wealth of those living at the site.132 There remains some disagreement about whether the western sea lanes around the coast of Ireland were open from the Roman period to Late Antiquity, with at least one author suggesting that these were all but closed to trade at this time.133 In County Cork alone there are multiple finds, along with the Roman imports from the impressive centre at Garranes, but there are also single finds of Roman material at places dotted along the western coastline— from fourth-century Roman coins found in the sandhills at Ballybunion, Co. Kerry, right around the entire littoral of the west of Ireland, with fibulae and one recently recognised third-century imported lamp from County Galway134 and a collection of early and later Roman material from Ballyness and Dunfanaghy in County Donegal.135 Trade is also suggested by the find of a greyware pot dredged off the Porcupine Bank (off County Sligo in the north-west). This little pot was classified as Romano-British and it bears a graffito of C PISCI I FAGI on its base, with a roughly depicted image of what was thought to be a bear. It appears that the depiction is actually an otter and that the inscription is likely to be a play on words for ‘fisheater’; more importantly, both the pot and the inscrip-

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 25

Romans and Roman material in Ireland: a wider social perspective

Fig. 2.8—An orthoimage of the promontory fort of Drumanagh at Loughshinny, Co. Dublin, from which an impressive array of both Roman and native Irish material has been recovered by metal-detectorists. (Aerial imagery © Ordnance Survey of Ireland. All rights reserved. Licence no. EN0059212.) tion are paralleled in Gaul, specifically in the area of Aquitaine.136 The coastal areas off the sea lanes along the north-western coast of counties Sligo and Donegal have produced evidence of Roman material; in a recent paper O’Brien drew attention to the sites around Ballyshannon Harbour at the estuary of the River Erne (which forms the border between Sligo/Leitrim and Donegal), and the find there of an

anthropoid sword, the blade of which was lost soon after discovery. The closest parallels for this remarkable object are with similar finds from Gaul; they are of La Tène III (Class G, dating from 150 BC–AD 50). Several similar examples have been found in Britain and these, too, may have been imported.137 One of the most important sites in Ireland with significant Roman material is the Drumanagh 25

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 26

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland promontory in north County Dublin, mentioned earlier (Fig. 2.8). Although the site has been recognised as exceptional for many years, little has been known about the extent of the Roman material discovered on the fort until now. This is, in part, due to the fact that the material from Drumanagh was illegally detected over many years, and significant objects were removed from a sale in 1995 at Sotheby’s by the NMI. The material has subsequently been the subject of legal proceedings over many years and as a consequence has been viewed by only a few archaeologists, although it was reviewed and classified by a Roman historian and Roman archaeologist in the 1990s on behalf of the landowners.With the permission of the Keeper of Irish Antiquities, who is presently compiling a catalogue of all the finds for publication, and the permission of the O’Callaghan family, who are the landowners of the site, a portion of the collection of Roman and Irish finds from Drumanagh was viewed by members of the LIARI team in June 2012. The collection appears to comprise a wide range of objects, including personal items such as fingerrings, dolphin fibulae, trumpet fibulae and several umbonate enamelled plate brooches. These are all datable to the later first or early second century AD. There are several whole and unfinished Raftery type D and E decorated horse-bits and Y-shaped pendants, several bronze cinerary vessels and a wide range of metalwork, including mounts and rings that may have been parts of sword mounts or scabbard fitments. Many of the pieces are suggestive of vessels, including a pair of very elaborate handles (which must have belonged to a large vessel); there are also around 40 whole and partial copper, bronze and brass ingots, all of which are suggestive of manufacturing on the site.There is a piece of tile or brick that appears to be of Roman type but may be later.There are approximately sixteen coins, the most easily recognisable of which are dupondii, that appear to start at the time of Emperor Titus (AD 79–81) (or his father Vespasian,AD 69–79), with several that date from the reign of Emperor Trajan (AD 98–117) and his successor Hadrian (AD 117–38). We were not in a position to analyse the coins more closely and the denominations of some remain uncertain (either asses or sestertii); as the legends of several of the coins are no longer discernible, they may date from different periods. All of the coins are bronze issues, however, and one is clipped neatly in half; this may provide evidence of the recycling of coinage on the site.138 Notable among the finds at Drumanagh are those that offer close parallels to the material found on the nearby island of Lambay (discussed in detail in Chapter 4), and this association suggests that there was 26

a link between these communities in the first and second centuries AD. Given that among the Drumanagh finds are many of pre-Roman date, such as a possible Iron Age stater or coin, several bronze vessels that were used as cinerary urns, a British-type mirror and a further mirror handle (similar to one from Lambay), it is reasonable to suggest that all of these point to existing pre-Roman trading connections on the promontory. Despite the limited knowledge at the time of the extent of the finds from Drumanagh, interesting parallels were proposed by Cunliffe between it and the Iron Age port of trade at Hengistbury Head on the Dorset coast in Britain (Fig. 2.9). Considerable research has been published on the excavations at Hengistbury over many years, and it remains one of the most important late Iron Age sites in Britain, demonstrating the immense quantity of trade between Armorica (Brittany) in Gaul in the first century BC and the communities known collectively as the Durotriges who lived on the south-east coast.139 Morphologically similar to Drumanagh, the promontory fort at Hengistbury has a double vallum on the landward side and forms part of Christchurch Harbour, where it is surrounded by sea on three sides. Hengistbury appears to have reached its greatest volume of trade with Gaul—and, indeed, Italy and the Mediterranean—during the first century BC. The high numbers of Dressel type 1A amphorae of this period, compared to finds of later types of amphorae from the site, suggest that its prominence declined in the post-Claudian period, when the focus of trade shifted to the south-east of Britain, especially the Thames areas of the Trinovantes and Catuvellauni and the focus of Roman administration through the port at Londinium (London) and the provincial capital at Camulodunum (Colchester). At Hengistbury, Cunliffe found that processing of iron, copper, bronze, gold and galena, along with cupellation (the removal of silver from the lead that was probably derived from the Mendips), was supported by evidence of the production of copper, bronze and brass ingots. The extent of the metalworking and craftworking taking place at Hengistbury is important, as it offers a clear parallel with Drumanagh, albeit in the latter case with the focus on the later first and second centuries AD. This is discussed further in Chapter 8. Many other, smaller British port sites may have formed part of a network of trade with Ireland in the pre-Roman and Roman period in Britain, but many of these are likely to have been succeeded, and in some cases obscured, by the later Roman military activity at the sites. One such site is that of Abonae,

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 27

Romans and Roman material in Ireland: a wider social perspective

Fig. 2.9—Aerial view of the promontory fort of Hengistbury Head on the Dorset coast.The site offers clear parallels with Drumanagh, given the evidence for craftworking alongside a role as a principal distributional centre (© Mark Holloway, Bournemouth Parks). modern Sea Mills, on the Avon River in Bristol, where an early pre-Roman Iron Age trading centre appears to have been appropriated in the northward push of Julius Frontinus, and it developed into a thriving Roman port by the end of the second century AD.140 Little material that is ostensibly ‘military’ in character has been found at the houses and gardens that now overlie the port and town, but two finds in the 1930s of brick stamps of the Legio II Augusta appear to confirm that this was, at least for a short time, a military-run operation.141 Like so many other examples of military operations around the southwest, it appears to have been quickly handed over to civilian contractors, and thereby developed into the Hadrianic period.142 Suggestions for links between areas in Somerset and Ireland recur in archaeological papers, but there were many small Roman ports dotted along the littoral of south-western Roman Britain facing Ireland, and along the coast of Wales up to north-west Britain.143 At sites like Crandon Bridge in Somerset, the above-mentioned Abonae, Aberffraw on Anglesey in Wales and Meols on the Wirral in northwest England, these ports would have hosted any number of trading craft plying the Irish Sea.144 Separating out those that were under civilian rather

than military operation is difficult because their strategic positioning and access was useful to both. This latter point reminds us of the earlier discussion on the many examples of how such benign commercial arrangements could often alter greatly. In many instances, we know that the cost of an agreement for a client relationship and the avoidance of full-scale military attack was accepting the non-negotiable Roman terms for tributes and hostages.145 The Romano-British material from the islands along the coast of County Dublin suggests that this area was a focus of trade from the beginning of the late Iron Age through to Late Antiquity.146 There is both early and later Roman material on Dalkey Island and Lambay, finds of fourth-century Roman coins on Ireland’s Eye and a small (possibly Roman-type) lamp from the foreshore at Skerries. Along with the important finds from Drumanagh promontory are the many finds from the wider Dublin area, including Howth Head,147 and it is not unreasonable to suggest that other sites may yet be identified in this region (see Chapter 7 for further discussion). The tides that govern these islands today would have determined the seasonality of commercial trade into Ireland in prehistory and early historic times. The nature of the weath27

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 28

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland er experienced firsthand on Lambay in the summer of 2012 was remarkable for the speed with which it changed from almost Mediterranean blue calm to grey-green ferocity, with rolling sea mists that engulfed the island in a matter of minutes. These vagaries would have affected access through the short sea crossing to the mainland. Our fieldwork on the mainland and on the island of Lambay is presented in detail later; central to this was a consideration of the role that this area played in relation to the distribution of material further inland at sites of political and religious importance. The material from Lambay that was found in association with burials remains the exception in Ireland, but there were issues that needed to be investigated surrounding the past interpretation of both the individuals who were buried on Lambay and the contexts of the finds, and these are discussed in detail in Chapter 4.148 Many of the richly furnished burials found beyond the Roman frontiers have been interpreted as those of individuals of high status who had encountered or engaged in some way with the Roman administration, as the placement of weapons and militaria in burial contexts was not a Roman practice.149 The Roman burials from Bray (discussed in detail later and in Chapter 6) were likely to have been of people who had been living within the Roman world, as they were accorded correct Roman burial rites, with second-century AD coins found in the chest area being suggestive of placement in the mouth at the time of burial. If the islands off the coast of Dublin were indeed used as stop-off points before the development of Drumanagh as an agreed port of trade, then safe harbourage and some settlement—albeit temporary— would have been needed.150 Although the overall quantity of Roman-type material found in Ireland is relatively small, it is the types of material that have been found that are enlightening. Finds of Romano-British coarsewares are being increasingly recognised at sites, and although there are relatively few sites with fine ware and Samian, we know that alternative forms of vessels (in wood and bronze, for example) were being used in Ireland at this time.151 Two of these are interesting wooden lathe-turned vessels from Lagore Crannog that were found close to where a sword of possible Illerup type was uncovered (Figs 2.10 and 2.11).152 These have bronze banding and lids, and their closest parallels are among vessels of similar manufacture that were found in bog deposits at Hjortspring in Denmark,153 although there they were dated by associated coins to the second century AD. Parts of a wooden drinking vessel (or tankard) were 28

among the material recovered from Drumanagh and an analysis of this was completed by Ingelise Stuijts of the Discovery Programme under licence from the NMI for the LIARI Project team. There is now a wide body of scholarship relating to the movement of Samian ware within and beyond the Roman provinces, as well as to the social role that it would have played in these areas.154 Among the Roman material from the Rath of the Synods is evidence of much Samian and (as mentioned) Severn Valley ware, which has also been found at Drogheda, Co. Louth, Randalstown, Co. Meath, and from a ploughed field just west of the ramparts at Drumanagh.155 Severn Valley ware is a distinctive orange coarseware which has a range of types suitable for domestic use, and it is one of the more common forms of Romano-British pottery found at excavations in the south-west of Britain (along with blackburnished wares, local greywares and pottery from the New Forest kilns). The reclassification of some of the Romano-British brooch types found in Ireland (Chapter 4), along with the evidence of Severn Valley ware, suggested that we needed to look again at links between Ireland and the south-west of Roman Britain; this work is currently in progress.156 Along with ceramics, Roman-type glass in the form of goblets or drinking vessels and possible window glass has been found at Knowth and the Rath of the Synods.157 A piece of what is believed to be Roman-type glass has also been found at Claristown, Co. Meath, and although a possible early form of etched glass was found with other material on Dalkey Island (including a sherd of Samian ware), there was a clear disagreement between the principal author and the specialist who identified it as such.158 A recent coin find of a nummus of Magnentius (AD 350–3) on an entirely different part of the island from where the other material was excavated suggests that there is a longer sequence of activity on Dalkey than had been previously known,159 and this is in keeping with what we now know of activity on the island of Lambay, further north in Dublin Bay. All of the pottery finds, including the different types of Samian ware found in Ireland, are currently under review so that we can tighten the dating sequences from existing typologies. Earlier research also highlighted a possible difference in the types of material found in the northern counties from that in the eastern and south-eastern counties of Ireland.160 There are a number of larger sherds of Samian ware and more decorated forms of Samian ware, two second-century AD silver coin hoards and a later mixed hoard (whereas no coins were found in the silver hoard at Balline), and several single

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 29

Romans and Roman material in Ireland: a wider social perspective finds of gold and silver coins at prehistoric sites. With the exception of the finds from Donegal, there are fewer toilet implements and other personal items, such as rings and brooches, from the north-eastern counties. Our research focused on whether this might be explained by different contact points in Roman Britain and southern Scotland, or different social structures reflected in the types of material in both the northern and southern counties. Central to this was a consideration of the role of traders (as discussed), but we also needed to look more closely at likely points of contact in Roman Britain to see whether the difference might be explained by the nature of the relations with the more militarised areas in the north of Britain. Given the short sea crossing between the northern Irish counties and northern Britain, the most likely source of this material would be either from these areas or through secondary contacts beyond the frontier in Scotland. This latter point is important, given the earlier discussion of the well-evidenced links between much of the material in Ireland and the communities of the preRoman Iron Age and the early medieval Irish settlements in Scotland.

Frontier zones, frontier communities and social change In the opening passage to After Rome, c. 400 to 800 AD, Thomas Charles-Edwards states that by the fifth century AD ‘it became easier for elements of late Roman civilization to be adopted by the barbarians themselves’.161 This sweeping narrative belies a much more complex and diverse archaeology in areas that we might consider as frontiers or borderland communities, in both the ostensibly military and civilian settlements.162 To a great extent, past scholarship has been coloured by this concept of the formidable permanent structures and demarcated lines designed to separate those within the territorium of Rome from the uncivilised and war-hungry barbarians that remained beyond its control.163 There is little doubt that the frontiers of Rome were formidable ideological statements of power and control, and in places these became permanent features in the landscape, but they were never intended to restrict completely the movement of people or their goods. Rather, they are best viewed as fluid and permeable, and the push–pull of regular interaction and the movement of people and goods ensured a hefty tax revenue for the local administrators and the Roman treasury.164 On the northern frontier in Britain, and beyond the Rhenish limes in Europe, the

archaeology is consistently demonstrating the similarity of the material culture of communities on both sides of the frontier; the reality of the archaeology has challenged the past characterisation of what it was to be ‘Roman’ for the greater populace.165 Recent archaeological research has demonstrated that the line of Flavian forts and fortlets known as the Gask Ridge Frontier, thought to date from the campaigns of Agricola (governor AD 78–85),166 are much earlier and should be credited to one of the preceding governors, Quintus Petillius Cerialis (governor AD 71–4) or Sextus Julius Frontinus (governor AD 75–8). The research project led by Woolliscroft was conducted over ten years and combined fieldwork and extensive survey, aerial reconnaissance and importantly) (most absolute dating rather than reliance on relative dating through morphological parallels.167 This is important, because central to the research findings was the immense Fig. 2.10—The Iron Age sword from Lagore Crannog (L. 57cm) (NMI Reg. 0002:Wk002) (© National Museum of Ireland). Fig. 2.11—An example of the suggested Roman-type parallel (L. 78.4cm) for the sword from Lagore (Fig. 2.10) from the vast bog deposits of Illerup Ådal (courtesy of the Moesgaard Museum, Denmark). 29

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 30

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland

´

Fig. 2.12—Map of sites beyond the limes frontier in Germany and Denmark that offer evidence of the reach of Roman influences on local societies (shaded relief model base © ESRI, GTOPO30).

e Å Illerup Ådal

Valloby V Varpelev

Funen Gudme

Himlingøje m mlingøje

Lundeborg Lund und deborg d

Hjortspring H Hj jjortspring t pri g

Hoby

Feddersen d n Wierd d Wierde

el Flögeln

100km

variability recorded from fort to fortlet, watch-tower and signal stations. These early forts were of different shapes, sizes and internal layout, with none that conformed to the standard ‘playing-card-shape’ legionary fortress of the second century AD.168 Many had only a single gateway, many more only a single ditch and bank, and it is likely that what we are seeing is the archaeological evidence of what the campaign forts looked like before decisions were made to garrison whole legions in permanent fortresses that were built 30

first in timber and then in stone.169 Similarly, the Roman military emplacements in Europe, generally regarded as the first Roman frontier on the German limes, when dated by Körtüm were revealed as unlikely to have been built before the time of Trajan (AD 98–117). This research on both of the frontiers has altered our views and our reliance on past assumptions about relative dating of the military sites, and has once again challenged the basis on which many of these were dated in the past.170

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 31

Romans and Roman material in Ireland: a wider social perspective Eggers’s monumental 1951 catalogue, Der römische Import im freien germanien, remains the most widely cited and principal classificatory work on the material that passed beyond the frontier into the barbaricum. Contemporary approaches continue to demonstrate the multiple ways in which people engaged with the material and also with the communities within the administered provinces. Hedeager, in her work over many years, has shown that the Roman material both within and beyond the Rhine frontier, and up to a distance of over 200km, is virtually indistinguishable.171 It is only beyond the area she termed a buffer zone that a difference was discernible in the quality, types and forms of material, passing into the farther barbaricum. She linked this difference to the use and function of high-status and luxury items, and she argued convincingly that these were fundamental to the legitimisation of the authority of local rulers. Her subsequent publications have further supported these initial impressions. More recently, the work of Peter Wells has inspired a new generation of scholarship that seeks to understand the influences and networks of engagement within and between local people and those living within the administered territories.172 As in Roman Britain, there were many varieties of local engagement in Roman Europe but most especially in these frontier zones of interaction, wherein a constant interplay took place between soldiers and local people, traders and craftspeople, farmers and tax-collectors. These engagements were not all easy or benign, however, and it is important to remember that the troops and their forts had essentially forcibly divided existing communities into those now within their territory and those who remained outside (Fig. 2.12). The difficulty in separating all that is Roman from all that might be local Iron Age in date is made more complicated by the movement of material with the soldiers and merchants across the provinces and the continuation of much local material well into the Roman period even within the Roman provinces.173 Alongside this is what has been interpreted as a reinvigoration and resurgence in late La Tène decorative art and styles in the later second and third centuries AD, and it is only in recent years that the archaeology at sites and settlements such as Rijswiijk in the Netherlands and Flögeln in northern Germany have been recognised as belonging to the Roman period.174 Previously, the Iron Age vernacular buildings and seemingly late La Tène pottery had been interpreted as pre-dating Roman period occupation; in fact, these settlements were occupied throughout the Roman period, with little change in local traditions from the first to the third century AD. The preference

given to the Roman material appears to have obscured the fact that both local and Roman-type finds ran in tandem at these sites.175 The increasing number of such sites, and the challenges and new questions raised as a consequence of these findings, has led to a reconsideration of past treatment of social changes in the Roman period in the barbaricum. Archaeologists working on sites in Europe have now critically assessed many of the previous assumptions about even the static nature of the limes and limesvorsland.176 This new dialogue addresses—as in the new approaches to Roman studies in Britain—the archaeology of ordinary people and the local cultural practices of people who appear to have had a direct influence on the emerging character of those living within provincial Roman societies.177 In the areas beyond the frontier zone in what was known as Germania Magna (modern-day Denmark and southern Scandinavia), recent research has focused on understanding two key aspects of the archaeological record: interpreting the immense deposits of Roman militaria in wetlands and the development of ‘central’ places in the Roman Iron Age.The deposition of Roman military equipment at sites such as Illerup Ådal and Vimose has been interpreted in different ways,178 but the general theme of past interpretation was that these should be seen as representative of sacrifices made by local people following success in battle against the Roman military.179 In recent years, however, new interpretations have been offered that suggest a link between the social, political and religious significance of these deposits and a likely engagement with direct contact or probably service among the Roman military on their borders.180 More importantly, it has been convincingly argued that service in and/or firsthand experience of the Roman military led to the development of large armies beyond the imperial frontiers and formed the basis of emerging new power relations and powerful individuals within these communities.181 The second aspect of these studies relates to the emergence and development of ‘central’ places of importance within the landscapes of the period.182 These were not just places of an élite political power; studies of the interrelated landscape settings have led to a greater understanding that these had a religious role, with many toponymical associations revealed for important centres such as Gudme on Funen and Uppåkra in south-west Scania.183 This interesting aspect of developing interpretation in southern Scandinavia on social and behavioural influences has been reflected in recent scholarship on sacral kingship at Tara, linked to the evidence of the Roman materi31

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 32

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland al dating from the second to fourth centuries AD, the likely Roman-type cult practices on the Rath of the Synods and its development, and the likely relationship between Tara and sites such as Drumanagh, which perhaps played a similar role to Lundeborg in terms of a port of trade and as a centre for manufacturing and craftworking.184 One of the central questions in the LIARI research is whether this recent observation on the development of centralised power relations in other areas outside the frontier could be read more widely in the archaeology of late Iron Age Ireland.185 Research and discussions on likely social structures for the late Iron Age acknowledge that this period marks the end of the creation of large monumental ceremonial centres and linear monuments within the landscape. The changes in the landscapes, along with the material evidence and new dates, are discussed in detail in Chapter 7. As mentioned earlier in the discussion, Roman pragmatism was often shown through strategic decisions not to annex territories but to place them instead under the control of friendly kings and local rulers, and good parallels for such practices are found during the entire period.186 Subsidies and valuable gifts moved through the complex web of politics, negotiation and diplomacy between those in power on each side of the frontiers, and some of the material in Ireland may have found its way here through such exchange. In Germania Magna, the archaeological evidence demonstrates quite clearly the high quality of the Roman material moving into those communities in the farther barbaricum, and the status that was imparted to the recipient as a consequence was most likely a deliberate and orchestrated move on the part of the Roman administration to ensure that the position and authority remained with friendly client kings—a straightforward case of ‘better the devil you know . . . ’. In keeping with the more recent approaches in Europe, it is clear that closer to home the impact on social structures varied across those within and beyond the frontier zone in Roman Britain. A comprehensive analysis was conducted on Roman material finds from beyond the frontier in northern Britain and it has been convincingly argued that, in those areas of Scotland that were occupied, albeit temporarily, the social structure and political authority was altered as a consequence of contact and influences. At key sites such as Eildon Hill near Melrose,187 Edinburgh188 and Traprain Law in East Lothian (Fig. 2.13)189 the archaeology suggests a move towards the centralisation of local authority and the restriction and control of access to Roman material; this is very much in keep32

ing with the development of key centres of importance in Ireland at this time. It is at these centres of local or regional power that the greatest assemblages of Roman material have been found in Scotland. In the south-west, however, beyond the limits of the Roman campaigns, the patterning in the distribution is quite different, with fewer finds, but often of higher quality, spread over many more sites. In the southwest of Scotland the impact of contact led to the development of a flatter social structure, with many local petty kings or powerful individuals who each had access to Roman material. This variation in social structure in Scotland is essential to our considerations of likely Roman influences in Ireland (as mentioned in the earlier discussion), as it demonstrates that different types of contact, set within a variety of circumstances, may have had greater or lesser impact on those rising to power in Ireland over the five centuries of the LIARI research period. It was not just in Scotland that responses to Roman influences differed greatly; this also occurred in many respects in Wales and Cornwall.190 Although situated within the province of Britannia, Cornwall offers a close parallel to Ireland, both in the manner in which it has been studied and in the nature of the developing social changes and its material record.191 Until recently, Roman Cornwall was characterised by the lack of any serious academic research on the Roman period and was treated as almost beyond the reach of Roman administration. This approach is, in part, due to the type of archaeological evidence in Cornwall, with seemingly little in terms of upstanding remains and the continued use of material that was regarded as Iron Age rather than Roman. The lack of predictably Romano-British material and sites is highlighted very well in the description offered by Hencken in 1932, as although ‘officially annexed to the Roman Empire, [Cornwall] possessed neither towns nor extensive fortifications’.192 Recent work on the archaeology of Roman Cornwall has highlighted the importance of looking beyond the traditional interpretation in order to gain an understanding of localised responses. The settlement type for the vast majority of people continued in the vernacular roundhouse tradition, known as Cornish rounds; as elsewhere, however, it has been convincingly argued that, soon after the Roman conquest, new social structures began to emerge alongside this continuation of local Iron Age traditions. Of the many of these rounds that have been identified, the most important mixtures of Roman and local assemblages come from the complete excavations at Trethurgy and the extraordinary settlement site at Chysauster village.193 What is clear is that although

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 33

Romans and Roman material in Ireland: a wider social perspective

Fig. 2.13—The extraordinary site of Traprain Law, East Lothian, Scotland, the subject of major excavations in the twentieth century by Curle, who recovered the largest assemblage of late Roman ‘hacksilber’ ever found from a site in Roman Britain (©Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland). these communities had access to Roman material they also chose to create their own similar styles in a local gabbroic pottery. Perhaps the complex nature of the Roman evidence in Cornwall is exemplified by the site of Magor Villa, a small winged-corridor villa, entirely in keeping with Roman-style villas elsewhere; in this instance it was built within an existing Iron Age earthen bank and ditch enclosure.194 Despite its past characterisation, there are now three recognised Roman forts in Cornwall, at Nanstallon, Calstock and Restormel, another likely fort at Carvossa and a recently proposed Roman fort

under modern-day Launceston.195 Nanstallon was excavated between 1965 and 1969 and is one of only a few Roman forts in Britain to have a double portal gate. It was occupied for only about five years.196 Although Restormel has not been excavated, detailed geophysical surveys have revealed the extent of the fort and its surroundings. Calstock was only recently identified through geophysical survey and was excavated shortly after in 2008.197 What is interesting is that although Calstock is larger than any of the other forts known in Cornwall, it is still relatively small compared to other fort sites in Roman Britain, and 33

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 34

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland the evidence suggests that metal extraction and metalworking were taking place on the site. Based on the geophysical survey, Restormel appears to have had two irregular-shaped annexes added to the fort and there is no evidence of an extramural settlement. All of the known or possible fort sites in Cornwall appear to be sited beside or close to rivers with access to the coast, but importantly also close to natural lode-bearing mineral resources—silver at Restormel and Calstock, and tin at Nanstallon.

´

s d sand

e halite

go g old d gold

g go od gold e d lead silver

pperr copper zinc na galena

Exploiting natural resources The exploitation of natural resources in the Roman provinces was unquestionably one of the greatest sources of revenue for the imperial state treasury and it is clear that it was often a primary motivator for expansion under successive emperors after the principate of Augustus. The classical sources make reference to those who were regarded as the most successful as good emperors and lament the profligate expenditure and lifestyles of those such as Emperor Nero.198 Roman mining operations that we know of from Egypt, Dacia, Hispania and Roman Britain are remarkable not just for the extent of extraction but also for the engineering and technology used to extract even relatively small amounts of precious metals.199 In Roman Britain alone, the workings at sites such as Pumsaint-Dolaucothi in Wales for extracting gold from the crushed quartz seams involved the construction and engineering of massive hammerstones, and stone water conduits and aqueducts that ran over seven miles or more up the Cothi Valley; they also included reservoir holding tanks from which the waters could be released for the sluicing of the crushed quartz.200 Although the second century AD was a time of relative peace in Roman Britain, there appear to have been skirmishes along the northern frontiers and major wars were fought under all of the emperors in other parts of the empire. Notably, the aggressive military expansion conducted under Emperor Trajan, who brought wars in AD 101–2 and AD 105–6 to the former client king Decabalus II of Dacia, led to the annexing of this former kingdom and its immense natural resources of gold and copper. These wars were immortalised in the extraordinary column of victory which stands overlooking Trajan’s marketplace and his forum in Rome today.201 There appears to be an interesting correlation between the distribution of Roman finds in Ireland and the availability of natural mineral resources (shown 34

silver copper

copper

100km

Fig. 2.14—Map showing distribution of Roman finds from Ireland and correlation of distribution of natural mineral resources (shaded relief model base © ESRI, GTOPO30).

in Fig. 2.14). Our investigations into sources and extraction of copper in Ireland was prompted by earlier research on a whole copper plano-convex ingot (known as a bun ingot) that was found in the 1950s at Damastown, Co. Dublin, and purchased by the NMI.202 A further example of this type of copper ingot was found in the twentieth century in Kilmoylan, close to where the Bunmahon River enters the sea beside the large promontory fort of Dunabrattin, Co. Waterford. This area is known as the ‘copper coast’ owing to the abundance of natural resources in the underlying geological formations, which has been the focus of much research for early periods of mining in this region.203 The unusual name of the promontory fort, which translates as ‘the fort of the Britons’,204 and its morphological similarity to the fort at Drumanagh require further detailed investigations to establish whether this site had a function as an entrepôt similar to that at Drumanagh. As at Kilmoylan, there are natural deposits of copper beside Drumanagh promontory fort and it is entirely possible that this was the source

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 35

Romans and Roman material in Ireland: a wider social perspective of the copper ingots found on the fort itself. Over 40 whole or partial ingots of copper, brass and bronze are in the collection of material from Drumanagh in the NMI, and at least one is stamped ‘I X VI’. The significant number of these, among a collection of partially finished D- and E-type horse-bits, Y-shaped pendants and brooches, as well as a likely lead mould for a trumpet-type Roman fibula, suggests that extensive manufacturing and craftworking took place on the site. The geophysical surveys undertaken in December 2012 and January 2013 both on the fort itself and in its wider environs identified a range of subsurface archaeological features that are presented in Chapter 3. Only excavation will determine absolute datable sequences and possible Roman activity at the site.

Irish participation in the Roman military Recent scholarship has generated interest once more in the likely participation of Irish men in the Roman army.205 The make-up of the late Roman military was very different to the earlier structure, with the main difference coming as a consequence of changes made under Emperor Constantine (AD 306–37), who broke with the existing legionary structure and introduced the limitanei—permanently stationed on the frontier defences—and the mobile field unit, the comitatenses, that could be deployed wherever they were needed most. There were a further two groups of military conscripts, however: the foederati and the laeti. The foederati were conscript units drawn from across the wider barbaricum and, by a mutual agreement of subsidy from Rome (initially annonae206 and later cash payment), they gave their support in fighting to defend its borderlands. The laeti were migrant groups who were allowed to settle in Roman territory on the condition that they provided conscripts for the military.207 These military units played a major role in the later empire, but their loyalty to the Roman administration did not always last long: many of the foederati are better known to us from their later actions that helped to speed the demise of Roman administration in the western Empire, among them the Franks, the Alemanni and the Huns.208 A reference in the fourthcentury writings of Ammianus Marcellinus mentions the conscription of a ‘British’ tribe, the Attacotti, sometime after the barbarian conspiracy of AD 367 (discussed in detail later).209 The Attacotti are also known from the Notitia Dignitatum (Fig. 2.15),210 a record of military emplacements and military units compiled sometime in the late fourth or early fifth century AD, and in this they are listed as active units

stationed in Italy, Gaul and Illyricum in the Balkans.211 In an influential paper based on a detailed study of these references, along with the corpus of medieval sources for both Ireland and Wales, Rance suggested that the name Attacotti was a Latinised term for the Irish aitheach thuatha, a landless, tributary or subjugated grouping known from the Irish text Tairired na nDésse (‘the wanderings or expulsion of the Déisi’).212 There are major problems with such an attribution, however, and Charles-Edwards argues that it is much more likely that, along with names given to other confederations in the later Roman sources such as the Picts or the Scotti, the Attacotti (or Atacotti) more likely refers to one of perhaps two or more confederations of Irish tribes, led by those he describes as ‘the Leinstermen’.213 Although debate will continue into the actual origin of these people, it is clear that their role in the fourth-century AD crisis was important in changing relations with late Roman Britain. In recently published research on the origin of the Irish ‘military-style’ silver hand-pins, Gavin has demonstrated that these ‘Irish’ pins were actually of late Roman design and probable manufacture, raising the question of who might have commissioned and lost them in Ireland. A further recently published review of three gold uniface pendants from Newgrange (that date from the reign of Constantine and his son Constantine II), plus a further gold pendant that lacks a clear context but is recorded as having been found in Ireland, has offered yet more evidence of a likely link between payment for services of Irish men in Roman military service.214 The variation in weight between these gold pendants and the contemporary standard gold coin, the solidus, along with the fact that they are pierced, suggests that these pendants were designed to be worn. They are also the product of official mints, probably Trier, and Bland has suggested that, given that all of the known official uniface pendants have come from areas outside the formal territories, these were most likely to have been official donatives or payments to the laeti settled in Roman territory, some of whom in the Newgrange case appear to have journeyed home to Ireland.215 A further line of investigation should be mentioned here, and this is our research into horse-bits, horse harnesses and horse equipment from sites in Denmark and northern Germany that have revealed parallels for Irish Y-shaped pendants, most notably among the Germanic-type U-shaped horse harnesses from Vimose on Funen that date from the Roman Iron Age.216 Following discussions of our preliminary findings at our conference in 2012, we were made aware of research being undertaken at Queen’s 35

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 36

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland

Fig. 2.15—Insignia of the Comes Litoris Saxonici per Britanniam from the Notitia Dignitatum, MS Canon. Misc. 378, fol. 153v (Bodleian Libraries, University of Oxford). 36

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 37

Romans and Roman material in Ireland: a wider social perspective

Fig. 2.16—Detail of ornate terminal of the Attymon horse-bit; three-link Irish type in bronze, Raftery type E, found in County Galway and on display at the NMI (© National Museum of Ireland).

5cm

University, Belfast, by Rena Maguire, who has sought her own parallels for Y-shaped pendants and, perhaps more importantly, has now offered an explanation of their function as psalions or bosals.217 The importance of Maguire’s findings is apparent when we consider that Irish type D and E horse-bits and highly decorated Y-shaped pendants are regarded as quintessentially Irish objects;218 some unfinished pieces of these were found on Drumanagh, suggesting that they may have been manufactured there.219 Furthermore, a recently published paper on the horse remains found around Newgrange, in the area in front of the passage tomb where much of the Roman material and the pendants just discussed were located, has offered another interesting new line of investigation. The horse remains from Newgrange have now been dated (OxA-19887: 40 cal. BC–cal. AD 121; OxA-19886: cal. AD 67–220) and this places them firmly within the time-frame of the earliest deposition of Roman material. Perhaps more importantly for our consideration, the published work included an analysis of the extreme bit wear evident on one of the horse’s teeth.220 The Irish-type snaffle-bit is kinder on the horse’s tongue and teeth and was designed for a rider to use with even pressure from both hands holding the reins,221 and there is no evidence on any of the known Irish-type snaffle-bits of damage or marks that might have been caused by the horse’s teeth.222 The bit wear on one of the horse’s teeth from Newgrange, however, is consistent with the damage caused by being pulled up hard and sharply on the reins, creating pressure and stress damage, and resulting in considerable pain for the horse. This type of wear is consistent either with extremely uneven pressure from the reins being held in one hand while using a snaffle-bit and possibly a psalion for control, or with the use of a different, harsher bit, such as the con-

temporary curb-bit used on Roman cavalry horses. Bendrey draws a parallel with the report completed on the horse remains during the excavation of Ráith na Ríg on Tara, where wear patterns on the P2 molar were also recorded by McCormick in his assessment.223 It is perhaps also worth noting that among the finds from Newgrange was a Raftery type D/E horse-bit and that Raftery identified an Irish-type horse-bit in a museum collection in Transylvania (which would have been within the Roman province of Dacia). He suggested that its occurrence might best be explained by the presence of someone who had commissioned a copy of an Irish type that he had seen elsewhere.224 It is equally likely that this was commissioned by an individual who was entirely familiar with Irish-type horse-bits or who may have originated in Ireland. Interestingly, there is an unusual Pannoniantype fibula recorded as having been found in County Galway and it is also perhaps notable that, apart from the better-known distribution of these Irish-type horse-bits and Y-pendants, some of the more elaborate examples come from a localised distribution around Somerset and Attymon, both in County Galway (Fig. 2.16). Further research will now be undertaken using scientific analysis comparable to that used on human teeth for the horses from Newgrange, the details of which are presented in Chapter 6.

Identities and materialities The social implications of the types of finds from Ireland are of great interest, given that many of them are smaller personal items such as toilet implements (both decorated and undecorated types), brooches and jewellery. These little objects are important in terms of 37

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 38

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland

2cm

Fig. 2.17—A fourth-century bronze balustrade bifurcate toilet implement (or nail-cleaner) from Clogher hillfort, Co. Tyrone (© National Museums Northern Ireland. Collection Ulster Museum). how we understand changing identities in the period and the importance of both personal appearance in dress (and, as previously mentioned, the likely status acquired by its use) and the grooming or styling of the body. Toilet implements are common finds in Roman Britain and their frequency often relegates them to catalogues within the small-finds sections of reports, but a recent catalogue and new typology allows us to track their development and changing styles over the entire period.225 Although they are small, the later types are often highly decorated and, though not designed to be worn on the body, diminutive sets were used on some contemporary and later chatelaine brooches.226 The range of toilet implements in Ireland covers simply decorated nail-cleaners (such as the examples from the Stoneyford, Co. Kilkenny, Roman cremation burial, and at least one from amongst the finds at Ballyness sand-hills, Co. Donegal)227 to elaborately ornamented cast tubular types, with examples from Carraig Aille, Co. Limerick, Dooey, Co. Donegal, Lagore Crannog, Co. Meath, and Freestone Hill, Co. Kilkenny,228 and comma-shaped toilet implements such as that found at Ballyness, often referred to as a toothpick; a fine example of these was found within the fourth-century AD Hoxne treasure hoard.229 The tubular types fit within Eckardt and Crummy’s ‘late Roman tubular nail-cleaners’ and they have a wide distribution, with examples from outside the frontier at Traprain Law in Scotland230 to the Romano-British temple site of Uley in Gloucestershire.231 Where datable, these come from fourth-century AD contexts. One of the few that has been found through excavation is the example from Clogher hillfort, Co. Tyrone (Fig. 2.17).232 This is a well-finished cast copper-alloy example of tubular type with baluster reel and mouldings on the shaft, and it flattens into a decorated bifid tip. It sits within Eckardt and Crummy’s group of ‘cast tubular nail-cleaners with mouldings on the upper shaft’ and good parallels include one from another Romano-British temple site at Lydney in 38

Gloucestershire and an example from Wanborough settlement site in Wiltshire (although this was unstratified); another similar nail-cleaner comes from a context at Shakenoak, Oxfordshire, that was dated to between the Flavian period and the mid-second century AD. 233 Other toilet implements as well as tweezers have been found at Strokestown, Co. Roscommon, Ballinderry, Co. Westmeath, and Lagore Crannog,234 and there is a cluster of toilet implements from around Dunfanaghy, Co. Donegal, that includes material from the early medieval site of Dooey.235 This type of earlier material is often published alongside later—and, indeed, much later—material, and the sites tend to be accorded an overall date relating to the period of most activity. One good example of this is shown in the publication of the material from Lough Gur/Carraig Aille, where several objects of probable late Roman date (such as the nail-cleaner mentioned earlier) and a stylus were found along with an interesting fourthcentury coin of Constantius II (AD 324–61).236 Of the approximately 30 fibulae recorded as found in Ireland, those from Dún Ailinne, Co. Kildare, Loughey, Co. Down,237 and two of the four (the Langton Down and rosette-type) from Lambay Island are early, dating from around the middle of the first century AD. The brooches from Lambay are discussed in detail in Chapter 4, but it is worth noting here that the rosette is a Continental type. Two of the dolphin fibulae are much larger (at over 9cm) than most brooches of this type from Roman Britain and these, too, may be of Continental type. The rest of the published brooches from Ireland are dolphin types, dating more broadly from the second century AD, with one unusual enamelled Polden Hill type from Cashel, Co. Tipperary.238 There is also a reference in Bateson’s catalogue to a crossbow brooch having being found in Ireland and this is presently under further investigation.239 As these are essentially a military type of brooch, they can be dated to the third or fourth cen-

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 39

Romans and Roman material in Ireland: a wider social perspective tury AD and they often have lightly inscribed graffiti along the bow.Virtually all of the brooches, apart from the Polden Hill type from Cashel, are from coastal sites, and there are two unprovenanced fibulae from County Cork that are said to have been found in the harbour area of Bantry.240 We can now add these to a growing number of finds from the Galway area, such as the unusual brooch of Panonnian type (also from the coast in Galway),241 along with a more recently recognised third-century AD Roman lamp from the reinvestigation of the impressive multivallate ringfort at Rathgurreen242 and, as previously mentioned, a local distribution for horse-bits and Y-pendants. Along with these are the brooches from Drumanagh that can be dated quite closely to the late first and early second centuries AD. As mentioned earlier, some of these are of dolphin type, others are of umbonate or lug-eared enamelled plate type, with at least two of the trumpet form (Figs 2.18 and 2.19). These latter brooches are interesting because of the identification of what may be an unusual lead mould from Drumanagh for this type of Roman fibula, especially given the rarity of such moulds in any media from Roman Britain;243 this adds a further dimension to the importance of craftworking at the site. In a recently published paper, Warner has linked the development and style of these trumpet brooches to the decorative motifs on the elongated side links of the Raftery type D/E horse-bits, which is interesting if both were being manufactured at Drumanagh.244 There are also finds of the early or initial-type penannular brooches, the origin for which is likely to have been in Roman Britain. Two of the most notable examples have come from Newgrange and Knowth, both sites with collections of Roman material.245 The proximity of these two passage tombs to each other is, however, marked by a clear difference in the types of Roman material found at them. The material from Knowth, including Samian ware sherds, Roman glass, a ligula (a cosmetic long-handled spoon) and stylus, is suggestive of domestic occupation rather than structured deposition.246 The collection from nearby Newgrange is of a completely different nature, with what appears to be the individual structured deposition of precious jewellery, rings, chains, necklaces, brooches and gold coins over the entire Roman period (the earliest coins are two bronzes and one denarius of Domitian (AD 81–96), the last a solidus of Arcadius (AD 383–408)).247 There is a further collection of whole or parts of early penannular brooches among the collection of second- to fourth-century AD Roman material from the Rath of the Synods, Tara,248 and the importance and significance of these two sites

are discussed in detail later. All of these sites have contemporary activity from the second to the fourth century AD. Roman fibulae varied greatly in size, and some are only a couple of centimetres in length; these are unlikely to have held anything other than the thinnest of fabrics, such as linen or silk. Others are far more robust in manufacture and the enlarged or often distended pin suggests that they held heavier or thicker cloth, such as wool, that altered the original profile of the brooch.249 It has been suggested that the larger pins held outer garments together while the finer brooches held undergarments.250 It is also interesting that while in Roman Britain early-type penannular brooches have been shown to be contemporary with fibula types, the existing typologies for Ireland classify those regarded as of Irish manufacture as later. There is, however, no reason to assume that one type postdates the other in terms of typologies in Ireland and, as ably demonstrated by Gavin in her latest work on the Irish silver dress-pins, it is equally likely that brooch types were similarly contemporary. Alongside the small items of jewellery from the sites just mentioned are other finds that are of Roman type, such as the many partial or whole glass bangles, some of which can be paralleled in the second century AD in northern Britain.251 Once we have located all of the known brooches in Ireland and conducted a visual inspection of all the personal objects and jewellery from this period, we will be better able to explore their significance further within the context of identities and materialities by correlating their occurrence in the archaeological record with the evidence for likely late Iron Age monuments and sites.

Coins and hoards As mentioned previously, there are some problems with the original Bateson catalogue of Roman coins from Ireland, not least because of the apparent inconsistency with which the author placed some material (but notably the lower denomination coins) within his ‘questionable’ or ‘rejected’ categories. The distributional focal points of those accepted and rejected by Bateson led us to look more closely at the types of issues that had been rejected and why. Bateson accepted all finds of aurei and the later solidi, and also denarii, and rejected most of the ‘stray’ finds from sites around Ireland. Notably, these were the lower denomination, and more common, copper issues from the fourth century AD. We need to be cautious in making any 39

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 40

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland

3cm

Fig. 2.18—A fine example from Worcestershire of the Roman ‘trumpet’ fibula of the later first to second century AD, similar to those found at Drumanagh (courtesy of the Portable Antiquities Scheme (WAW-33F344)).

2cm

Fig. 2.19—A ‘lug-eared’ or umbonate-type Roman plate brooch of the late first century or second century AD from Hampshire.These small brooches were enamelled and the finds from Drumanagh may offer evidence of early use of enamel from an Irish context (courtesy of the Portable Antiquities Scheme (HAMP-515B13)). 40

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 41

Romans and Roman material in Ireland: a wider social perspective assumptions about the coins from Ireland until a detailed analysis has been completed on them, as different coin issues and different denominations have been shown to have continued in circulation far longer than the record of the obverse legend alone might suggest. With that caveat in mind, past research based on detailed analysis of coin losses elsewhere has suggested that even single coin finds need to be considered as legitimate in terms of casual loss or, indeed, deliberate deposition.252 On present evidence, the pattern of loss, with a greater proportion of coins in Ireland belonging to the later centuries, appears to be in keeping with the loss rate in Roman Britain.253 Many of the finds are from sites that were already extant in the landscape and were clearly recognised and associated with rites and rituals, whether this be for ancestors, deities, kings or all of these. One important point that has been highlighted in recent discussions of coins of the entire period relates to the fact that coinage was not just an integral part of a monetised economy; from the earliest evidence of Iron Age coins in Britain, these provided the perfect medium for ensuring that political messages were disseminated widely, and they were also intrinsically valuable for their base metal.254 Of the c. 90 coin finds listed by Bateson where either single or multiple coins were found, he accepted only thirteen as genuine. When we look at the distribution of the coins (see Fig. 2.20), there is a cluster of later first- and early second-century AD coins in the greater Dublin area and a further cluster of fourth-century AD coins in the same region, suggestive of a longer pattern of exchange. This is supported by other finds of both early and later Roman material from the same geographical areas. The finds appear to reflect considerable activity and contacts in the Flavian to Hadrianic periods, and whether this was through control by local magnates or exploitation by Roman contractors is yet to be determined. There is, however, an interesting difference between the early coins from the greater Dublin region and a number of recent finds of later third-century coins from the south-eastern region; this may reflect a development of trade further south in the later period. Three coins of Emperor Galienus (AD 260–8) have been found separately in the south-east and, interestingly, at least two of these are finds from river banks (the River Slaney, Co. Wexford, and the River Nore, Co. Kilkenny), the latter not far from the area where the Stoneyford burial was found.255 This is suggestive of local trade moving up these navigable rivers. But there are also sites where multiple gold and silver coins have been found which appear to be structured depositions, such as single finds of gold coins from Ballintoy, Co. Antrim (solidus, fourth

´

100km

Coin Coins Coin hoard ard

Fig. 2.20—Graduated distribution map of single coins and coin hoards from Ireland (shaded relief model base © ESRI, GTOPO30).

century AD), the Giant’s Ring, Ballynahatty, Co. Down (solidus of Valentinian II, AD 375–92), and Templeogue, Co. Dublin (solidus of Valens, AD 364–78). There are also silver coins from Derrykeighan, Co. Antrim (denarius of Trajan, AD 97–117), Creggan, Co. Derry (denarius of Severus Alexander, AD 222–35), and Maghera, Co. Derry (listed as just a ‘silver coin’). The majority of the single coin finds that Bateson thought problematic are smaller denomination coins (see Fig. 2.20), but when the distribution of these is mapped against other coins, and other finds, it becomes apparent that they fit into what we now know to be a wider range of imported material. Sound arguments have been proposed for the political and diplomatic role of gold coins found in areas beyond the frontier,256 and it has been shown that silver coinage circulated for far longer (even centuries after it was struck); this is likely to relate to its intrinsic value.257 In his consideration of the movement and contemporaneity of bronze or brass coinage at sites in the early empire, however, Wigg-Wolf has demonstrated that these coins moved swiftly into the military zones and from there to civilian settlements, and that they can be used as indicators for dating 41

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 42

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland

10cm

Fig. 2.21—The Balline hoard, found in a bog in County Limerick in the twentieth century.The hoard consists of deliberately cut-up pieces of late Roman silver, cut to exact size and weight and known as ‘hacksilber’, along with silver ingots marked with officinae or makers’ stamps, which can be paralleled with others such as those from Richborough Roman fort (© National Museum of Ireland). sequences. This is important given the type of coins from Drumanagh, which are suggestive of late firstand second-century AD activity. Among the finds from Carraig Aille, Co. Limerick, mentioned earlier, was an unusual Roman coin to be found in an Irish context and this issue is known as a barbarous radiate.258 These were not forgeries in the strictest sense; rather the term ‘barbarous’ comes from the fact that they were struck (sometimes very poorly) in the provinces during the crisis of the fourth century AD to provide smaller denomination coinage at a time when the coinage reforms in Rome were greatly affecting the circulation of coins in local economies.259 Many of these are quite distinctive and can be identified and linked to key areas in Roman Britain. Further work 42

will establish where the Carraig Aille coin originated, but what we do know is that its date is broadly contemporary with the Roman nail-cleaner from the same site, mentioned earlier. One further coin on record that deserves closer attention is a ‘silver coin’ of Carausius said to have been found in County Kildare.260 Carausius was a Menapian by birth who commanded the Roman navy (the Classis Britannica) before usurping the imperial purple in AD 286 and setting himself up as emperor of Britain and Gaul.261 He later issued coinage with his portrait and that of Diocletian and his co-Augustus Maximian, and coins of Carausius are rare.262 Our research has emphasised the essential need to consider these not as ‘stray’ finds but as single finds that need to be investigated within a local context and considered

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 43

Romans and Roman material in Ireland: a wider social perspective alongside all of the archaeological evidence of landscape use, ritual practice and occupational activity. An initial assessment was completed in the preliminary research phase on the published records of hoards found in Ireland. Although four had been accepted by Bateson, two others were rejected immediately by him, and it is notable that the four accepted as authentic were silver hoards. The hoards from Flower Hill and Feigh Mountain are coin hoards of the second century AD and both were found in County Antrim. The hoard from Feigh Mountain consisted of c. 500 silver coins dating from the reign of Vespasian (AD 69–79) to that of Commodus (AD 176–92). The hoard from Flower Hill was found close to a standing stone and contained c. 300 coins. As noted by Bateson, little work appears to have been completed on establishing the range of coin dates; one, however, was attributed to Matidia, the niece of Emperor Trajan (AD 97–117). The Ballinrees hoard, now housed between the collections of the Ulster Museum and the British Museum, was found near the River Bann, Co. Derry, and consists of a mix of silver ingots, silver plate and over 1,700 coins dating from Constantine II (AD 337–40) to the period when the last coinage circulated fully in Roman Britain, around the time of the demise of the empire in the western provinces (i.e. the reign of Honorius, AD 395–423).263 The hoard from Balline, Co. Limerick (Fig. 2.21), is the only one of the four silver hoards to have been found in a southern region; it does not contain any coins but consists of silver ingots and carefully cut silver dishes of the very highest-quality Roman tableware, known as hacksilber.264 Both the Ballinrees and Balline hoards have double-axehead-type silver ingots that bear officinae, or stamped makers’ marks, and it is suggested that both are payments or donatives to troops for service in the Roman army. They can be paralleled with similar finds from Richborough in Kent and one from London.265 This latter point is important, given all the more recent evidence suggesting the movement of material into Ireland that may reflect items belonging to, or payment to, auxiliary troops or foederati.266

Rituals, ceremony and structured deposition One further aspect of the evidence from Roman material in Ireland that has been touched on already in the earlier discussions is the occurrence of Roman material at sites of ceremonial or ritual importance. At some of the sites where Roman material has been found, interpretations have been offered that focus on

structured deposition and votive objects, for example at Newgrange, Co. Meath, Golden, Co. Tipperary, Rath of the Synods, Tara, Co. Meath, and Freestone Hill, Co. Kilkenny.267 At the Rath of the Synods and Freestone Hill, it is the nature of the small enclosures and the types of finds (Roman-type drinking vessels along with small items of personal jewellery) that are suggestive of the type of assemblage common at small Romano-British shrines.268 It has been argued that these suggest a syncretic link, with both local and Roman religious practices being enacted at places of existing ceremonial and political importance in Ireland. The hoard from Balline, although different in that it is of silver, as discussed earlier, is best regarded as a payment or donative either for someone who was local and had returned home or for a former serving member of the Roman military from elsewhere, and it may be that it too was a votive or ritual deposition. Furthermore, the small copper coin hoard from the Rath of the Synods is closely paralleled by those regularly found at rural shrines and temples in Roman Britain and is further evidence of cultic practices at this important ritual site. There is not the space here to cover the wideranging existing scholarship on the role of religion and religious practices in the Roman world, but the adoption of such practices is evidenced elsewhere, often by the pairing of a local deity with a Roman deity, a strategic move that helped to encourage and integrate local customs and behaviour with Roman customs. Although there is no evidence of Roman deities being directly adopted to replace existing Irish deities, it is entirely possible, given the evidence from the Rath of the Synods and Freestone Hill, that a similar melding of local and foreign practices (or, indeed, people) helped to reshape relations between communities in Ireland at this time.269 Given the wide body of literature and research on structured deposition more widely at ritual centres, and specifically of copper hoards, in Roman Britain,270 the LIARI Project was interested in the other two small fourth-century coin hoards that were rejected by Bateson. One was found in 1878 in the area known as Cuskinny, near Cork Harbour, while the other was a hoard from the Rath of the Synods on the Hill of Tara (as previously mentioned). The hoard from Cuskinny contained ten copper coins (from Claudius Gothicus, AD 268–9, to Constantine II, AD 317–40) and was rejected because it covered two periods of recoinage. The hoard from the Rath of the Synods was believed to have been a hoax planted during the time of the hunt for the Ark of the Covenant.271 Although there remain some difficulties 43

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 44

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland in the revised stratigraphy and chronologies offered by Grogan in his review of the site and finds from the Rath of the Synods,272 it seems likely that the coin hoard (which consisted of fifteen copper coins, all dating from the reign of Constantine I, AD 306–37) was a contemporary deposition, given that the rest of the Roman assemblage and absolute dates from the site confirm predominantly second- to fourth-century activity there. The hoard from Cuskinny has not yet been located, but our aim is to find it, as offering a likely context for it is important. Smaller copper coin hoards from Roman Britain are often characterised by wide ranges in dates and given the other finds in the Cork region, along with the fourth- and fifth-century AD collection of Roman material from the site of Garranes, there is now less reason to doubt its authenticity. Alongside the many artefacts is the evidence for structured deposition of selected types of animal remains that have been shown to reflect aspects of both local Iron Age and Roman religious practices.273 The distribution of Romano-British temples and smaller shrines is important, as these are predominantly in the southern parts of Britain, mostly in the countryside, although a few are known from small towns such as Caerwent.274 Furthermore, in a review of the cultic practice of deposition and of shrines which appear to respect or incorporate extant prehistoric monuments in Roman Britain, Dark argued that the distribution appears to be focused in the Gloucestershire region.275 We tend to view the urban spaces in towns and settlements in Roman Britain as utterly different in form and function to the settlement places of the preRoman Iron Age people, but, as in other areas of interpretation, separating what we may see as domestic practices from that which was inherently ritualised is fraught with difficulty. Houses and homes and the families who lived within them were all protected by the household deities, the penates, vesta and lares, and it is notable—given the focus of Roman material in the immediate environs—that one such domestic household god, a little lar, was found in the River Boyne in County Meath. Recent research by Adams into ‘urbanism’ and the continuity of late Roman towns has outlined how modern preconceptions reflected onto Roman practices have in many cases obscured or removed the need to understand the enduring nature of rituals in these different settings.276 The analogy offered by Adams is that we should liken the lines of buildings to any other demarcation process by which a designated area is enclosed for special purposes. By thinking of buildings as such, it is easier to see beyond the Roman bricks and mortar (i.e. the medium of con44

struction) to investigate the underlying principles by which, and for which, structures of all kinds were created and vested with ritual significance. The evidence for deposits of horses and dogs at the Rath of the Synods and Ráith na Ríg, but also at Freestone Hill, Co. Kilkenny, suggests that there is also a link through the cults being venerated at these sites. The concept of the spectral hound or dog is common across Celtic mythology; these animals are ascribed various roles, from harbingers of death to protectors of the living, or simply hunting companions for young aristocrats,277 and many of these associated roles are paralleled in Roman cult practice, such as the hound as a familiar of Diana, the hunter goddess.278 Among the many figurines that have been found in Roman Britain, the most accomplished is a bronze example of what is believed to be an Irish wolfhound from the Romano-British ritual healing centre of Lydney Park in Gloucestershire.279 Furthermore, the assemblages of material recovered from temples and shrines in Roman Britain such as Lydney, but also at Nettleton Scrub in Wiltshire (interestingly where one of the principal deities was Cunomaglus, the Hound Lord) and at Uley in Gloucestershire, are characterised by many items of jewellery and bracelets, including plate brooches with conical glass insets identical to those found at Newgrange within the second- to fourthcentury Roman deposits (Figs 2.22 and 2.23). Inscriptions from Lydney show that the principal deity was Mars-Nodens. Many other representations of dogs were found at the site, with objects such as a small bronze votive arm and a collyrium stamp, and, alongside the extensive ancillary buildings, these have been used to support the interpretation of this site as a healing centre. It has been argued that Nodens is cognate with Nuadu in Irish mythology, and perhaps even linked to his alter ego Nechtan, whom some have related to Neptune.280 Nechtan is said to have been the counterpart deity of Bóind, the goddess of the River Boyne, and the site closest to the source of the River Boyne, the springhead at the Well of Segais, is Carbury Hill, Co. Kildare, known from the literary sources as Síd Nechtain.281 It is interesting that the finds at Newgrange should so closely parallel those found at temples such as Lydney, given the positioning of this and the Romano-British temple nearby at Littledean282 along the extent of the horseshoe bend of the River Severn, within sight and sound of the extraordinary natural phenomenon of the tidal surge known as the Severn Bore. The River Severn is also represented by a river goddess, Sabrina, and, like the Boyne, appears to have iconography and mythology associated with the salmon and the dog/hound.283

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 45

Romans and Roman material in Ireland: a wider social perspective

2cm

Figs 2.22 (left) and 2.23 (right)—Two examples of late third- or early fourth-century incised and gilded plate brooches with conical green glass inset: Newgrange, Co. Meath (left, © National Museum of Ireland); Nettleton Temple,Wiltshire (right, courtesy of the Bristol Museum and Art Gallery).

Ireland in Late Antiquity In the introductory section to this chapter, it was suggested that the existing nomenclature for the period may, in part, have hindered the inclusion of Ireland as being engaged within, rather than isolated from, the Roman world. Nowhere is this more true than from the fourth and fifth centuries AD, where even more material is evident. In keeping with the work of scholars such as Brown, Wells and Bhreathnach,284 it seems more appropriate to refer to these two centuries as part of the Late Antique world, but for the moment they form the end of the late Iron Age and the transition to the early medieval period. The inclusion and greater acceptance of Roman material in the historical narratives for the fourth and fifth centuries in Ireland provides an interesting counterpoint to the way earlier material has been somewhat orphaned from archaeological interpretation in the late Iron Age. The focus of archaeological accounts about Ireland in this period tends to lean heavily towards either Christianisation as the catalyst for social change or the record of the conspiratio barbarica of AD 367 (the Barbarian Conspiracy, mentioned earlier) from the accounts of the classical writer Ammianus Marcellinus.285 Ammianus tells us of a year-long war prompted by a mutiny of the garrison on Hadrian’s Wall and how the barbarians, among them people who are named as the Picts, Saxons, Scotti and Attacotti, aided by disgruntled soldiers, marauded and looted the great villas and temples of Roman Britain. We are told that,

in response to this, in the following year, AD 368, Theodosius the Elder (known as comes or Count Theodosius) was despatched to Roman Britain to return order to both the garrison and the administration. There he summarily dealt with the rebellious troops, pardoning a great many of them, who then returned to Hadrian’s Wall, while probably executing a great many more. This new military effort was also characterised by the development of the Saxon Shore forts, with greatly strengthened forts in the north-west of Britain and the better-known line of new forts along the south-east and south coast. A record of units stationed within these in the later period is known from the Notitia Dignitatum, and parts of the superstructure of these architecturally superior forts, built from the fourth century AD, remain standing today at sites such as Porchester in Hampshire. These were built as part of a new coastal defensive system that is partnered with similar forts along the coast of Gaul. The conspiratio barbarica is often cited as a turning point in relations between the remaining military garrison of the period and the increasingly put-upon Roman administative systems that were struggling to maintain order while finding the funds from within a dwindling urban economy.286 What is notable about the accounts of this breakdown in order is that they refer to the severing of an existing agreement with those outside the frontier. There is little doubt that the gradual reduction in numbers and changes to military structure initiated by Constantine appear to have weakened the role of the garrisons in Roman Britain,287 but we would be 45

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 46

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland wrong to assume that this period can be characterised by countrywide unrest or mass raiding by the Irish among the vestiges of Roman towns and the great villa estates in the south-west. The archaeology of villas, houses, forts and temples simply does not support this model of wholesale destruction in this period. Ironically in Roman studies, the greater part of the fourth century in this part of Britain is characterised by economic stability, relative peace and the emergence of self-sufficiency and localised production, with a new focus away from the urban centres to the villa estates in the countryside.288 The other dominant aspect of the narrative for this period in Ireland is the role of the Christian missions in reshaping and reformulating social and religious practices and establishing centres of learning and literacy. There is a vast body of scholarship in this area which cannot be adequately covered here, but there is a general consensus that Roman-type evidence from this later period can be regarded as part of a ‘package’ of romanitas that arrived in Ireland with the earliest Christian missions, from both Britain and Europe.289 As with the earlier material, however, we need to be cautious, as there is likely to have been more than one process by which material arrived in Ireland. In recent years, the evidence for late imported wares in Ireland has benefited from specialist attention and it appears to follow the same distributional pattern as the earlier material in terms of nodal entry points along the sea coast of Dublin and Meath, but also in the south-east, with possible entry points either at Wexford or Waterford and from there transported along the navigable extent of the rivers Barrow, Nore and Suir. The role of these imported wares in society in Ireland has been outlined in detail by Kelly, who first identified Phocaean Red Slip Ware (PRSW) at Collierstown, Co. Meath, and African Red Slip Ware (ARSW) at Kilree, Co. Kilkenny. In her assessment of the inland trading routes across Ireland, she has described the importance of these wares in establishing and maintaining status among centres such as Tara, but it is interesting that she sees this as a continuity of existing practice rather than as a new development linked to the church. Several important reviews of late Roman and post-Roman material have been completed over the last 30 or more years; perhaps the most relevant and up to date for the Irish material is that by Kelly, mentioned earlier. A range of sherds of Late Roman Amphorae 1 are known from sites such as Dalkey Island, Lambay, Garranes290 and Garryduff, Co. Cork, but more recently from sites such as Collierstown, Ninch and Colp West (all in County Meath), and at Cherrywood and Cabinteely, Co. Dublin.291 In previ46

ous studies, the likely dates of importation were usually inferred from a date range offered for similar material from sites in western Britain, as it was believed that these were importations via Britain. Some material may have been part of a secondary distribution route through important sites such as Dinas Powys in Wales or Tintagel in Cornwall, but given the evidence for ARSW and PRSW at sites around Ireland it is equally likely that these were direct imports from the eastern Byzantine Roman Empire. Probably the most important site dating from this period is the large trivallate enclosure (ringfort) at Lisnacaheragh, in the townland of Garranes, excavated by Seán P. Ó Ríordáin and published in 1942. The enclosure itself sits within a rich agricultural landscape and Ó Ríordáin found that it had around eight formidable timber gateways during its lifetime. As recently noted by Bhreathnach, Garranes produced the largest single assemblage of imported pottery from a site in Ireland that included LRA1 and LRA2 amphorae and PRSW, and evidence for extensive craftworking in glass (both enamel and millefiori).292 The site and its environs (including many other enclosures) have formed part of ongoing research at NUI Galway and UCC under the Iverni Project.293 Although Ó Ríordáin tentatively dated the site to around AD 500, he drew attention in the report to much material that he believed was significantly earlier than this date.294 Recognition of an individual buried at Bettystown in the later fifth century AD who had an origin in either northern Africa or southern Portugal links an individual buried in Ireland with the longer trade routes which we know were used during this entire period.295 Alongside the sites discussed here are a larger number of sites where later Eware from Merovingian Gaul has also been found, and it is clear that this mat-erial supports Doyle’s conclusions in his summation of the work for Dalkey Island that the people living and/or working at these sites continued to maintain trade links after the demise of Roman power in the western provinces.296

The archaeology of early Christianity in Roman Britain In order to understand the relationship between Christian communities in Ireland, Britain and Gaul, it is important to look at the earliest evidence for Christianity in Roman Britain. There is a complex body of interdisciplinary scholarship based on the hagiographical, liturgical and canonical literature for this period, but as scholarship tends to reflect back-

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 47

Romans and Roman material in Ireland: a wider social perspective

Fig. 2.24—The famous depiction of orantes in highly detailed painted plaster from Lullingstone Roman villa in Kent (L. 4.2m) (© Trustees of the British Museum).

wards onto this earlier period a picture of Christianity in its later form, which was widespread, formal and organised, it is useful to consider what archaeological evidence there is for the earlier centuries AD. It is reasonable to suggest that, in its earliest introduction into the provinces, Christianity needs to be thought of as a cult of Jesus and placed alongside other popular eastern cults evidenced much more widely in Roman Britain. These cults include those of Mithras, Cybele and Attis,297 and even the popular cult of Sol Invictus,298 all of which had dedicated followers of similarly monotheistic doctrines in the Roman provinces. Constantine himself is said to have swayed between his dedication to Sol and Christianity with great ease, and so the concept of a single deity would not have been as surprising or as challenging for many as might otherwise be thought. Before the Edict of Toleration signed by the coemperors Constantine and Licinius in AD 313, being a Christian was not something that would have been

advertised; early devotees relied on discretion, and we know that this led to the misunderstanding of its message and accusations of treasonous cult behaviour. We can only imagine the daily routines for those converts who remained in the quiet places of worship with the constant threat of persecution, and we know that in some cases meetings of Christians took place in ordinary locations such as above bath houses, with baptisms taking place in the baths themselves.299 As is so often the case, it is the archaeology of the élite that is most prominent from southern Roman Britain: the painted panels of Lullingstone Villa in Kent300 that depict orantes (Fig. 2.24) and the third-century lavish Chi-Rho and extraordinary mosaic at Hinton St Mary in Dorset with its complex imagery, part ‘pagan’ mythology, part Christian. Both offer an insight into what are best likened to the Romano-British equivalent of the private chapels in the castles and houses of great estates in much later times. But in many respects these are the exception and are the result of fortunate 47

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 48

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland

Fig. 2.25 (left)—Detail of Chi-Rho stamped within the officinae mark on one of the silver ingots from the Balline hoard (© National Museum of Ireland).

5cm

Fig. 2.26 (right)—Detail of the Chi-Rho in the inscribed ingot from the Balline hoard, RIB 2402.1 (from Roman inscriptions of Britain, vol. II, fasc. III; reproduced by permission of the Administrators of the Haverfield Bequest).

preservation, and in the absence of the mosaic or, indeed, the wall painting from Lullingstone these would simply be good examples of fourth-century rich villas in Roman Britain.The unusual preservation of these is, to a great extent, juxtaposed with the archaeology of the rest of the population at this time, and we have to question whether what we are seeing represents individuals seeking to align themselves with imperial favour and social standing after Constantine gave his support to Christian belief or a genuine desire 48

to provide safe sanctuary for worship at a family level. The likelihood of this new religion overriding social convention and social separation between rich and poor at this time, to allow villa workers and slaves access to these house shrines alongside their patrons, remains problematic. In contrast to this is the later fourth-century and more commonly fifth-century evidence that, although fragmentary, appears to reflect images familiar to us as Christian iconography, such as the peacock represent-

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 49

Romans and Roman material in Ireland: a wider social perspective

Fig. 2.27—Mnemonics of local social memory in a pagan past: rags tied to a ‘holy well’ at Doon, Co. Donegal (© 2006 Annette Wagner, annettewagnerart.com). ing immortality and the Constantinian Chi-Rho representing the first two letters of the Greek Christos. These are the symbols that were etched, pecked or incised onto small items of metalwork such as toilet implements and strap-ends or scratched onto pottery, and it is these visible symbols of religious association that would have been immediately recognisable amongst non-literate people.301 Archaeological evidence for churches is not without its problems either, as at least one likely candidate at Silchester has recently been reinterpreted as belonging to a guild, a collegium, although we know that it could have served the same function for its members.302 Nevertheless, some of the small, two-roomed, apsidal-ended buildings are possibly churches, and those that have been found in areas where there are other indicators of early Christian communities should not be discounted completely. Indeed, in many respects the earliest plausible evidence for small churches and likely altars comes from the later fourth- and fifth-century architectural changes that are evidenced at forts along the frontier in Roman Britain.303 These support Dark’s

suggestions, made throughout his thoughtful reassessment of this period, that the more formalised missions that brought Christianity to Ireland and Scotland may have been helped in part by prior conversions among the remaining soldiers or limitanei living on the frontier.304 If, as mentioned in the earlier discussions, we accept that the Balline silver hoard is likely to be a donative to a former serving soldier in the late Roman army, then the Chi-Rho on one of the stamped ingots takes on even greater significance, as it is the earliest Christian epigraphy from an Irish context (Figs 2.25 and 2.26). We know that, along with the celebration of the Eucharist, one of the most important, and certainly most public, rites in the early Christian church was that of baptism. Whitfield has drawn attention to the suggestion that the numerous holy wells in Ireland may have been linked to or used as part of the baptismal rite during the early conversion period (Fig. 2.27).305 In Britain, lead cisterns or tanks (c. 1m in diameter), often decorated, have been found at sites such as Witham in Essex, Icklingham in Suffolk and 49

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 50

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland Walesby in Lincolnshire, and some are near or associated with early buildings that have an external area with footings (some polygonal) that have been interpreted as possible baptisteries.306 There are now approximately 40 of these tanks known from around Britain, in whole or part, and some bearing graffiti or the Constantinian Chi-Rho.The distribution lies generally in the south-east and midlands. Although their function has recently been questioned,307 the most important tank comes from Walesby and depicts a young female competens, partially disrobed, being led forward by two female helpers in what is clearly a depiction of the performance of a ritual, and a convincing case has been made that this is the rite of baptism.308 This particular example is interesting because the pictorial elements are depicted within small, simple Ionic columns that have been interpreted as representing the internal architecture of a small church. In his recent work on churches in early medieval Ireland, Ó Carragáin has demonstrated the parallels between the (albeit few) likely church structures from Ireland and contemporary churches in late and post-Roman Britain and later timber-built structures from Europe. He presents a convincing argument for what these earliest structures may have looked like and for the likely use of sill-beam construction that would leave only a light footprint archaeologically.309 Although literacy in Ireland has always been regarded as a development that was linked to the emergent Christian centres, and it did indeed act as a catalyst for such an important wider social development, it has been

50

argued that there were those who were already literate and possibly bilingual in both Irish and Latin at this time.310

Conclusion As will have become clear from the previous discussions, there was a discrete set of research questions that the LIARI Project hoped to address and investigate in our consideration of society and settlement in the later Iron Age and the nature of Roman relations with Ireland. Central to this was a need to produce a contemporary analysis, in keeping with approaches to Roman material beyond the limes elsewhere. In order to create a more inclusive narrative of this important period, our work needed to be accessible for both academic researchers and the interested reader. In the following chapters we present the detailed research undertaken during the preliminary eighteen-month period; although our research focused on those areas in the eastern seaboard counties where there appeared to be the greatest concentration of material, there are other nodal points in Ireland and we will be continuing with a programme of investigation in other areas in LIARI Phase 2. Certain trends in the data set cannot be related simply to a lack—or intensity—of recent excavation; rather it is much more probable that these indicators are meaningful. All of the emerging trends are discussed in Chapter 7, and our findings are brought together in detail in Chapter 8.

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 51

Romans and Roman material in Ireland: a wider social perspective Notes 1. 2.

3. 4. 5. 6.

7.

8. 9.

10.

11.

12. 13.

14. 15. 16. 17.

18.

With a contribution from Christopher Standish (University of Bristol). This is a useful phrase coined in the influential work of Wells (1999). We felt that it was entirely appropriate to apply it throughout our research in consideration of the people living in areas outside the formal limes (in northern Britain and Europe) where the archaeology has shown them to be actively engaged rather than just passive recipients of material from the Roman provinces. Becker et al. 2008. A term originally coined by the late Barry Raftery (1994). Raftery 1983; 1984. Particularly in social media and blog posts following an article in the Irish Times (2011) about the LIARI Project. The article can be read here: http://www.discoveryprogramme. ie/news-aevents/news/159-liari-project-in-the-news. The difference between a senatorial and an imperial province was created during the principate of Augustus (27 BC–AD 14). He decided that those areas of greatest revenue potential and in need of greatest military control should remain under his direct control, and he personally appointed those in charge. The senatorial provinces were thought to be more stable and not to require the same number of troops stationed there and so were given over to the administration of a proconsul. James 2011, 41. A good example is the breakdown of the relationship between Queen Cartimandua and her estranged partner Venutius, which led to the annexation of the territory of the Brigantes and the subsequent extension of Roman administration in northern Britain. King Decabalus of Dacia managed to resist two attempts at annexation before being finally defeated by the sheer brute force and determination of the Emperor Trajan, who annexed Dacia and exploited its natural resources. For a complete overview of the manner in which Roman imperialism was seen as a parallel to the civilising influence of the British Empire see Hingley 2005; Rogers and Hingley 2010. See in particular Raftery 1983 and 1984, in which he created a classification based on La Tène stylistic parallels without, perhaps, due consideration of the incorporation and adoption of both local and Roman artistic influences; for an earlier but more nuanced approach see Jope 1954 and 1961–2. For a detailed discussion of the problems with such approaches see Hodos 2010, 3–32. See Harding 2007, 164–88, on the likely origin of many Irish-type finds and the discovery of matching moulds for making these at sites in Scotland. On the debate around Celtic revisionism in archaeology see James 1999; Collis 2003. Gosden and Marshall 1999; Koptyoff 1986. Bateson 1973; 1976. See, in particular, Mattingly 2004 and 2007 on discrepant identities and experiences in Roman Britain and the provinces. See also Hingley 1994; 1997b; 2005; Wells 1999; 2005. E. O’Brien 1990, 37–8; 1999b; 2009a; McGarry 2008; Cahill

Wilson 2012a. 19. Raftery 1984, 222, contra Jope 1954. 20. Staelen 1982; David Rice, Curator at the Gloucester Museum, pers. comm. (2013). 21. On bronze bowls see Raftery 1984, particularly his discussion on pp 222–3, where he challenges Jope 1954; Harding 2007, 181–2. The beehive quern, as its name suggests, is a two-part hive-shaped quern-stone as opposed to the earlier saddle quern type (of which many have been found in Ireland) and the later rotary or disc quern type. The distribution of these querns is interesting, as they are predominantly found in the northern and midland counties, a concentration that is similar to the finds of high-status metalwork, leading some to suggest that they are a British type, based on the greater numbers found in northern Britain, especially the Yorkshire area. For detailed discussion see Caulfield 1977; Raftery 1994; and, more recently, Warner 2013, 234–5. 22. Kenny 2012; Anderson et al. 2013. 23. Jope 1958. 24. On the Mars figurine in the collection of Alnwick Castle in Northumberland, see Bateson 1973, 88; on the winged figure, we are grateful to Patrick Gleeson, who brought this to our attention when it came to light during his own research on material from County Tipperary; on the Venus figurine, the description and whereabouts of this figurine are uncertain but it was said to have been sent to the NMI (M. Timoney, pers. comm. (2012)); on the lar, see Kenny 2012. 25. Warner 1982; Wallace and Ó Floinn 2002, 128–9; Warner 1995. 26. Lynn 2003b; Raftery 1994. 27. For parallels for the bowl from Fore see James and Rigby 1997. 28. Brindley and Lanting 1990; Raftery 1994, 205. 29. Johnston and Wailes 2007; in particular, see discussion and finds in the Flame/Rose/Mauve phases at the hillfort. 30. E. O’Brien 1990; 1993; 2003; 2009a; Cahill Wilson 2012a. 31. Todd 2007. 32. For Hengistbury Head see Cunliffe 1991. The Hengistbury Head port of trade on the Dorset coast remains one of the most important Iron Age sites in Britain; it is discussed and referenced in detail later in this chapter. Silchester is Calleva Atrebatum and the earlier Iron Age settlement levels have produced much that is Roman in origin, including militaria. See the many publications on the site by Michael Fulford (University of Reading). For Colchester see Crummy 1997 and 2003. For Fishbourne see Manley and Rudkin 2005. 33. Creighton 2005, 51. 34. Lorica segmentata is the best known of the types of armour used by Roman troops; segmentata, as its name suggests, is the characteristic segmented plate armour, but there are also variations based on a Roman chain-mail known as hamata, and a small plate-mail or fish-scale armour known as squamata; see Bishop and Coulston 2006. 35. Mallory 2013, 92. 36. Creighton 2005. 37. Tom Moore’s excavations revealed a first-century AD Roman villa near the hillfort of Bagendon in Gloucestershire, but traditionally villa development in this part of Britain is believed to have followed similar dating to elsewhere, with the majority being built in the third to early fourth centuries AD. Excavations in 2012/13 have revealed

51

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 52

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland

38.

39.

40.

41.

42.

43.

44.

45.

46.

52

this to be a polyfocal site that offers new insights into the development of Iron Age oppida and hillforts in the transition into and during the early Roman period in Britain. The term mores refers to the customs which had been adopted; Tacitus tells us that Agricola encouraged the wearing of the toga and bathing in an attempt to convince the upper stratum of society of the benefits of becoming ‘good’ Romans. See Laing and Laing 1992 on the evolution of shared local and Roman artistic motifs in the period, or Kelly 1993, 47, on more direct links to Roman influence in Irish art styles. Baker 2007 is an excellent source, written in an engaging narrative, that centres on the individual motives of key people behind the pivotal moments in Roman history, from the Roman Republic through the Empire; see also James 2011 for an equally engaging narrative, although focused here on the nature of martial society. The Stanegate is a Roman military road built during the forward campaigns of Agricola; it runs between the two important forts of Coria (Corbridge) and Luguvalium (Carlisle). Forts were placed on the south of the road as a line of defence at regular intervals and the best known of these is the fort at Vindolanda; see Mattingly 2011 (particularly chapter 8, where he discusses both the theoretical issues and the archaeology of identities and the discrepancies within the experience of being Roman in Britain and the archaeology that is revealing the sheer diversity across Britain). These relationships were, of course, unofficial for all soldiers at this time, as only senior officers and centurions were allowed to marry while on active service. For many, this is seen as a decisive factor in the ‘barbarianisation’ of the military; it essentially removed the need for them to join the auxiliaries, and conscripts were needed from beyond the provinces to fill the ranks. For an overview of the impact in later centuries see Collins 2013. For the details of dedicatory inscriptions from Hadrian’s Wall and elsewhere in Roman Britain see the fascicules of the Roman inscriptions of Britain (RIB), first edited by R.G. Collingwood and R.P. Wright in 1965 and completely revised up to 2006 by the additional volumes with various editors and contributors through Britannia and the JRA; all referencing of inscriptions for Roman Britain uses the series identifier ‘RIB’ plus the specific catalogue entry. Gaius Julius Civilis was a Batavian and an auxiliary officer in the Roman army who led the revolt. Civilis led a combined force of Batavians from inside the province of Germania Inferior and Gallia Belgica, but also many troops who joined forces with him from beyond the area of the frontiers. Two legions were lost during the uprising and the revolt was only finally quashed after a massive Roman counter-attack led by Quintus Petillius Cerialis (later governor of Britannia). Caesar mentions a cavalry unit drafted in from Germany called the Usipetes, but Tacitus refers to them as the Usipi and records in the Agricola that they murdered their centurion and fellow soldiers on a training detachment before stealing some boats and trying to sail home to Germany. They were apparently forced into cannibalism during the journey—probably just a literary topos by Tacitus, designed to stress their reversion to older, nonRoman, barbarous ways—and on reaching landfall in Europe they were captured by members of the Suebi; some were

executed, others sold into slavery. 47. Maps and details (along with aerial photos) on Roman sites in Scotland can be found on-line at the RCAHMS’s valuable open-access and searchable database: http://canmore.rcahms.gov.uk, accessed May 2014. 48. For the most recent gazetteer and catalogues of these camps see R. Jones 2012. For Wales see Burnham and Davies 2010. For a detailed discussion of the martial structure of these forts see James 2011, 174: James sees these not so much as castra or castles but as wolf-cages! 49. Mattingly 2007, 166. 50. Johns 1996; Creighton 2005, 49, on the complexity of identities in this period. 51. Harding 2007; but see also Raftery 1984, 222, drawing parallels between the bird-head design on the Keshcarrigan bowl and some of the bird heads on varieties of dragonesque brooches. For the catalogues of dragonesque brooches and their forms see de Feachem 1951 and 1968. For a more recent assessment based on the finds recorded through the PAS see Hunter 2010. 52. Laing 1987, 8–9; Johns 1996; see Ellen Swift’s many papers on the consumption, use and function of Roman material during the earlier and later period, but in particular see Swift 2003; Bayley and Butcher 2004. 53. For a detailed discussion of why this is important see Wells 1999, 127–8; terra sigillata is a term that denotes a range of forms, fabrics and types and it encompasses much earlier material, such as Arretine ware from Arezzo in Italy. In Roman studies in Britain these types of wares are described by their individual names, and ‘Samian ware’ is used more widely to denote the characteristic red-slipped, plain and decorated types from kilns in Gaul and those produced probably by Gaulish potters briefly at Colchester in Essex and Pulborough in Sussex. 54. See Toynbee 1971; for a discussion on the change in burial practices see Cahill Wilson 2012a for examples of Irish sites and material. 55. Mitchell and Ryan 2003, 250. 56. See Mattingly 2007. 57. The issues around the level of success of urbanisation are cogently argued for the earlier periods in various publications, but for the best review using likely demographic numbers for those who lived in Roman Britain see Mattingly 2011; for the later towns see Rogers 2011; for details and breakdown of demographics in different social groups and urban and rural places in the Roman period in Britain see Mattingly 2011, 219. 58. Good examples are the excavations at Bryn Eryr farmstead on Anglesey (Longley 1998), and on Bush Farm on Anglesey, and the round and rectangular buildings that make up the Roman settlement at Din Lligwy, near the copper mines at the Great Orme in Wales. 59. Northern Britain, Wales and Cornwall; for examples see the Roman settlement evidence at Penrith (Higham 1989); for Iron Age and Roman settlement in vernacular style alongside local copies of Roman types and architecture see reports on excavations at Chysauster and Trethurgy (Quinnell 1986; 2004); for a Roman period rath or enclosed house in south Wales see Wainright et al. 1971; Thomas and Walker 1959. 60. The insula was the standard building plot used in Roman towns; see Revell 2009, 32, and in particular her discussion

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 53

Romans and Roman material in Ireland: a wider social perspective

61.

62.

63. 64.

65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70.

71.

72. 73.

74.

75.

76.

of empty insulae in Caerwent Roman town and her interpretation of this and similar patterning elsewhere. Ably demonstrated by Davies (2002, 39), who outlines the nature of the surveying and engineering of the military roads that were built in straight sections—rather than straight lines—and often deviate from straight courses. Alongside this is the evidence of the diverticuli, the smaller roads that linked into the main military infrastructure and more famous roads such as the Fosse Way and Akeman Street. Many of these smaller roads had their origin along the length of earlier Iron Age routes; for detail of the construction of Roman roads and communications systems in Wales see Sylvester and Toller 2010. See Harding 2007, 121, on the mingling of Roman classical design repertoire with late La Tène style and vegetative motifs; also Laing 1987, 8–9, on the origin and continued use of the triskele in Roman design. Bateson 1973; 1976, 179; Warner 1976; Guido 1978; Edwards 1990; Cunliffe 2001. Beard 2009, one of the most colourful and entertaining academic accounts ever written on Romans at home; but, in particular, see Beard et al. 1998, 177–84, for descriptions of the importance of the ancient pomerium—the sacred ditch around the extent of the city of Rome and its ritualised nature. Warner 1995. Birley 1976: Aelius Spartianus, ‘Hadrian’, xi, 2. Caesar, The Gallic war, 5.10. Tacitus, The Agricola, chapters 24 and 25. See Strang 1997, which includes a review of the coordinates for Ireland. See Toner 2000 for detailed discussion of both the existing problems and interpretations, and a discussion of which probably reflect local names or places in the landscape in the first century AD rather than by the time Ptolemy recorded them. P. Sims-Williams has written widely on the origin of many of the names listed by Ptolemy; he accepted only a few of those as of Celtic origin and thus likely to reflect contemporary settlements or communities in Ireland. Ptolemy, The Geographia; Freeman 2001. The most detailed accounts are in Freeman 2001, in which he gives the original Greek and Latin extracts plus his own translations. Juvenal: arma quidem ultra litora Iuvernae promovimus et modo captas Oracadus ac minima contentos nocte Britannos—‘indeed, we have advanced our arms beyond the shores of Iuverna and the recently captured Orkneys and the mighty Britons with their short nights’ (Satire 2.159–63); Freeman 2001, 62. Symmachus: ut nunc septem scotticorum canum probavit oblatio, quos praelusionis die ita Roma mirata est, ut ferries caveis putaret advectos—‘as now the presentation of seven Scotti dogs has demonstrated, which on the day of the prelude so astonished Rome, that it was thought they were brought in iron cages’ (Epistle, 2.7); Freeman 2001, 102–3. The reference may have been overlooked because the authenticity of these accounts, thought to have been compiled sometime in the fourth century, has been challenged; see Birley 1976 and later editions, but see also Syme 1989 for the controversial nature of the written biographies and the care needed when using them. The portents in Roman religious terms relate to an unusual

occurrence thought to have been sent by the gods and, if sanctioned by officials, it became a prodigy, which meant that the pax deorum or the benevolence of the gods had been broken in some way; see Warrior 2006 for a good introduction to the specific practices and cult worship. 77. See Freeman 2001; Rankin 1996. 78. Syme 1983. 79. Freeman 2001, 97. 80. See the important work of Creighton 2005; Hingley 1994; 1997b; 2005; 2010 (on Victorian imperialism in archaeology); Piccini 1996. 81. This division has occurred either in discrete periods— prehistory/Iron Age, or Roman/Classics, or Late Roman/Sub-Roman/post-Roman, or Late Antiquity—or indeed in individual aspects such as the study of ancient Greek and Latin, numismatics, art and architecture. 82. Hoffman 2004. 83. See Hoffman 2013. 84. Gudeman 1900 (with Haverfield’s response on p. 53); Haverfield 1913. 85. Their work was recently the subject of an investigation by Carew (2012). 86. Carew 2012, 39. 87. The emphasis here is the author’s. 88. Waddell 2005, 219; Carew 2012. 89. For Ballinderry see Hencken 1942. For Lagore see Hencken 1950a. 90. Hencken 1950a, 134 and 139, on the insignificance of the Roman melon bead and other Iron Age beads, and for his Danish parallels. 91. Cahill Wilson 2010, 80; Hencken 1950a, 6, 24. 92. Due thanks to our UCD MA student placement Alexandra Guglielmi, who has reviewed the material for her thesis. 93. Ó Ríordáin 1947. 94. Ó Ríordáin 1947. 95. See Carew 2003 on this extraordinary episode at the turn of the twentieth century. 96. Bateson 1973; 1976; Dolley 1976. 97. Bateson 1976. 98. Kilbride-Jones 1980; Fowler 1960; Newman 1989; Cahill Wilson 2012a; Warner 2013 on the initial or early-type penannular brooches. A series of important theoretical papers were published together in Monk and Sheehan 1998. 99. For example Tierney 1998. 100. Kilbride-Jones 1980; Fowler 1960; Newman 1989; Cahill Wilson 2012a; Warner 2013. 101. Megaw and Megaw 1996; Collis 2003; James 1999; Karl 2004. 102. Raftery 1994. 103. Tacitus, The Agricola, chapter 24. 104. Maas and Byrne 1996; Warner 1995. 105. See Ó Floinn 2001 for his work in particular on Freestone Hill and the material from Newgrange, and on a suggested revision for the proto-hand-pins from Ireland; and Ó Floinn 2009 on provenance for Irish material in collections in the museums. Ó Floinn’s work is acknowledged in Cahill Wilson 2012a, Newman and Gavin 2008 and Gavin 2013. 106. Waddell 2005 is essential reading for all students of archaeology in Ireland. Carefully and objectively written, it highlights some of the issues that led to the problems with ‘foreign’ material from Irish contexts. 107. Warner 2013.

53

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 54

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland 108. Waddell 2005 offers the most comprehensive account, but see also J. O’Sullivan 1998. 109. Ó hÓgáin 2002 for a general treatment, but specifically p. 193; Raftery 1989, 146. 110. Warner 1976; we should note that Samian ware originated in Gaul, so that any links with sites such as Bobbio are unlikely, and there is virtually no evidence of a link between sites where Samian ware has been found in Ireland and any early Christian churches. 111. Cooney 2009a. 112. See Dowling 2006; 2011; Newman 2012; Newman and Gavin 2008; Gavin 2013. 113. Haverfield 1913. 114. Bateson 1973; 1976. 115. See Cahill Wilson 2012a. 116. Ibid. 117. Cahill Wilson 2010, 68. 118. Bateson 1973; 1976; Warner 1976; Raftery 1989; Mytum 1992; Rynne 1976. 119. Wells 2005; Fibiger Bang 2008; Mattingly 2011; also see Kessler and Temin 2007 and various papers in Bowman and Wilson 2009. 120. Storgaard 2003, 106–12; for the most recent detailed accounts of the classical sources and interpretation see McLaughlin 2010. So important were these that, in the civil war that followed the demise of Caligula,Vespasian went personally to Alexandria to hold up the cereal supply to Rome. See Jones and Mattingly 1990, 181–4, for details of the economy and evidence for mining in Roman Britain; Mattingly 2011, 167–89, on metals and metalla and the extraordinary evidence for mining in the empire; Fulford 1989 on the estimated volume of cereals and foodstuffs being imported and exported in the provinces; Kessler and Temin 2007 on the economics of the grain supply to Rome; Bowman and Thomas 1984; Fibiger Bang 2008. 121. The Sangam literature is made up of poems and dates from between 300 BC and AD 300; see Shajan, Cherian et al. 2008; Shajan, Tomber et al. 2004. 122. See McLaughlin 2010 for a detailed discussion on the senators’ stand on what they saw as a problem with the costs associated with this trade. 123. The Han Dynasty ruled from 206 BC to AD 220; the Roman name for the Chinese was Seres, and Chinese silk was known as sereca; McLaughlin 2010. 124. Gosden 2004, 31, but in particular his take on first-hand cultural encounters and shared value systems. 125. Cahill Wilson 2012a; McLaughlin 2010. 126. Raftery 1996a; Warner 1995. 127. The rich assemblage of Roman material from graves beyond the frontier cannot be detailed in full here but for good examples see Wells 1999, and for details of their importance and interpretation see papers in Jørgensen et al. 2003. 128. Finley 1973. 129. This is, by necessity, an oversimplification of a complex issue and it is quite separate to considerations of the role coinage played as a medium by which propaganda and imperial prowess might be disseminated widely across the provincial world, discussed earlier. 130. Many large hoards of Roman small-denomination coins from the fourth century have been found at both domestic and ritual sites in Roman Britain. There are several reasons offered for the collection and deposition of such hoards,

54

including the removal of coinage from circulation, the recycling of coinage or the hiding of coins for safekeeping. All of the hoards from Roman Britain are currently being reinvestigated through an AHRC-funded collaborative project between the University of Leicester and the British Museum. 131. See Mattingly 2011, 125–45, for a detailed reconsideration of the economy of the Roman state and the provinces. I have simplified this for our purposes and focused on coins, but this is a highly complex and interesting discussion and Mattingly provides a comprehensive consideration of the range of goods and services available throughout each of the models he proposes. 132. See Wells 1999 and Heather 2009 on the importance of the site of Feddersen-Wierde, but for the problems with the methodology used in the original excavations see Collis 2008. 133. Fulford 2007. 134. Comber 2002. 135. Bateson 1973, 48; 1976. 136. Collingwood and Wright 1995, vol. II, fascicule 8. I am grateful to Mark Hassall for bringing this latest research to our attention and for the likely parallels he offered. 137. See E. O’Brien 2009b. 138. This was a common practice; see Reece 2002; Guest 2008b. 139. Excavations were carried out here by Bush-Fox in 1911–12, but see Cunliffe for the most detailed account of the complete history of the site and its finds: Cunliffe 1978 for Hengistbury Head and the role of the Durotriges in the Iron Age and Roman periods; and Cunliffe 1991 for discussion on Coriosolite coins from Armorica (p. 481), for distribution maps and discussion of amphorae (pp 478–83), and for discussion on changes in trade routes after the Claudian campaign (p. 480). 140. The campaigns of Sextus Julius Frontinus are well documented, but he is known for his successful subjugation of the troublesome Silures in south Wales; his campaigns resulted in the development of the legionary fortress at Caerleon, as well as the new Roman town of Caerwent; Ellis 1987. 141. Ibid. 142. Ibid.; see Jones and Mattingly 1990 on coastal sites; Jones 2012. 143. Irish examples are ably summarised in Rahtz 1976; Rippon 2008; Wacher 1997. 144. Rippon 2008; Griffiths et al. 2007; Aberffraw was a small port with a first-century fort beside it—or maybe controlling it—but the ingot (RIB II. 1 2403.3) inscribed ‘socio Romae-natsol’ suggests that it was already under a civilian contractor. 145. Creighton 2005, 19. 146. Doyle 1998; and Charles-Edwards 2000, 156, on likely emporia in this area. 147. See Bateson 1973; 1976. 148. Rynne 1976; Cooney 2009a. 149. Toynbee 1971 for the details of Roman burial practices both in Rome and in the provinces. 150. Cunliffe 2001, 417. 151. Found at Lagore Crannog and on Drumanagh, and discussed in detail in Chapter 8 of this volume. 152. Recently reconsidered by Alexandra Guglielmi, our MA student placement from UCD, its parallel with the Illerup-

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 55

Romans and Roman material in Ireland: a wider social perspective type swords appears to have been identified by Xenia PauliJensen, but there remains some work to be done before this can be confirmed. See Rynne 1983, in which he considered some late La Tène and ‘Celto-Roman’-type (more correctly Roman auxiliary-type) swords from Ireland—curiously, despite cross-referencing Hencken’s work at Lagore, he did not discuss the sword found there specifically. 153. References to these and other finds are in Kaul 2003. 154. See Fulford 1985; Hansen 1982; Hedeager 1978; 1987; 1992. 155. For the Drogheda finds see Kelly 2002; note that this was a topsoil find in a ploughed field with no context (Drumanagh). 156. See Chapter 4 for a review of the Roman brooches from Lambay. 157. On Roman glass from the Rath of the Synods see Grogan 2008. 158. Harden 1968; for a more recent reassessment see Doyle 1998. 159. We are grateful to its finder, Patrick Diamond, for bringing this coin to our attention; it is now in the NMI. 160. Cahill Wilson 2010. 161. Charles-Edwards 2003. 162. Wells 2005. 163. See Fulford 1989 for a complete rebuttal of Whittaker’s earlier hypothesis that these frontier zones needed to be seen as permeable and fluid; but see the impressive scholarship of Gardner 2007, offering a more nuanced contemporary approach. 164. Gardner 2007. 165. Hedeager 1978. 166. Hoffman (2004; 2013) has ably demonstrated how translated texts, but notably for this period the writings of Tacitus, have been used uncritically to perpetuate the importance of the role of Agricola in the first-century campaigns. 167. Woolliscroft and Hoffman 2010, 16–17. 168. For a detailed description of the variations across the entire Roman period see R. Jones 2012. 169. See Maxwell 2008 for a different take on the success of the Roman campaigns in Scotland; he believes that they were far more successful than previously considered. 170. For the re-dating of the German limes see Körtüm 1998. 171. Hedeager 1978; 1987; 1992. 172. Wells 1999 remains the most comprehensive detailed source on this new approach to local and Roman interaction; Wells has inspired a new generation of archaeologists with new approaches to the study of material culture in areas outside the Roman frontier zone. 173. Wells (1999) covers this very well and gives detailed descriptions of the archaeology of the sites mentioned here; see also Wigg 1999 on the sites excavated in the Wetterau area in Germany. 174. Wells 1999, 150–1. 175. Ibid.; Grane 2008a; 2008b. 176. Galestin 2010; Wells 1996; 1999. 177. Gosden 2004 on colonialism and power; also Hodos 2010; see Doherty 2005 and Newman 2005. 178. Jørgen and Friberg 2002. 179. Multiple papers in Jørgensen et al. 2003. 180. See the recent work of Xenia Pauli-Jensen in particular; her articles have altered our perspectives on the role that Roman military material played in local societies. 181. Grane 2008b.

182. There is now a wide body of scholarship on the role of central places in the later Roman Iron Age in Denmark and southern Scandinavia, but for an important collection of papers that covers this period and the Migration period see Hårdh and Larsson 2002, as many of the papers cover the later Roman Iron Age also. See Hedeager 2001; Wells 2008; Reiersen 2009 for a convincing reconsideration and redating of these into the later Iron Age (AD 250–350) rather than the Merovingian period; see also the work of Lars Larsson (2001; 2002; 2003; Larsson and Lenntorp 2004) on the excavations at Uppåkra in south-west Scania, and its structures and finds, another central place and clear parallels for Gudme-Lundeborg. 183. Hedeager 2002. 184. Sindbaek 2009; Dowling 2009, 213–32, on a similar role for sites in Ireland in relation to Tara. 185. Wells 1999; 2005. 186. See Creighton 2005 for various examples of such ‘diplomacy’. 187. Eildon Hill has three peaks, from which the massive Roman camp at Trimontium probably gets its name; the Roman site sits in the river valley below Eildon. 188. Current research is taking place in the north of Edinburgh to establish whether the city itself overlies a large Roman camp; Roman camps were built at Inveresk and Cramond, and it seems likely that there is a camp (given its strategic location) under Edinburgh itself. 189. Traprain is one of the most important sites in Scotland owing to the remarkable high-status Roman objects found and the manufacturing that took place on the site during the entire Roman period. A recent volume has brought together scholars working on the later Roman silver finds and related finds elsewhere: Hunter and Painter 2013. 190. For the most recent work on Roman Wales see Burnham and Davies 2010. 191. Thomas 2010. 192. Hencken 1932, 190. 193. See reports on excavations at Chysauster and Trethurgy; Quinnell 1986; 2004. 194. Quinnell 1986; 1993; 2004; for Magor Villa see O’Neill 1933. 195. Thomas 2010. 196. Ibid. 197. This research is ongoing at the University of Exeter. The reports haven’t yet been published in monograph form, but for an update on the project see the University of Exeter’s website and portal at http://people.exeter.ac.uk/pfclaugh/ mhinf/Roman%20fort%20-%20Tamar%2030.pdf, accessed August 2013. 198. Cassius Dio and Suetonius in particular draw a parallel between those who were successful in both their military and religious role and those who also appeared to have left a positive balance sheet. 199. See Jones and Mattingly 1990 for comprehensive discussion of mining operations in Roman Britain; for details of Egypt see Mattingly 2011, and particularly chapter 7 on mining and metallurgy. 200. The site was excavated over many years by the late Barri Jones; for full details of the site and Roman settlement at Pumsaint see Jones and Mattingly 1990, 180–4. 201. The forum and markets were designed and built by Trajan’s favourite architect, Apollodorus of Damascus, who also

55

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 56

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland designed and built the monumental bridge that spanned the Danube through the Iron Gates and allowed the annexation of Dacia. 202. Some of these may be of late Iron Age manufacture and date but, as explained, one of the ingots from Drumanagh is stamped and is suggestive of a Roman period origin. The earlier research mentioned here was undertaken for doctoral research by Cahill Wilson in 2007. Details of both the examination of the ingot by a Roman specialist in England and the negotiation to purchase it for the princely sum of £25 are available on the topographical files at the NMI. 203. W. O’Brien 1996; 2004; 2007; 2013. 204. Dunabrattin is the English name for the fort, but it is recorded in the Placenames Database of Ireland as ‘Dún na mBreatán, tr. The Fort of the Britons’; see http://www.logainm.ie/Viewer.aspx?text=Dún+na+mBreat an. 205. See Gavin 2013, but see also Warner 1976 on his interpretation of the Roman material in Ireland, including an interesting and detailed discussion on the material from Drumanagh. 206. Annonae is a reference to the goddess Annona and is often used to describe the Roman grain dole distributed to all the citizens and military; it is also used to describe any exchange that took place in terms of foodstuffs rather than a monetary exchange using coins. 207. For details of the difference between the various conscript units see Southern 2007, 259. 208. One of the best reference books on the emergence of these groups is that by C. Kelly (2009), Attila the Hun: barbarian terror and the fall of the Roman Empire; despite its somewhat old-fashioned title, this is a contemporary approach to an individual whose name is instantly recognisable to most people, but whose life, political know-how and brilliant military skills have rarely been explored in detail before this publication. 209. Ammianus Marcellinus, History, 27.8.5; Rance 2001; Freeman 2001; Shotter 2004. 210. In keeping with the points raised earlier about the need for critical assessment of this and other classical histories, Hoffman (2004) has recently questioned whether the Notitia Dignitatum was in fact written later, perhaps in the fifth century, as an idealised ‘wish-list’ of fortifications and garrisons. 211. Jones and Mattingly 1990; Rance 2001; Shotter 2004. 212. See Charles-Edwards 2000; Rance 2001, 249; O’Rahilly 1946, 162; Byrne 1973, 4. 213. For a full discussion on the origin of these see CharlesEdwards 2000, 158–60. 214. Bland 2012. 215. Ibid. 216. Xenia Pauli-Jensen has reviewed and published in this important area; see her important papers from 2009 and 2010 on the military material and its contexts: available online at https://natmus.academia.edu/XeniaPauliJensen, accessed May 2014. 217. ‘Bosol’ is a term used to describe a nose-piece which is commonly used today to train young or difficult horses before they will accept a mouth bit. It can be likened to the hackamore commonly used by rodeo riders and is designed to bring a horse to a stop, holding the reins in both hands. Hyland (1990) refers to these as metal ‘psalions’ rather than

56

using the term ‘bosol’, which is a more modern term from the Spanish or Mexican use in the vaquero tradition. They are perfectly designed to be used by cavalry forces that would need to control the horse with one hand while wielding a weapon in the other. 218. In keeping with all previous approaches to scholarship with regards to these and Warner 1976. 219. We are grateful to the Keeper of Irish Antiquities, Eamonn P. Kelly, for providing us with the opportunity to view some of the material from Drumanagh in June 2012. 220. Robin Bendrey of the University of Reading has published widely on bit wear on horses, but this relates to his recent paper (Bendrey et al. 2013). 221. See Hyland 1990, 138. Hyland is a skilled horsewoman who has spent many years carrying out reconstructions using tack from different periods on her horses. Her detailed assessment of the difference between the curb-bits found at Newstead Roman fort and the ordinary snaffle highlights how vicious the curbs were, but also how effective they would have been. 222. Haworth 1971. 223. McCormick 2002. 224. Raftery 2000. 225. Eckardt and Crummy 2008. 226. Mackreth 2011; Collingwood 1930, 243–61, for his classification of brooches. 227. See Lacey et al. (forthcoming). 228. For Carraig Aille see Ó Ríordáin 1949. For Dooey see Knowles 1893–6; Ó Floinn 1995; Ó Ríordáin and Rynne 1961. For Lagore see Hencken 1950a. For Freestone Hill see Ó Floinn 2000. 229. Details of all the finds in this treasure hoard and digital images are available to browse on the British Museum website. For details see Bland and Johns 1993. 230. Eckardt and Crummy 2008. 231. Woodward and Leach 1993. 232.Viewed by kind permission of Richard Warner in 2004. 233. Woodward and Leach 1993. 234. For catalogue of Roman finds see Bateson 1973; for Ballinderry see Hencken 1942; for Lagore see Hencken 1950a. 235. Ó Floinn 1995; Ó Ríordáin and Rynne 1961. 236. Ó Ríordáin 1949. 237. For Dún Ailinne see Johnston and Wailes 2007. For Loughey see Henderson 1987. 238. Hodkinson 1991; Cahill 1982. 239. Bateson 1973. 240. Ibid. 241. Ibid. 242. Comber 2002. 243. Bayley and Butcher 2004. 244. Warner 2013, 238. 245. Kilbride-Jones 1980; Fowler 1960; Cahill Wilson 2012a; Warner 2013. 246. Mulvin 2012. 247. Carson and O’Kelly 1977. 248. Allason-Jones 2008. 249. Johns 1996; Bayley and Butcher 2004. 250. Johns 1996. 251. Assessed by Hencken in keeping with Kilbride-Jones’s earlier typology for D-shaped glass bangles found in secondcentury contexts at Hadrian’s Wall. 252. Aitchison 1988.

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 57

Romans and Roman material in Ireland: a wider social perspective 253. Reece 2002; Jones and Mattingly 1990; Guest 2008a; 2008b. 254. Wigg-Wolf 1997; Creighton 2009. 255. Our thanks to Cóilín Ó Drisceoil for making us aware of these and sending images through so that they could be dated by the author from both the reverse and mint marks evident on the obverse. 256. Bland 2012; Guest 2008a; 2008b. 257. Guest 2008a; 2008b. 258. Reece 2002, 47–9. 259. Ibid. 260. Bateson 1973, 52. 261. Scarre 1995. 262. Sam Moorhead, National Adviser for Iron Age and Roman Coins, British Museum, pers. comm. (2013). 263. A hoard found at Patching, Sussex, in 1997, however, contained coins dating from the reign of Libius Severus, c. AD 470: Abdy 2002, 64–6. 264. The most recent work on the assessment of hacksilber is Hunter and Painter 2013, a collection of important papers related to the silver found at Traprain Law. The term hacksilber (rather than hacksilver) is preferred as it is a more neutral one. 265. Correctly identified and discussed by Ó Ríordáin (1947), and offered clear parallels for the officinae by Painter (1972). 266. Bland 2012. 267. For Newgrange see Carson and O’Kelly 1977. For recontextualisation of the Golden finds see Daffy 2002, but see Boon 1983 on the context for collyrium stamps in Roman Britain and Gaul, as these run counter to Daffy’s hypothesis; see also Kurzmann 2009, which directly challenges Daffy’s interpretation. Finally, see the latest research in this area in Pérez-Cambrodí et al. 2013, where the authors’ conclusions support the association of the stamps directly with the military in the Roman north. For Freestone Hill see Ó Floinn 2000 and, following Ó Floinn’s research on Freestone Hill, Cahill Wilson 2012a. 268. In keeping with Ó Floinn’s suggestions and research on both of these sites. 269. Cahill Wilson 2012a. 270. See R. Abdy of the British Museum for his various publications on the details of hoards and hoarding in Roman Britain, but for specific references for smaller copper hoards see Abdy 2002. 271. See earlier note on the activity of the British Israelites on the Hill of Tara; see Dolley 1976 for Dolley’s rejection of this hoard, but see Grogan 2008 for its rehabilitation. 272. See Fenwick 2011 for a detailed discussion on the interpolation of the structures used in Grogan; see Cahill Wilson 2012a for a different interpretation which follows Fenwick’s review; see Warner 2013 for a critical assessment of all of the radiocarbon dates and the interpretation of the site and finds. 273. See Cahill Wilson 2012a for a full discussion of this and its importance in terms of understanding the links between these sites and those in the south-west of Roman Britain. 274. Wacher 1997, 386–7. 275. Dark 1993. 276. Rogers 2011. 277. Koch 2006, 524, for a discussion of the relevance across all Celtic peoples of the role of dogs, some spectral, as in the case of Cwn Annwyn (Hounds of Annwyn) or the association with Gwyn ap Nudd/Nodens at Lydney Park

Roman temple site (p. 1359). 278. For discussion of syncretism and interpretatio romana see Cahill Wilson 2012a. 279. Excavations at Lydney Park were undertaken by Sir Mortimer and Lady Tessa Wheeler in the 1920s (Wheeler and Wheeler 1932); for the re-dating of this site by more recent targeted excavations to the middle of the third century AD (with a major refurbishment in the fourth century AD) see Casey et al. 1999; for on-line resources and details of the finds, the history and the translation of the curse tablet and other inscriptions from the site see http://curses.csad.ox.ac.uk. 280. Koch 2006, 754. 281. For a detailed account of these sites in the early Irish literary sources and the important burials at Carbury Hill see Bhreathnach 2014, 135; for details of the dating and isotope analysis conducted on the burials by Cahill Wilson see the entries by E. O’Brien on the on-line and searchable database at www.mapping.deathdb.ie. 282. The Roman temple and shrine at Littledean have only recently been recognised as one of the most important cult centres in Roman Britain. It has been excavated over many years by a group of volunteer community archaeologists supervised by the previous owner of Littledean Hall, who is an amateur archaeologist. They were helped greatly by the interest shown by the late Barri Jones, whose archival material and notes are held at the RCAHMW. 283. Lacey et al. (forthcoming) have explored the link between Lug and Mercury in relation to many of the associations with the Síl Lughdeach in an area of County Donegal that has a cluster of Roman finds. 284. Brown 1989; Wells 2008; Bhreathnach 2014. 285. Ammianus Marcellinus, History, 20.1.1. For a translation see Freeman 2001, 95; for interpretation see Rance 2001. 286. The hereditary nature of the civil role of decurion and ordo created immense pressure on individual families to continue the upkeep and provisioning of civic buildings within the urban centres. It is likely that this was responsible for the earlier move out of urban spaces to country houses, the villas, set within estates that could support the wealthy lifestyles of their owners and which became relatively selfsufficient. 287. The introduction of the limitanei and the comitatenses, as discussed earlier. 288. Jones and Mattingly 1990. 289. See Bhreathnach 2014 for a more nuanced approach to importation and the links to the Christian missions, but see also Ó Carragáin 2010b, 37, for convincing arguments about the likely structure of these early churches. 290. For Dalkey Island see Doyle 1998. For Lambay see Cooney 2009a. For Garranes see Ó Ríordáin 1942. 291. For the most comprehensive classification and interpretation of these finds see Kelly 2010. 292. Bhreathnach 2014. 293. On-line details can be found at the project partner website: http://www.nuigalway.ie/archaeology/Research/Landscape _Archaeology/Comber_Garranes/comber_garranes_index.h tml. 294. Ó Ríordáin 1942, 142. 295. Cahill Wilson 2010; 2012a. 296. Doyle 1998. 297. Shotter 2004, 89–92. Mithraism was popular with the

57

2-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 12:51 Page 58

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland military, probably because of its martial nature and tight levels of hierarchy; depictions of the tauroctony (bull sacrifice) have been found in Roman Britain along with two important temples to Mithras, at the Walbrook in London and at Carrawburgh Roman fort. The cult of Cybele and Attis originated in Turkey, and Attis is often depicted wearing the Phrygian cap. Although no temples are known from Roman Britain, dedicatory plaques and figurines suggest that the cult was popular: interestingly, these come from civilian areas rather than from the military sites, where there is no evidence of the cult. 298. It is tempting to think that Constantine’s epiphany preceding the Battle of the Milvian Bridge in AD 312 led to a replacement of existing cults with that of Christ, but it did not, and coins were struck of Constantine partnered with Sol until AD 325. 299. For a detailed video on the interpretation of the Hinton St Mary mosaic, narrated by Neil McGregor (Director of the British Museum), see http://www.britishmuseum.org/ explore/a_history_of_the_world. 300. Excavations and geophysical survey continue today around the site of Lullingstone Roman villa and a wide body of research has been published on it; see the English Heritage website: www.english-heritage.org.uk. 301. Thomas 1981.

58

302. For its reinterpretation as such see Petts 2003, 57. We do know that these guilds often had little temples in adjacent buildings and, from the time of their earliest conversion, it is likely that members would have continued to meet under the cloak of existing practices; see White 2000; Lambert 2010. 303. Collins 2013. 304. Dark 2000. 305. Bhreathnach 2014, 134, citing the work of Whitfield (2007). 306. Thomas 1981, 216; Petts 2003, 91. 307. Many functional purposes have been proposed for these and a recent paper has challenged past interpretations that related them exclusively to the rite of baptism: see Crerar 2012. 308. See Lambert 2010 for the most recent detailed accounts of the archaeology and texts relating to early Christianity; see also Petts 2003 for a detailed review of the archaeological evidence and the earlier work of Charles Thomas. 309. Ó Carragáin 2010b; this lavishly illustrated volume is essential reading for understanding the development of the Christian church in Ireland, providing a highly detailed reassessment that combines the wide body of historical literature with a detailed survey of the archaeology and the origins of the Christian mission and missionaries from late Roman Britain. 310. Stevenson 1989; Harvey 1987; McManus 1983; Bhreathnach 2014; Johnston 2013.

3-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:06 Page 59

3. GEOPHYSICAL INVESTIGATIONS AT DRUMANAGH AND LOUGHSHINNY, NORTH COUNTY DUBLIN GER DOWLING

Fig. 3.1—Oblique aerial view of Drumanagh promontory fort (photo: Leo Swan Collection; © National Museum of Ireland). The coastal landscape of Drumanagh and Loughshinny, north Co. Dublin, has long been recognised as a key region in the investigation of the late Iron Age in Ireland and is one of the principal areas targeted for geophysical survey as part of the LIARI Project. Located less than 1km to the south of Loughshinny village, roughly midway between the towns of Skerries and Rush, the multivallate promontory fort at Drumanagh (Droim Meánach, ‘the middle ridge’)1 is one of the largest and most impressive monuments of its type in Ireland (Fig. 3.1), and has achieved particular prominence in recent years owing to the discovery there (through illegal metal-detecting) of a substantial corpus of both native and Roman/Romano-British material (see Chapter 2). This material has prompted scholars like Barry

Raftery and others to suggest that Drumanagh was an important entrepôt or trading port connecting the Dublin/Meath region with Roman Britain,2 comparable, perhaps, to sites like Hengistbury Head in Dorset, which served as a gateway for the importation of a range of commodities, including Roman goods, from northern Gaul in the early first century BC.3 Lying within easy reach of Britain, only 100km or so from Anglesey, the north Dublin/Meath region is favoured by an accessible coastline and a network of navigable rivers, most notably the Boyne and the Liffey, whose estuaries lie some 20km to the north-west and south of Drumanagh respectively. These maritime and riverine communication routes are likely to have been important conduits for the exchange of goods and ideas and are of critical importance for understanding 59

3-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:06 Page 60

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland

Fig. 3.2—Lambay and Drumanagh (centre left, with Martello tower), viewed from the summit of Popeshall hill.

developments in this region from early prehistory onwards. Indeed, the wealth of evidence for contact between communities in north Leinster and Britain during the early centuries AD strongly supports an impression of this region as an internationalised zone.4 The distinctive promontory in Drumanagh townland encompasses an area of approximately 13ha and gives way on its landward side to a broad expanse of flat to gently undulating terrain that seldom rises over 50m above sea level (ASL). A low hill (57m ASL) in the townland of Popeshall—hereafter referred to as ‘Popeshall hill’—overlooks Loughshinny and Drumanagh to the north-west and affords spectacular views over the surrounding landscape, especially towards Lambay, to the south-east, and southwards across the Liffey plain (Fig. 3.2). Notwithstanding its low elevation, the hill forms a conspicuous landmark that is visible for some distance offshore (Fig. 3.3) and may have facilitated navigation along this part of the north Dublin coast in the past. Popeshall hill, together with a nearby rise at Ballykea (57m ASL), marks the eastern limit of a string of low hills extending as far west as the Hill of Tara, Co. Meath, and including eminences such as Knockbrack (176m ASL), Garristown (168m ASL), Windmill Hill (120m ASL) and Skreen (172m ASL). All of these hills and the river valleys between them are distinguished by significant archaeological monuments, including large enclosures and 60

prominent burial mounds, and have been suggested by Newman to delineate a routeway connecting Drumanagh and Tara.5 Despite place-name evidence suggesting the former presence of a body of water in the townland of Loughshinny (Loch Sionnaigh, ‘Lake of the Fox’),6 the only notable waterway in the area today is a minor river that flows eastwards from the adjacent townland of Blackland to enter the sea at Brook’s End, a small bay about 500m south of Drumanagh. Flanking the promontory itself are two larger bays, fronted by sandy beaches, the cliffs of which are renowned for their distinctive geomorphology, consisting of highly compressed, zigzag or ‘chevron’ folds in the Lower Carboniferous limestone bedrock.7 The limestone and shale till of Irish Sea provenance that overlies the bedrock in this region has produced well-drained, fertile Grey-Brown Podzolic soils,8 with much of the land around Drumanagh given over to tillage farming today. In addition to its productive soils, this area is rich in deposits of copper ore, with a notable concentration occurring along the coast immediately north of Loughshinny. Some of these deposits were mined in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, including the site known as the ‘Smuggler’s Cave’ (Fig. 3.4), which was dug into the sea cliff in Lane townland, and others along Mine Road between Popeshall

3-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:06 Page 61

Geophysical investigations at Drumanagh and Loughshinny, north County Dublin

Fig. 3.3—View of Popeshall hill from Lambay.

Fig. 3.4—The former copper mine known as ‘Smuggler’s Cave’, Lane townland, Loughshinny. 61

3-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:06 Page 62

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland and Loughshinny.9 The discovery of a large number of whole and partial bun-shaped copper ingots of Roman type at Drumanagh, as well as a similar ingot from Damastown, some 15km to the west, is of particular interest in this context and raises the possibility that copper sources in the Loughshinny area were exploited as early as the late Iron Age.10 As part of the present project, an area adjacent to one of the abandoned copper mines, in Loughshinny townland, was targeted for geophysical survey in order to assess whether the site may have been a focus for earlier activity (see area 5, below). The copper ingot from Damastown is one of a number of late Iron Age finds recorded in the wider Drumanagh area. Others include two second-century AD Roman coins and a sherd of Severn Valley ware discovered in fields surrounding the promontory fort,11 as well as a stone lamp of first- or second-century AD date found on the coast west of Shenick Island, near Skerries.12 As Amanda Kelly has observed, a lively maritime trade in high-status commodities along the Dublin–Meath coast is also implied during the late fifth and early sixth centuries AD by a sherd of Bv ware found in ploughsoil at Drumanagh and other late Roman ceramics from locations such as Gracedieu, Lusk and Lambay.13 Interestingly, two Bii ware sherds from Lusk, which lies only 7km west of Drumanagh, are broadly contemporary with the outer enclosure and one of the burials at the early monastery, a site reputedly founded by Cuinnid mac Cathmoga (St Mac Cuilinn) in the fifth century AD.14 The possibility that the founder saint of Lusk came from Britain,15 as did other early missionaries in Brega,16 is all the more intriguing in view of the potential British origin of one of the individuals buried on Lambay (see Chapter 4), and may serve to further underline the protracted history of this region as a key zone of interaction between the two islands. Drumanagh itself is surrounded by a range of monuments and sites of varying date, including a passage tomb, cist grave and midden in Rush townland,17 all situated on a small headland about 1km south of the fort, and a tower-house, church and holy well a similar distance to the west.18 Just to the north of Drumanagh are the sites of two enclosures of unknown date—one overlooking the bay at Loughshinny and the other on the summit of the rise at Ballykea19—while a series of cropmarks, suggestive of ancient settlement, is recorded in the townland of Blackland, less than 2km north-west of the promontory fort.20 Despite the dearth of upstanding monuments of late prehistoric date in the immediate vicinity of Drumanagh, the above sites serve to highlight 62

the potential for the discovery in this landscape of significant subsurface archaeological remains using noninvasive geophysical techniques and remote sensing.

Geophysical survey In January 2012 the LIARI Project initiated an extensive campaign of geophysical survey in the Drumanagh/Loughshinny area that continued on a phased basis until March 2013. The investigations focused on twelve areas in total—three inside and three surrounding Drumanagh promontory fort, and the remainder in the neighbouring townlands of Popeshall, Thomastown, Lane, Loughshinny and Blackland.21 Apart from the interior of Drumanagh fort, which was the focus of a geophysical survey commissioned by the National Museum of Ireland (NMI) in 1999, none of the survey areas had previously been subject to geophysical prospection. The Discovery Programme is grateful to Eamonn P. Kelly (NMI) and Martina McCarthy (GeoArc Ltd) for generously sharing the results of the NMI survey at Drumanagh prior to publication.

Drumanagh Jutting out into the sea for a distance of roughly 420m, the elevated, relatively flat promontory at Drumanagh is delimited on its landward (western) side by three closely spaced earthen banks, each fronted by a ditch, with traces of a fourth, counterscarp, bank beyond the outer ditch (Fig. 3.5).The inner rampart is by far the most substantial, standing to a height of about 2m above the interior of the site. The defences narrow towards the north, in the area of an overgrown well,22 where the inner bank and ditch and the counterscarp bank converge. The outer banks and ditches exhibit little surface expression on the south, but can be seen to curve inwards slightly on lidar imagery. A small stream emanates from a pond outside the ramparts to flow along the inner ditch and over the cliff edge at the south-western corner of the promontory. A number of gaps occur along the length of the ramparts, one or more of which may represent an original entrance. The only substantial structure inside the fort today is a Martello tower, at the eastern end of the promontory, which was built c. 1804 and later used to combat smuggling along the coast.23 The original approach to the tower survives as a sunken trackway extending from the south-western corner of the fort (Fig. 3.6). Just to

3-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:06 Page 63

Geophysical investigations at Drumanagh and Loughshinny, north County Dublin

Fig. 3.5—Visualisations of lidar data of Drumanagh promontory fort: relief shade model (main image), slope model (top right) and local relief model (bottom right) (lidar data courtesy of Fingal County Council).

Fig. 3.6—View across the interior of Drumanagh promontory fort, from the west. 63

3-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:06 Page 64

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland

Fig. 3.7—Orthoimage of the Drumanagh area, showing location of survey areas 1A–1F. (Aerial imagery © Ordnance Survey of Ireland. All rights reserved. Licence no. EN0059212.)

the east of the tower are the masonry remains of a small piggery, dating from the 1850s.24 Apart from these structures, the most obvious surface features inside the fort are a system of relict field boundaries defined by low earthen banks and ditches, which extend across the northern and southern sides of the promontory. Those on the north are depicted on a watercolour map dating from 181025—when the lands formed part of the Palmer Estate26—which shows the entire promontory divided into tenant plots of one Irish acre (c. 0.66ha). The outlines of some of these small fields are visible on lidar imagery, as are numerous other lowprofile linear and curvilinear features, few of which are readily discernible on the ground. Although many of these features are of historical interest, the circuitous depression seen on lidar imagery extending from the ramparts across the north-western quadrant of the fort interior is a more recent feature, consisting of a rutted track created by motorbikes. The dearth of upstanding archaeological remains inside the promontory fort belies the protracted history of activity indicated by the artefactual record. The 64

unprovenanced nature of the metal-detected finds from Drumanagh, however, and ground disturbance caused by looting continue to present very real obstacles to archaeological research and interpretation. Moreover, while objects of Roman and provincial Roman type dominate the finds assemblage and clearly attest to the importance of the site in the early centuries AD, it has yet to be established whether the multivallate earthworks were constructed during this period or rather date from a different, potentially earlier, phase in the site’s history. Further archaeological work is clearly required to address this and other fundamental questions, and it is hoped that the present investigations by LIARI represent but a first step towards understanding this important site. Survey areas and methodology Six separate areas, comprising approximately 4.7ha in total, were targeted for geophysical survey at Drumanagh as part of the present investigations (Fig. 3.7). Three of these areas, in the northern (area 1A), north-eastern (area 1B) and south-eastern (area 1C)

3-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:06 Page 65

Geophysical investigations at Drumanagh and Loughshinny, north County Dublin sectors of the fort, were selected to investigate a number of potential features mapped by lidar, the layout of which is suggestive of square/rectangular structures. Area 1D was positioned to encompass a section of the outer ramparts and the lands immediately outside the fort on the south-west, while area 1E, some 20m further south, and area 1F, approximately 170m to the west of the fort, served to broaden the investigation of the surrounding area. The gradiometer survey in areas 1A–1D was conducted using 0.25m sample and 0.5m traverse intervals, amounting to 3,200 readings per 20m x 20m grid panel, while a 0.25m x 1m spacing was utilised in areas 1E and 1F. Detailed electrical resistance survey (0.5m x 0.5m sampling interval) was also undertaken across portions of areas 1B and 1C in order to bring greater clarity to some of the archaeological features recorded by gradiometry. Overview of survey results The magnetic surveys inside the promontory fort are at four times the resolution of the survey undertaken in 1999, which employed a 0.5m x 1m sampling interval (i.e. 800 readings per 20m x 20m panel).This higher sampling density, together with detailed resistance survey, has brought greater resolution to the geophysical anomalies previously recorded and has also revealed additional features of archaeological interest in all of the areas investigated (Figs 3.8–3.23).The gradiometer results from the interior of the fort present a very complex picture, however, with the cumulative effects of multi-period occupation, agricultural practices and other more recent ground disturbance resulting in a dense and confusing array of anomalies in each of the survey areas. The multitude of anomalies recorded in areas 1D–1F suggest a similarly protracted history of activity outside the fort. In order to avoid repetition, a summary of the main anomaly types is provided prior to discussing the principal features of archaeological interest in each of the survey areas. Anomalies of uncertain archaeological significance Discrete, ‘pit-type’ responses account for a large proportion of the anomalies recorded both inside and outside the fort. Anomalies of this type are generally regarded as being of archaeological potential, though in the absence of supporting evidence such an interpretation is tentative; some may have a modern (e.g. agricultural) origin or reflect natural variations in the underlying geology/soils. Less coherent spreads or deposits of magnetically enhanced soils, which register as positive amorphous or sinuous responses in the gradiometer data, might also be of archaeological signifi-

cance, but could equally have a modern/agricultural or natural origin. The numerous discrete, small-scale dipolar (positive/negative) responses recorded across the survey areas are indicative of ferrous debris in the topsoil, which is commonly assigned a modern origin (e.g. nails, bottle-caps, etc.). In view of the extensive ground disturbance at the site, however, it is likely that the range of material represented by the ferrous responses also includes objects of archaeological significance. Given the large number and uncertain significance of many of the above anomalies, only those that contribute directly to the archaeological interpretation of the data are discussed below and shown on the interpretive images. Field boundaries and cultivation Some of the linear responses recorded by the surveys in areas 1A and 1B (see Figs 3.9–3.13) can be equated with field divisions and cultivation of postmedieval to modern date. Strong negative magnetic and varying high/low-resistance values were recorded over the shallow ditches (G1/R1) of the derelict (pre1810) field system that extends across this part of the promontory, while their accompanying earthen banks produced more diffuse, enhanced magnetic/highresistance responses (G2/R2). Ploughing associated with several different episodes of cultivation is also apparent as a series of parallel, negative magnetic/lowresistance trends of varying orientation, some of which overlap. Those in areas 1A and 1B appear to be later than the above field system, as the north/south pattern of cultivation in area 1B seems to run across ditch G1/R1, while the direction of the other plough trends bears no direct relationship to the field boundaries. In area 1C, the cultivation pattern (which is particularly well defined in the resistance data; see Fig. 3.17) follows a north-west/south-east alignment and clearly overlies an array of linear, rectilinear and arcuate features, described below, elements of which were mapped by lidar survey. Despite area 1F’s being deeply ploughed at the time of the survey, the gradiometer data show only faint traces of the extant furrows, which run east/west and can be seen to overlap with another faint pattern of plough trends, running north-west/south-east (see Figs 3.22–3.23, below). Trackways The sunken roadway leading to the Martello tower is represented by a broad, negative magnetic band flanked by positive linears (G3) in the south-eastern quadrant of area 1B (see Figs 3.10–3.11). The signa65

3-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:06 Page 66

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland ture of this feature suggests that it consists of a stony or paved surface, about 6m wide, bounded on either side by a ditch. A pair of shallow linear depressions mapped by lidar approximately 70m north of, and running parallel to, the approach to the Martello tower was also recorded by magnetic survey in areas 1A and 1B (see Figs 3.8–3.11). These register as parallel negative lineations (G4), 2m in average width and spaced 10m apart, and are likely to represent ditches containing stone or, alternatively, a soil infill that is less magnetic than the surrounding matrix. Though possibly comprising field/drainage ditches, the fact that they extend from a break in the ramparts to the north-eastern edge of the promontory, where the shore is most easily accessible, suggests that they could equally delimit a trackway. It may be inferred from topographical and, to a lesser extent, geophysical evidence that G4 pre-dates field bank G2 and is therefore of some antiquity. Other archaeological anomalies AREA 1A (Figs 3.8–3.9) Alongside the anomalies described above, other features of archaeological or potential archaeological significance were identified in all of the areas investigated. Area 1A contains some of the most clearly

defined examples, the most striking of which is a large, D-shaped enclosure (G5) measuring about 43m north-west/south-east by 26m north-east/south-west. Its positive magnetic signature suggests that it is defined by a ditch, the footprint of which is difficult to distinguish in places but generally varies from 1m to 3m in width. A faint, positive circular anomaly (G6), containing a number of small ‘pit-type’ responses along its circuit, is centrally located in the southern half of the enclosure and may represent an associated building/structure c. 12m in diameter. A range of ‘pittype’ responses and less coherent arcuate and amorphous anomalies occur in its vicinity, some of which appear to overlap with enclosure G5. A more prominent, rectilinear anomaly of positive magnetic gradient (G7), at the eastern edge of the survey area, could represent the infilled ditch of a rectangular enclosure measuring about 30m in length north/south. The reduced strength and fragmentary nature of the responses recorded over the northern half of G7, where it overlaps with G4, raises the possibility that it pre-dates the latter feature. A range of faint anomalies of circular and arcuate form are also discernible in the data and are likely to denote the remains of less substantial structures and features that have been truncated by ploughing. Some are suggestive of buildings and/or small enclosures

Fig. 3.8—Area 1A (Drumanagh): greyscale image of gradiometry results. 66

3-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:06 Page 67

Geophysical investigations at Drumanagh and Loughshinny, north County Dublin

Fig. 3.9—Area 1A (Drumanagh): interpretative plan showing principal geophysical anomalies.

(e.g. G8 and G9), while others may be ring-ditches (e.g. G10). Several examples appear to contain internal features, and one of the largest, G8 (c. 17m in diameter), is also surrounded by an array of large ‘pit-type’ anomalies, some of which appear to form regularly spaced arcuate or linear patterns; similar anomalies occur in and around enclosure G5. These include some strong responses (e.g. G11 and G12) that are suggestive of burnt/fired material, such as might be associated with hearth- or oven-type archaeological features. This group of anomalies corresponds spatially with a conspicuous feature mapped by lidar, the rectangular morphology of which is at odds with the geophysical evidence and may be attributable to the coarse resolution (2m spacing) of the topographical data. 1B (Figs 3.10–3.13) The gradiometer results from area 1B are somewhat confusing owing to widespread, low-level variations associated with an array of amorphous positive/negative responses and more discrete pit-type anomalies, which are particularly notable in the area adjacent to the roadway (G4) leading to the Martello tower.These responses, coupled with the overprint of modern cultivation, have the effect of masking more subtle anomalies of archaeological interest. Despite this, two small circular features are clearly visible in the gradiometer data, both of which are defined by positive, ditch-type responses. The larger AREA

example (G13), c. 15m in diameter, is truncated by field ditch G1, while the other (G14) is more fragmentary and has a well-defined pit-type anomaly at its centre. The magnetic signature of these features suggests that they may represent the remains of large timber buildings (e.g. roundhouses) or, alternatively, ring-ditches. Neither of these anomalies is readily discernible in the resistance survey (Figs 3.12–3.13); the latter, however, did reveal possible traces of two additional small circular features (R3 and R4) which broadly correspond with faint arcuate anomalies in the gradiometer data. Close scrutiny of the magnetic data also hints at the presence of other circular anomalies, though in the absence of supporting evidence their interpretation as archaeological features is tentative. Three separate, and more extensive, positive arcuate and curvilinear anomalies were identified by gradiometer survey near the western (G15), south-western (G16) and eastern (G17) limits of area 1B; one of these (G17) corresponds with a band of reduced values (R5) in the resistance data. The width of these anomalies is suggestive of narrow trenches (rather than substantial ditches) and they may be indicative of larger enclosures (c. 20m to >35m in diameter) that extend beyond the survey area. A broad, discontinuous arc of high-resistance values (R6) near the centre of the survey area is also of potential interest. The eastern segment of this anomaly corresponds with a low-relief surface feature on lidar imagery and roughly coincides with a band of 67

3-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:06 Page 68

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland

Fig. 3.10—Area 1B (Drumanagh): greyscale image of gradiometry results.

Fig. 3.11—Area 1B (Drumanagh): interpretative plan showing principal geophysical anomalies. Area of electrical resistance survey highlighted in yellow. 68

3-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:06 Page 69

Geophysical investigations at Drumanagh and Loughshinny, north County Dublin

Fig. 3.12—Area 1B (Drumanagh): greyscale image of resistance data.

Fig. 3.13—Area 1B (Drumanagh): interpretative plan of resistance data.

amorphous positive magnetic responses (G18), which peters out to a barely visible trend on the south. Together, these may denote the footings of a wall or bank, with an associated build-up of magnetically enhanced soils around it. While the curvilinear form of R6 is suggestive of an enclosure, its limited definition in the gradiometer and lidar surveys makes interpretation difficult. It should be noted that none of the magnetic or resistance responses identified in area 1B can be equated with the rectangular feature visible at the approximate centre of the survey area on lidar imagery. This suggests that the latter comprises a relatively superficial surface feature (whose geophysical properties are similar to those of the surrounding matrix) or is simply an artefact of data-processing.

AREA

1C (Figs 3.14–3.17)

The survey in area 1C was undertaken to investigate a series of low-relief features mapped by lidar to the south of the Martello tower, the most prominent of which appear to describe a roughly square enclosure with internal subdivisions. The topographical evidence suggests that this putative enclosure has been incorporated into (or forms part of) a broader network of linear features that may reflect multiple phases of field division and land use. A broad, curving ditch with traces of an inner bank, which cuts off the south-eastern tip of the headland, is suggested by lidar to underlie the enclosure and could conceivably represent a smaller promontory fort inside the multivallate fort. The presence of a rectilinear enclosure in this area was confirmed by geophysical survey, the resistance responses being far better defined than those evidenced in the gradiometer data, the overall pattern 69

3-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:06 Page 70

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland

Fig. 3.14—Area 1C (Drumanagh): greyscale image of gradiometry results.

Fig. 3.15—Area 1C (Drumanagh): interpretative plan showing principal geophysical anomalies. Area of electrical resistance survey highlighted in yellow. 70

3-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:06 Page 71

Geophysical investigations at Drumanagh and Loughshinny, north County Dublin

Fig. 3.16—Area 1C (Drumanagh): greyscale image of resistance data.

Fig. 3.17—Area 1C (Drumanagh): interpretative plan of resistance data. 71

3-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:06 Page 72

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland

Fig. 3.18—Area 1D (Drumanagh): greyscale image of gradiometry results.

of which is confusing. The high-resistance values recorded for the enclosure (R7) define an area measuring approximately 36m north/south by 33m east/west, and correspond, on the west and south, with weak, negative magnetic linears (G19). Such responses would be consistent with the footings of a stone wall or earth and stone bank, with variations in the width (1–4.5m) and clarity of the enclosure boundary possibly reflecting differing degrees of preservation. Similar (high-resistance/negative magnetic) responses were produced by the linear features (e.g. G20) that join the enclosure, many of which are likely to be old field boundaries. On the other hand, a discontinuous arc of high-resistance responses (R8) directly to the north of R7 could reflect a continuation of the enclosure, though this is highly tentative. The more diffuse (high-) resistance responses recorded over the northern and south-eastern sectors 72

of R7 broadly coincide with positive magnetic linears (G21 and G22), which may represent narrow ditches/trenches or an accumulation of magnetically enhanced soils on and around the enclosure boundary. A short positive magnetic linear (G23) and a corresponding high-resistance linear (R9), to its south, extend at right angles from the eastern boundary into the enclosure and are suggestive of some form of internal subdivision. Just to the west is a somewhat irregular circular band of high resistance (R10), some 15m in diameter, which may denote the buried remains of a relatively intact stone structure or building, the circuit of which coincides, or overlaps, with the line of the enclosure on the west, and possibly also on the north. A roughly subrectangular zone of highresistance values (R11) in the south-eastern quadrant of the enclosure is also of interest, as it possibly represents the denuded/collapsed remains of another stone

3-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:06 Page 73

Geophysical investigations at Drumanagh and Loughshinny, north County Dublin

Fig. 3.19—Area 1D (Drumanagh): interpretative plan showing principal geophysical anomalies. structure or a compact/stone surface of some kind. It is traversed by a narrow high-resistance linear (R12), the line of which is continued by a negative magnetic trend (G24) that extends beyond the eastern limit of the survey area.The significance of this latter anomaly is uncertain; it may be archaeological in origin but could equally reflect a modern field drain. No definitive responses corresponding with R10 and R11 were identified by the gradiometer survey, nor do the numerous ‘pit-type’ anomalies and more amorphous positive responses recorded in area 1C form any coherent archaeological patterns, though the strength of some examples does suggest the likely presence of associated burnt material. A greater degree of confidence surrounds the interpretation of a circular, positive-negative-positive magnetic anomaly (G25) in the south-eastern quadrant of the survey area: it corresponds with a low mound and is likely to

describe a small barrow with outer ditch (c. 13m in diameter). Unfortunately, the survey failed to clarify the relationship between the rectilinear enclosure and the curving bank and ditch shown by lidar to enclose the south-eastern tip of the promontory; apart from a broad band of negative magnetic values (G26) in the north-eastern quadrant of area 1C, which clearly marks the line of the bank, no traces of this feature were identified. 1D (Figs 3.18–3.19) Area 1D was positioned to investigate a section of the outer ramparts and the lands adjacent to the promontory fort on the south and encompasses an area of c. 1ha (maximum dimensions 120m north/south by 100m east/west). A tree-lined earthen bank—marking the townland boundary between Drumanagh and AREA

73

3-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:06 Page 74

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland Ballustree—delimits the survey area on the west, while a derelict building lies just to the south, next to the modern site entrance. Apart from magnetic disturbance and a wide scatter of ferrous litter in the area of the adjacent building, the survey in this area yielded very interesting results.The two outer ditches of the fort and intervening rampart appear as broad, contiguous bands of positive-negative-positive magnetic gradient (G1), while the negative magnetic band flanking the line of the outer ditch suggests a continuation of the counterscarp bank, which exhibits no surface expression in this area. These responses are less clearly defined on the south and north, where gaps in the inner rampart provide the principal modern entrances to the fort; that on the south gives way to the Martello tower roadway, while the northern approach is defined by a trackway which registers as a diffuse band of positive responses. By far the most significant feature identified outside the fort is a large, roughly oval enclosure (G2) defined by a positive ditch-type response, which has maximum dimensions of approximately 42m east/west by 30m north/south. The width of this anomaly (c. 0.5–2m) is suggestive of a narrow ditch or palisade trench, with the strong responses (up to 15nT) recorded over its eastern half indicating the likely presence of burnt material in its fill. Two welldefined breaks, each c. 5m in width, occur on the north-eastern and south-eastern sides of the enclosure and may reflect original entrances; that on the northeast appears to be flanked by pit-type features, possibly post-pits, and is roughly aligned on one of the gaps in the fort ramparts, though this may be fortuitous. The significance of several short positive lineations (G3) just outside, and running parallel to, G2 on the west and north is uncertain, but may denote an ancillary ditch (or ditches). With the exception of a few small ‘pit-type’ responses and faint curvilinear trends, no anomalies of archaeological interest were identified inside the enclosure. A broad negative magnetic lineation (G4) extending north/south in the area between the fort and G2 corresponds with a low-profile feature visible on lidar imagery.27 It extends from the small, shallow pond adjacent to the ramparts to a derelict gate in the field boundary on the south and possibly represents an old trackway or field boundary. A number of ‘pit-type’ responses and ill-defined positive anomalies in its vicinity may be of archaeological origin, but their indistinct character precludes any meaningful interpretation.

74

Fig. 3.20—Area 1E (Rush): greyscale image of gradiometry results.

AREA

1E (Figs 3.20–3.21)

One of the few fields outside the fort not under crop at the time of the survey was a flat, narrow strip of land beside the sea just to the south of the fort in Rush townland. Unfortunately, the investigations here were restricted by the Bord Gáis interconnector gas pipeline, constructed in the early 1990s, which comes ashore at the approximate centre of the field and extends north-westwards to a landfall station in Ballustree townland (see area 1F, below). No information is available on whether any features of archaeological significance were identified during the construction of the pipeline.28 The gradiometer survey was limited to two small

3-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:06 Page 75

Geophysical investigations at Drumanagh and Loughshinny, north County Dublin 1F (Figs 3.22–3.23) Area 1F lies at the eastern end of a large, roughly rectangular field, 170m west of the fort, and has maximum dimensions of 120m north/south by 100m east/west (total area c. 1.2ha). The lands here are regularly under crop and were deeply furrowed at the time of the survey, which hindered walking and contributed to instrument noise. Magnetic disturbance at the south-western corner of the survey area is associated with the landfall station for the Bord Gáis pipeline, which lies some 30m to the south. The survey results from area 1F are dominated by a dense scatter of ferrous and ‘pit-type’ responses. Given extensive ground disturbance, it is likely that many of the ‘pit-type’ anomalies are the result of soil variations and/or agricultural disturbance, though an archaeological source for some cannot be ruled out. Several very faint positive circular and linear trends hint at the potential presence of disturbed archaeological features in this area; these are barely perceptible above the ‘background’ levels, however, and their identification is highly tentative. AREA

Loughshinny area

Fig. 3.21—Area 1E (Rush): interpretative plan showing principal geophysical anomalies.

areas, spaced 80m apart, at the northern (48m north/south by 40m east/west) and southern (20m north/south by 50m east/west) ends of the field (total c. 0.25ha). Magnetic disturbance associated with the pipeline was encountered in both survey areas, and the results are further compromised by a wide scatter of near-surface ferrous debris. Several weak positive/negative linear responses were also recorded; these are ill defined, however, and analysis is hindered by the small scale of the survey. The only other anomaly of note is a faint, positive magnetic arc associated with a number of small ‘pit-type’ responses in the northern part of the survey area, the archaeological significance of which is likewise uncertain.

Geophysical survey was also undertaken at six other locations to the north and west of Loughshinny village, all of which lie within 2km of Drumanagh (Fig. 3.24). The investigations, comprising magnetic gradiometry, were conducted in the townlands of Popeshall, Thomastown, Lane, Loughshinny and Blackland and encompass a combined area of approximately 10.2ha. The summit of the hill in Popeshall townland (area 2) was identified as an area of high archaeological potential and provided an opportunity to assess whether elevated locations in the vicinity of Drumanagh were the focus of prehistoric, and possibly Iron Age, activity. Areas 3 and 4, in the townlands of Thomastown and Lane respectively, were targeted to investigate a series of cropmarks identified on satellite imagery that were suspected to relate to subsurface archaeological features. Moreover, given the possibility that some of the copper sources in the Loughshinny area were worked in antiquity, it was also deemed worthwhile to investigate the lands lying adjacent to one of the abandoned mines beside Mine Road (area 5), where associated archaeological features might be present. In order to broaden the investigation to include other sites of known archaeological potential in the wider landscape, two adjacent fields (areas 6 and 7) in the townland of Blackland, about 1km to the 75

3-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:06 Page 76

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland

Fig. 3.22—Area 1F (Ballustree): greyscale image of gradiometry results.

Fig. 3.23—Area 1F (Ballustree): interpretative plan showing principal geophysical anomalies.

west of Loughshinny village, were also selected for survey. Area 6 is the location of an interesting array of circular, linear and arc-shaped cropmarks suggestive of an ancient settlement, while a large circular cropmark—identified on aerial imagery during preliminary research for the project—lies in the field to the east (area 7). All of the areas were investigated using a 0.25m x 1m sampling interval, while more detailed survey (0.25m x 0.5m) was subsequently undertaken in area 3, where the initial survey revealed a significant concentration of archaeological features.

topped by hedges and trees, while to the south the land descends gently towards Mine Road. A large quarry (see Fig. 3.25) in the western part of the survey area may have been excavated in recent centuries to supply a nearby limekiln,29 which is marked on the first- and second-edition Ordnance Survey maps and lies just outside the survey area to the north-west. It is worth noting that the ‘mottled’ appearance of the survey data from area 2 suggests that the limestone bedrock may lie close to the surface in places, as magnetic fluctuations of this sort typically reflect variations in the depth and composition of the underlying geology and soils. While many of the irregular, sinuous responses and amorphous areas of magnetic variation are probably natural in origin, a significant number of features of archaeological interest were also revealed by the survey in this area. The most striking are four small, circular enclosures (G1–G4) defined by positive magnetic bands of annular or penannular form, which vary from about 8m to 15m in diameter. The relatively broad width of these anomalies (1–2m), together with a general lack of evidence for internal features such as post-pits or hearths, indicates that they are likely to be

Area 2, Popeshall townland (Figs 3.25–3.27) The first area targeted for investigation around Loughshinny (area 2) lies on the summit and upper south-facing slope of Popeshall hill. The survey was conducted over a large, irregularly shaped grid with maximum dimensions of 240m north/south by 120m east/west (total area c. 2.4ha), encompassing the northern portions of two large, roughly rectangular fields, which are separated by a wire fence that bisects the survey area from north to south. Both fields are currently under pasture. Bounding the survey area on the north, east and west are a series of earthen banks 76

3-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:06 Page 77

Geophysical investigations at Drumanagh and Loughshinny, north County Dublin HACKETSTOWN

´

HOLMPATRICK BALLYHAVIL PIERCETOWN

LANE AREA 4

DRUMLATTERY

AREA 2

DELLABROWN

POPESHALL

Fig. 3.24—Orthoimage of the Loughshinny area, showing location of survey areas 2–6 outlined in red. (Aerial imagery © Ordnance Survey of Ireland. All rights reserved. Licence no. EN0059212.)

LOUGHSHINNY AREA 3 THOMASTOWN

BALLYKEA

AREA 5

BALLYKEA (PART OF)

BLACKLAND

CARNHILL

AREA 6

BALLUSTREE

AREA 7 DRUMANAGH

RUSH DEMESNE RUSH

500m

Fig. 3.25—View of the former quarry on the summit of Popeshall hill, from the south. 77

3-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:06 Page 78

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland

Fig. 3.26—Area 2 (Popeshall): greyscale image of gradiometry results.

Fig. 3.27—Area 2 (Popeshall): interpretative plan showing principal geophysical anomalies. 78

3-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:06 Page 79

Geophysical investigations at Drumanagh and Loughshinny, north County Dublin ring-ditches (i.e. funerary monuments) rather than the foundation trenches of roundhouses. Unfortunately, the two westernmost examples (G1 and G2) have been partly truncated by the quarry, which has cut away all the land between them to a depth of approximately 5m. The largest of the two (G1), on the southern side of the quarry, measures about 15m in diameter and is associated with several ‘pit-type’ responses—one at its approximate centre and a few others along the line of the ditch—which could conceivably mark the location of cremation burials or other ritual deposits. The northern ring-ditch (G2), at approximately 8m in diameter, is more modest in size and, unlike G1, which appears to have no entrance, has a well-defined gap on the west. One of the ring-ditches in the eastern field (G3) displays a particularly strong magnetic signature (up to 16nT) that attests to the presence of a significant volume of enhanced magnetic (probably burnt) material in its fill. The most unusual of the ring-ditches, however, lies some 15m to its south and is defined by two concentric annular ditches measuring 6m and 11m in diameter respectively (G4). The distinctive, double-ditched morphology of this feature indicates it to be a ‘double ringditch’, a relatively rare type of late prehistoric burial monument, several of which have been excavated in recent years (see discussion below). It is possible that some of the ‘pit-type’ features recorded in the vicinity of G4 and the other ring-ditches are also archaeological in origin, although a modern, or indeed geological, source for these anomalies cannot be ruled out. Traces of two further possible circular features were also noted in the eastern field, both of which overlap with the edges of the survey area. The smaller of the two, at the north-west, appears as a semicircular band of enhanced magnetic values (G5) and may represent the partial outline of yet another ring-ditch, with a diameter of about 7m.The second example (G6) straddles the eastern edge of the survey and registers as a faint, semicircular anomaly with suggestions of a gap on the west. In contrast to the ring-ditches, its boundary is quite narrow, suggesting that it is perhaps more likely to denote the foundation trench of a circular structure measuring approximately 16m in diameter. Some of the other linear and curvilinear anomalies revealed by the survey are also of potential archaeological interest. Three positive magnetic lineations (G7, G8 and G9), possibly representing the remains of a single, extensive ditch which has been truncated by the quarry, curve from south-west to east across the northern half of the survey area.This feature bears no surface expression, nor does it correspond in

any way to the modern field layout, and the fact that it appears to terminate at the north-western ringditch (G2) suggests that it might be of some antiquity; it could represent an ancient field boundary, for example. Another feature which is perhaps more clearly indicative of past agricultural activity is a positive magnetic, L-shaped anomaly (G10) in the eastern part of the survey area that probably marks the partial outline of a large rectangular field. Faint traces of a possible continuation of its western boundary were recorded just to the north and may delimit a second field. While no field boundaries are recorded in this location on Ordnance Survey maps, the rectilinear layout of these features suggests that they are unlikely to be more than a few centuries old. This is perhaps corroborated by the similar (north-east/south-west) alignment of the fossil cultivation pattern in this field, which, although difficult to discern in places owing to its faint (negative) magnetic expression, appears to overlie G10. A faint, and more slender, positive magnetic lineation (G11), which may likewise be agricultural in origin, traverses the southern part of the survey area, extending from west to east for about 150m before turning to the south. Area 3, Thomastown townland (Figs 3.28–3.30) Significant results were also obtained in area 3, which lies some 200m to the south-west of area 2, at the base of Popeshall hill. The survey in area 3 was undertaken over a relatively flat, wedge-shaped field of pasture delimited on all sides by a combination of hedges, trees and wire fencing, with maximum dimensions of 140m north/south by 140m east/west (total area c. 1.3ha). A small pond and north-flowing stream, possibly fed by a natural spring, occupy the north-western corner of the field, while the remains of an old building lie in the adjacent field to the east. Following the discovery of a multitude of significant archaeological features in the western half of the field, a 100m by 80m area was resurveyed at a higher resolution (0.25m x 0.5m) to map these features in greater detail (see Fig. 3.30). Dominant among the many archaeological features revealed in this area are a series of enclosures of varying size and form, all of which appear to underlie the imprint of cultivation that extends roughly north/south across area 3. The layout of these features and the fact that some of them overlap clearly testify to multiple phases of activity at the site. One of the most clearly defined features is a large circular enclosure (G1) evidenced as a band of positive magnetic gradient measuring some 2m in width and 40m in maximum diameter.The magnetic signature of 79

3-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:06 Page 80

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland

Fig. 3.28—Area 3 (Thomastown): greyscale image of gradiometry results (0.25m by 1m spacing).

Fig. 3.29—Area 3 (Thomastown): interpretative plan showing principal geophysical anomalies. 80

3-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:06 Page 81

Geophysical investigations at Drumanagh and Loughshinny, north County Dublin

Fig. 3.30—Area 3 (Thomastown): greyscale image of gradiometry results (0.25m by 0.5m spacing).

this feature is suggestive of an infilled ditch, while a faint, discontinuous ring of negative magnetic responses just inside it may hint at the former presence of a bank; if so, it raises the possibility that the enclosure is a ploughed-out ringfort. Apart from a potential gap on the south, where the enclosure is less clearly defined, no trace of an entrance was identified by the survey. A number of ‘pit-type’ responses were recorded in its interior, as were a range of other weaker anomalies of varying form. Of the latter anomalies, one of the more interesting is located in the north-western quadrant of the enclosure and registers as a slender, weakly enhanced magnetic band of subrectangular plan measuring approximately 10m north-east/south-west by 5m north-west/south-east. This feature (G2), though relatively ill defined, could comprise the foundation trench of a timber building, possibly a house. While it is possible that this structure, as well as some of the surrounding ‘pit-type’ anomalies, may be broadly contemporary with the enclosure, several other, equally slender, linear and arcuate anomalies recorded in this area appear to underlie, and therefore pre-date, the enclosure. These latter anomalies form part of a complex array of ephemeral—and, in some cases,

overlapping—features (e.g. G3 and G4) that extend beyond the limits of the survey on the west. Although the full extent and significance of these features remain uncertain, they are clearly of archaeological potential, perhaps representing a sequence of structures and enclosures associated with settlement and related agricultural activities. A greater degree of confidence surrounds the interpretation of two well-defined circular features (G5 and G6), which are likely to be ring-ditches, lying immediately to the north-west of the enclosure (G1). Defined in each case by a relatively broad band of positive magnetic values measuring roughly 1m in width and 8m in diameter, these features lie less than 5m apart and are virtually identical to some of the ringditches identified on the summit of the hill (area 2). A 2m-wide gap, apparently marking the position of an entrance, is clearly evident in the line of G5 on the west/south-west, while vague suggestions of a narrower gap can be discerned on the eastern side of G6. Significantly, the survey results also provide some potential insights into the relative chronology of the features in this area, as the western side of the enclosure (G1) appears to deviate from its usual elliptical course to accommodate the eastern ring-ditch (G5). This indicates that the enclosure is likely to be later in date than G5, and probably also G6, as the close proximity and similarity of the two ring-ditches suggest that they may be broadly contemporary. The north-western quadrant of the survey area is dominated by a series of subrectangular and linear features, seemingly representing one or more field systems delimited by ditches. The partial outlines of at least three enclosures were recorded, all of which appear to extend beyond the limits of the survey to the west, towards the adjacent pond and stream noted above. The largest enclosure (G7), on the south, is characterised by a slightly curving eastern boundary and a rounded corner on the south-east, which extends to within a few metres of one of the ring-ditches. Inside and roughly concentric with G7, at a distance of 11–14m, is a second rectilinear enclosure (G8), with a 4m-wide gap on the south-east and a large ‘pit-type’ anomaly at its approximate centre. Adjoining, or possibly overlapping with, G7 and G8 on the north is a third, subrectangular, enclosure (G9) with maximum dimensions of 29m north-west/south-east by 17m north-east/south-west. This enclosure appears to be open to the west but is defined on all other sides by a broad band of strong magnetic responses (up to 25nT), indicating the presence of substantial quantities of burnt or fired material. It is unclear whether the north-east/south-west lineations within the enclosure 81

3-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:06 Page 82

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland

Fig. 3.31—Area 4 (Lane): annotated greyscale image of gradiometry results.

represent internal subdivisions or, alternatively, are continuations of the eastern boundaries of G7 and G8 and relate to an earlier phase of field division. While it is quite possible that this ancient field system (or systems) and the large circular enclosure (G1) represent elements of a single farming settlement, the survey results clearly show that not all of the structures and features in this area are contemporary. Indeed, although some of the features described above (e.g. G3, G4 and G5) appear to pre-date the circular enclosure, others may be associated with later activity. Two faint lineations extending across the centre and south of the survey area (G10 and G11), for instance, run parallel to the existing field boundaries and possibly represent an intermediate phase of land division between the ancient and modern field systems. Some of the other faint linear and arcuate anomalies and ‘pit-type’ responses recorded by the survey hint at the existence of additional archaeological structures and features associated with one or other phases of activity at the site.

82

Fig. 3.32—Area 5 (Loughshinny): greyscale image of gradiometry results.

Area 4, Lane townland (Fig. 3.31) Area 4 comprises the western part of a large, rectangular field beside the sea at the foot of Popeshall hill, in Lane townland. The field, which has been extensively ploughed in recent years, slopes gently from south to north and is delimited on all sides by low earthen banks and hedges. The gradiometer survey was undertaken over a subrectangular grid with maximum dimensions of 160m north/south by 100m

3-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:06 Page 83

Geophysical investigations at Drumanagh and Loughshinny, north County Dublin

Fig. 3.33— Orthoimage of area 6 (Blackland), showing cropmarks (RMP DU008-052), with survey area outlined in red (aerial photograph © 2014 Nokia; © 2014 Microsoft Corporation).

east/west that covers an area of approximately 1.4ha. Although several curvilinear cropmarks are visible in the western part of this field on aerial photographs, the survey revealed no obvious features of archaeological significance in area 4. Indeed, apart from a linear pattern of cultivation trends (running north-west/south-east) and a number of relict field boundaries (G1–G3)—all of which are likely to be of comparatively modern date—the dominant magnetic variations recorded in this area appear as an incoherent array of amorphous, sinuous and ‘pit-type’ anomalies. In general, these fluctuations can be attributed to natural variations in the underlying geology and soils, augmented, perhaps, by the redistribution of soils through ploughing. Nevertheless, the possibility that some of the discrete anomalies within this group are anthropogenic (archaeological or modern) in origin cannot be excluded. Area 5, Loughshinny townland (Fig. 3.32) The survey in area 5 was conducted over a large rectangular field in Loughshinny townland and has maximum dimensions of 220m north/south by 100m east/west (total area 1.7ha). An old copper mine and several associated buildings and structures are shown in the northern part of this field on both the first- and second-edition Ordnance Survey maps. Although no trace of any of these features is visible today, a series of overgrown, irregular earthen banks in this area could represent upcast from former mining activities. The field, which slopes gently from north to south, has been intensively cultivated in recent years and was

deeply furrowed at the time of the survey. Apart from a dense scatter of ferrous responses of probable recent origin, most of the anomalies recorded by the survey in area 5 appear to relate to modern agricultural activities. A faint pattern of cultivation trends, defined by a series of slightly sinuous, parallel lineations extending from east to west across the northern part of the survey area, runs at right angles to the modern plough furrows and attests to an earlier phase of tillage farming at the site. Two faint parallel bands, running north-east/south-west, in the south-eastern quadrant of the survey area correspond with the line of a field boundary shown on the firstedition Ordnance Survey map and are therefore also likely to be of relatively modern date. A range of other ‘pit-type’ and amorphous responses were also recorded by the survey, which could either be natural in origin or relate to ground disturbance associated with agricultural, or perhaps industrial (mining?), activities. Areas 6 and 7, Blackland townland Two adjoining fields in the townland of Blackland, just to the west of Loughshinny village, were targeted for gradiometry survey to investigate a series of cropmarks identified on aerial photographs. The fields are located on the gentle, south-facing slope of a low ridge (50m ASL) that extends eastwards towards Loughshinny and as far west as Mallahow townland. The land falls away gradually to the south, where the fields are delimited by a substantial ditch, shown on the first-edition Ordnance Survey map. This ditch was dug, possibly in the early nineteenth century, to chan83

3-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:06 Page 84

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland nel a minor river that flows into the sea at Brook’s End Bay. The greatest concentration of cropmarks is located in the western field (area 6) and appears as a complex of enclosures of varying size and shape (Fig. 3.33), while a circular enclosure is indicated in the adjacent field to the east (area 7; see Fig. 3.36, below). AREA

6 (Figs 3.34–3.35)

Area 6 encompasses the northern half of a large rectangular field currently used for tillage. The site of the cropmarks formed the main focus of the survey, which covered an area of approximately 3ha, with maximum dimensions of 180m north/south by 200m east/west. The results of the survey are remarkable in their clarity and show that the cropmarks form part of a more complex mosaic of rectilinear, circular and petalshaped enclosures and other features extending over an area of more than 1ha. The magnetic signature and layout of these features suggest that they are defined by a series of adjoining and overlapping ditches and trenches associated with several phases of land division and possible settlement, all sealed beneath the imprint of modern cultivation. The intensity of the magnetic responses exhibited by these features varies considerably, with some particularly strong anomalies likely to relate to ditches that contain significant quantities of burnt (as well as decaying organic) material. The most striking of these combine to form the outline of an extensive, north-east/south-west-aligned field system composed of a dozen or so rectangular and irregular petal-shaped fields (G1). These enclose areas ranging from approximately 120m² to 1,750m² and may have been used for grazing, cultivation and as animal pens; some of their boundaries are interrupted by gaps that perhaps provided access between adjoining fields. Overlapping with this field system are traces of another, possibly earlier, system (or systems) of field divisions represented by a range of more subtle positive magnetic lineations of varying form. These were observed across much of the survey area and appear to extend beyond its limits on the north and south-east, as well as possibly on the west. They are most clearly defined on the east, however, where the principal lineations form a pattern of rectilinear fields (e.g. G2 and G3) which, like G1, exhibit a predominantly northeast/south-west alignment. A possible trackway or droveway (G4), defined by two roughly parallel positive lineations spaced about 4–6m apart, can be traced running between them from north-west to south-east for a distance of at least 60m, but may continue further. Interestingly, a broad curving band of enhanced magnetic responses (G5)—also traced in area 7 (see below)—appears to delimit the field divisions on the 84

south and may represent a former river channel. Both it and the ancient field boundaries fronting onto it have been truncated by a modern narrow ditch that bisects the field from east to west and registers in the survey as a well-defined, negative magnetic lineation (G6). In addition to the ancient field divisions, the most intriguing features recorded by the survey are two circular enclosures, both of which appear to belong to an early phase of activity. The more clearly defined of the two corresponds with a prominent cropmark in the south-eastern quadrant of the survey area and registers as a positive annular band (G7) measuring 2m in average width and 32m in diameter. Located immediately adjacent to the putative trackway (G4), it is bisected in the gradiometry image by a sinuous linear anomaly emanating from G1 and appears to overlap with a faint subrectangular(?) anomaly on the south (G8).Traces of another subrectangular anomaly (G9), possibly representing a small enclosure or annexe, are also apparent adjoining(?) G7 on the east. Several small ‘pit-type’ anomalies and a semicircular band of enhanced magnetic responses (G10) were recorded inside the enclosure (G7) and could conceivably represent the remains of a building. No clear indication of an entrance to the enclosure was identified but this may lie on the east, where its outline is relatively weak. The second enclosure (G11) is indicated primarily by the curvature of some of the field boundaries in the north-western quadrant of the survey area, as well as by a discontinuous arcuate lineation which delimits it on the north and north-east. At approximately 30m in diameter, it is almost identical in size to G7 and has all the appearance of a pre-existing feature that has been incorporated into the field system, one of whose boundaries bisects it. A broad arcuate anomaly (G12), probably representing a (double?) ditch or palisade trench, is evident about 15m outside and roughly concentric with the enclosure on the north and east. Its trajectory is continued by the curving boundary of one of the petal-shaped fields (G1), which raises the possibility that it represents a second, outer, enclosure. Several short positive magnetic lineations and ‘pittype’ anomalies recorded in this area are also of archaeological interest and may be associated with the enclosure(s). The location and character of the two circular enclosures, and the way they are integrated into the ancient field divisions, suggest that one or both of them may represent domestic settlements. Nevertheless, although the survey results suggest that both enclosures pre-date some of the boundaries associated with the (magnetically) dominant field system,

3-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:06 Page 85

Geophysical investigations at Drumanagh and Loughshinny, north County Dublin

Fig. 3.34—Area 6 (Blackland): greyscale image of gradiometry results.

Fig. 3.35—Area 6 (Blackland): interpretative plan showing principal geophysical anomalies. 85

3-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:06 Page 86

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland

Fig. 3.36— Orthoimage of area 7 (Blackland), with circular cropmark arrowed (© Google Earth).

only excavation can determine their function and relationship to one another and, indeed, the broader developmental sequence of this complex as a whole. The presence of another large circular enclosure in the adjacent field to the east (see below) also warrants consideration in this context. 7 (Figs 3.36–3.38) Area 7 lies some 60m to the south-east of area 6 and comprises a slight rise in the south-western quadrant of a large rectangular field that corresponds to the site of the circular cropmark (see Fig. 3.36). The field has been intensively cultivated in recent years and was deeply ploughed at the time of the survey. In order to reduce any adverse effects produced by the plough furrows, which run roughly north/south, the survey traverses were walked from west to east over a rectangular grid measuring 60m north/south by 80m east/west (total area c. 0.5ha). The north-eastern corner of area 7 could not be surveyed owing to waterlogging and uneven ground conditions, while the land to the south is also prone to flooding. Despite extensive ploughing (evidenced geophysically as a pattern of closely spaced positive and negative linear trends), the circular cropmark displays a very coherent and pronounced magnetic signature. Defined by a broad band of enhanced magnetic gradient some 2m in average width (G1), it appears to comprise a ditched enclosure with a diameter of approximately 40m north/south by 37m east/west. Close scrutiny of AREA

86

the data suggests that there may be an entrance gap on the east, which is obscured by a narrow plough furrow whose heightened response is likely to relate to the redistribution of magnetically enhanced material from the fill of the enclosure ditch. A similar phenomenon may be observed in relation to several other features of archaeological potential recorded by the survey, including a number of ‘pit-type’ anomalies to the north-east of the enclosure (e.g. G2). Adjoining the enclosure on the east is a positive linear feature (G3), running east/west, of similar width to the enclosure ditch. It extends beyond the limits of the survey and, although potentially associated with the enclosure, its significance is unclear. Another prominent lineation (G4), which runs in a northeast/south-east direction to the west of the enclosure, is broadly consistent with the modern cultivation pattern and may be agricultural (rather than archaeological) in origin. It intersects at right angles with a broad, intermittent band of weakly positive responses (G5) which appears to represent a continuation of a possible palaeochannel identified in area 6 (G5 on Fig. 3.35). Although there are suggestions in the aerial imagery of one or more small circular or oval features lying adjacent to the enclosure in this area, no corresponding anomalies were mapped by the survey. The survey did, however, detect several other features of archaeological potential, including a weakly positive semicircular arc (G6) in the northern half of the enclosure and a semicircular or annular anomaly (G7),

3-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:06 Page 87

Geophysical investigations at Drumanagh and Loughshinny, north County Dublin

Fig. 3.37—Area 7 (Blackland): greyscale image of gradiometry results.

Fig. 3.38—Area 7 (Blackland): interpretative plan showing principal geophysical anomalies.

about 7m in diameter, which adjoins or overlaps with the enclosure on the east. While the interpretation of such faint anomalies is very tentative, they could represent the remains of ring-ditches or slot-trenches that have been disturbed by more recent ploughing. Apart from G6, the only other anomalies of archaeological potential recorded in the interior of the enclosure are a scatter of small ‘pit-type’ features and an intermittent band of enhanced responses that may correspond with some form of internal subdivision.

Moreover, while it is possible that some of the features mapped by the survey are associated with the late Iron Age use of the site, few are susceptible to close dating on the basis of typology. This is demonstrated, for example, by the potential ring-ditches, roundhouses and other small circular structures recorded within the fort, as these types of features, although representing ‘characteristic’ Iron Age forms, have very long chronologies, extending from early prehistory to at least the first millennium AD.30 A similarly broad date range may also apply in the case of the well-defined oval and D-shaped enclosures outside the fort ramparts (area 1D) and in the northwestern quadrant of its interior (area 1A) respectively (Figs 3.19 and 3.9). The distinct, 5m-wide breaks in the line of the former and the absence of evidence for internal structures suggest a non-domestic function for this enclosure, whose causewayed form is reminiscent of some of the circular, ovoid and elongated Neolithic enclosures in Britain.31 While these potential British parallels may be significant, any comparison with what is, in effect, a large and diverse corpus of monuments is highly speculative. The enclosure in area 1A is equally difficult to classify and, notwithstanding the circular structure in its interior, little can be said about its potential function—whether domestic, ritual/ceremonial or otherwise—on the basis of the geophysical evidence alone. Moreover, while the rectilinear form of the enclosures identified inside the fort is intriguing in light of the Roman/Romano-British connection implied by

Discussion The LIARI surveys in the Drumanagh–Loughshinny landscape have revealed a rich diversity of buried archaeological remains which significantly augment the existing record and the results of previous geophysical investigations within the promontory fort. The dense and varied array of archaeological anomalies mapped by the surveys at Drumanagh is testimony to the protracted history of activity on the promontory, with features suggestive of settlement and funerary/ritual activity, as well as post-medieval occupation and agriculture, represented (Fig. 3.39). The complex and often confusing pattern of the survey results, however, illustrates particularly clearly the difficulties of interpreting geophysical data from sites that have seen extensive, multi-period, activity, as many of the anomalies are not sufficiently distinct to allow for a meaningful assessment of their origins or function.

87

3-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:06 Page 88

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland

Fig. 3.39—Combined gradiometry survey results and lidar map of Drumanagh (vertical exaggeration x2.5; lidar data courtesy of Fingal County Council). the metal-detected finds, the possibility that these features belong to an earlier or, perhaps more likely, a later—medieval or post-medieval—horizon at the site must also be considered. In this context, it is worth noting that none of the features revealed by the survey can be identified, on the basis of their geophysical footprint, as representing distinctively ‘Roman’ forms of architecture. This may be of some significance and, although by no means negating the possibility of a substantive Roman or Romano-British presence at Drumanagh, it does not readily support the recently mooted suggestion of a ‘Roman settlement’ at the site.32 Indeed, what the results of the present survey reinforce quite clearly is the need for an in-depth, multifaceted programme of archaeological research aimed at addressing the fundamental question of the character and evolving role of the site through time. The wider landscape A rich diversity of archaeological features was also identified in the wider landscape of Drumanagh, the most intriguing of which include a potential barrow cemetery, consisting of four or five small ring-ditches, on the summit of Popeshall hill (area 2), as well as two settlements defined by circular enclosures and field systems in the townlands of Thomastown (area 3) and Blackland (area 6). A range of other features, including a circular enclosure some 40m in diameter in 88

Blackland (area 7), was also mapped by the surveys. In contrast to the significant results obtained in these areas, however, geophysical investigation of the cropmarks at Lane (area 4) and the lands adjacent to an old copper mine at Loughshinny (area 5) revealed no obvious features of archaeological interest. The discovery of a potential barrow cemetery on the summit of Popeshall hill once again highlights the importance of elevated locations for funerary activity in the past (Fig. 3.40). Although simple ring-ditches are not susceptible to close dating, the presence of a double-ditched example among this group could, on the basis of comparison with excavated examples at Raynestown, Co. Meath,33 for example, imply a firstmillennium BC or later date for this, and perhaps for some of the other ring-ditches identified at Popeshall. Irrespective of dating, their location on the upper, south-facing slope of the hill is of interest and may indicate an affiliation between the community that used the cemetery and the lands extending southwards from the site towards Drumanagh. In addition to settlement, potential evidence for funerary activity was also revealed at the base of Popeshall hill, on the south-west (see Fig. 3.40), where two possible ring-ditches were identified next to a large circular enclosure which is suggested on the basis of its morphology and evidence for internal structures to comprise a destroyed ringfort some 40m in diam-

3-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:06 Page 89

Geophysical investigations at Drumanagh and Loughshinny, north County Dublin

Fig. 3.40—Combined gradiometry survey results and lidar map of the Popeshall area (vertical exaggeration x2.5; lidar data courtesy of Fingal County Council).

Fig. 3.41—Combined gradiometry survey results and lidar map of the Blackland area (vertical exaggeration x2.5; lidar data courtesy of Fingal County Council). eter. The siting of early medieval settlements in close proximity to prehistoric burial monuments is not uncommon (see Chapter 7), as attested, for example, at Parknahown 2, Co. Laois, where a 10m-diameter ring-ditch of late Bronze Age date was identified only 2m outside a ringfort.34 Some of the other linear and curvilinear features mapped at Thomastown overlap

with the enclosure and further emphasise the multiperiod nature of the site, while a rectilinear network of ditches to its north-west is indicative of a field system that may be contemporary with the enclosure. Field systems of similar size and form have been excavated in the vicinity of broadly contemporary ringforts at sites such as Dowdstown 2 and Roestown 2, 89

3-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:06 Page 90

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland Co. Meath,35 which may provide close parallels for the features discovered at Thomastown. As at Thomastown, the dense concentration of features revealed by the survey at Blackland is likely to denote an early agricultural settlement that may have been in use over an extended period (Fig. 3.41). The former presence of a river in this area, as suggested by the putative palaeochannel identified in areas 5 and 6, would have made this an attractive location for settlement. Two or more phases of settlement appear to be indicated, and are represented by two circular enclosures—with a third example recorded in area 7, just to the south-east—and a complex mosaic of rectilinear and petal-shaped fields. Comparison with the petalshaped fields excavated at Boyerstown 3, Co. Meath, 36 may indicate an early medieval date for this phase of field division; like many of the sites revealed by the survey, however, the evidence from Blackland is complex and can only be unravelled by excavation. Nevertheless, the remarkable wealth of archaeological monuments and features identified by the LIARI surveys in the Drumanagh–Loughshinny region is testimony to the historical importance of this coastal landscape and opens up exciting new avenues for future research.

12. 13. 14. 15.

16.

17. 18. 19. 20. 21.

Notes 1. RMP DU008-006. The Placenames Database of Ireland (www.logainm.ie), accessed January 2013. The promontory at Drumanagh is suggested by some to be recorded on a midsecond-century AD map of Ireland derived from Ptolemy’s Geographia: see, among others, Raftery 1994, 208; Warner 1995, 26; Darcy and Flynn 2008; Kelly 2010, 62. The author would like to thank Roseanne Schot (NUI Galway) and Gabriel Cooney (UCD) for helpful comments on the text. 2. Raftery 1994, 207–8; 1996a; Mitchell and Ryan 2003, 246–7; Newman 2005, 379; Mattingly 2007, 448–9. 3. Dowling 2011, 227; see also Chapter 2, this volume. On Hengistbury Head see, for example, Cunliffe 1991, 160–5. 4. Newman 2005, 379', and elsewhere in this volume. 5. Ibid. 6. The Placenames Database of Ireland, accessed January 2013. Alternatively, the ‘loch’ element of the place-name could relate to the small bay around which the village of Loughshinny developed (Cormac Bourke, pers. comm.). 7. Parkes 2012, 24–5; Geological Survey of Ireland 2008. 8. National Soil Survey, An Foras Talúntais 1980. 9. Several of the copper mines worked in the nineteenth century, including two along Mine Road, are recorded on the firstedition Ordnance Survey map (c. 1837, sheet 8). On Smuggler’s Cave see Parkes 2012, 25. 10. Raftery 1994, 208; Mitchell and Ryan 2003, 246–7. The application of isotope geochemistry to the Drumanagh ingots may help to determine the provenance of the copper sources for these objects: see Chapter 2, this volume. 11. Raftery (1994, 208) notes that the Roman coins were

90

22. 23.

24. 25.

26.

27. 28. 29. 30.

31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36.

discovered ‘in ploughed land not far from the fort’, while the pottery sherd was found by Cahill Wilson in June 2012 in a field adjacent to the fort on the west. Several chert and flint tools found in and around the promontory fort and two iron ingots from a nearby field are less susceptible to close dating, though later activity is indicated by a dome-headed bronze pin of tenth- or eleventh-century date among the metal-detected finds from the site. On these latter finds see Mitchell and Ryan 2003, 247; O’Sullivan and Breen 2007, 111; Irish Archaeological Consultancy Ltd 2012. On the stone lamp see Grundy 2011. Kelly 2010, 62, 72–3. RMP DU008-01006. O’Connell 2009b, 52–4, 56. Mac Shamhráin 2004, 131–2, though Ó Riain (2011, 415) suggests that Cuinnid is ‘a variant hypocoristic form of Colum’. Mac Shamhráin 2004. On the role and influence of British missionaries in early Ireland see also Charles-Edwards 2000, 182–9ff; Bhreathnach 2011, 130–2. RMP DU008-01301–03. Newenham 1836–40; Cooney 2009a, 16. RMP DU008-003-5. RMP DU008-051 and RMP DU005-069. RMP DU008-052. The surveys at Drumanagh and in the Loughshinny region were undertaken under licence numbers 12R127 and 12R010 respectively. The author would like to thank all the landowners for generously facilitating the survey on their lands, as well as Jane Whittaker (Archaeological Development Services), Kevin McGuinness (Loughshinny), Steven McGlade (Aileach Archaeology), Benjamin Thebaudeau (TCD), Karen Dempsey (UCD), Phillip Behan (DIT) and Discovery Programme staff for assistance with the surveys. The well is labelled ‘Drumanagh well’ on the first-edition Ordnance Survey map. Bolton et al. 2012, 172, where it is noted that the Martello tower was disarmed in 1874 and sold in 1908 to the landowner, Sir Roger Palmer. Bolton 2008. The watercolour was kindly shown to the LIARI team by the O’Callaghan family, the landowners of Drumanagh, and we are very grateful to them for granting us permission to refer to it in this paper. The principal residence of the Palmer family was Kenure Park, located about 1.5km to the south-east of Drumanagh. See, for example, D’Alton 1838, 428–30; see also http://www.landedestates.ie, accessed September 2013. This feature is also marked on plans of Drumanagh in Raftery 1994, 207 (figs 131 and 132). See Anon. 1993. Record of Protected Structures no. 248. For a summary of the dating evidence see Newman 1997, 153–70; Waddell 2010. See also Doody 2000; Tierney and Johnston 2009. See, for example, Jones 1998; Oswald et al. 1999; Passmore and Waddington 2009, 135, figs 4.5 and 4.6; Edwards 2013. Warner 2013, 238. Elder et al. 2009. O’Neill 2009b. On Dowdstown see Cagney et al. 2009. For Roestown 2 see O’Hara 2009a. Clarke 2009b.

4-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:29 Page 91

4. INVESTIGATIONS ON LAMBAY, CO. DUBLIN JACQUELINE CAHILL WILSON, GABRIEL COONEY, GER DOWLING AND IAN ELLIOTT

Fig. 4.1—Aerial view of Lambay (© Rob Sands, UCD School of Archaeology).

Central to the LIARI Project has been the collation of data, and a focus for investigation has been the littoral and offshore islands in County Dublin, many of which have produced single Roman finds. In the early twentieth century the most important collection of material was found associated with burials on the largest of these islands, Lambay. Lambay is approximately 2.5km2 in overall size and has a long history of settlement (Fig. 4.1). It has been the subject of extensive research over many years by Gabriel Cooney.1 A notable feature of the archaeology of the island is the Neolithic quarry, where porphyritic andesite (or Lambay porphyry) was worked to produce stone axeheads from the early fourth millennium BC.2 The dramatic topography of the island was created by its volcanic origins and the geology is shared with an area on the mainland

directly to the west, which also shares its name, Rechra, with Portrane (Port Rechrainn), Co. Dublin.3 The island’s topography is markedly diverse, with some good agricultural land on its more gently sloping western side towards the present harbour and dramatic high cliffscapes on its eastern side. Lambay is notable not only for its archaeology but also for its geology, flora and migratory and sea-bird and seal colonies, and for the naturalised wallabies that live there.4 Cooney and his team extended an invitation to the LIARI Project to broaden the investigation of Iron Age activity on Lambay. As part of this work, an extensive programme of geophysical survey was conducted on the island in August 2012 that built on previous surveys by Cooney and Ian Elliott (see below). The research also offered an opportunity to revisit the interpretation of the burials and the extraordinary 91

4-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:29 Page 92

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland collection of Iron Age and Roman material, some of which is currently on display at the National Museum of Ireland (NMI). It should be noted that the discussion below is based on a desktop study.

The Lambay Harbour burials The earliest reference to Roman material being found on Lambay is in a note published by W.H. Drummond in the Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy in 1840.5 Drummond outlined a correspondence that he had with the late dean of St Patrick’s about a Roman coin that was found on the island. The dean had commented that the coin was a similar issue to those found with a number of burials at Bray Head during the building of a gatepier c. 1840.6 During the reconstruction of a shore wall at the harbour on Lambay in 1927 workmen disturbed several burials, and it is from these that one of the most important collections of late Iron Age and Roman material in Ireland was recovered. The archaeologist R.A.S. Macalister visited Lambay shortly after the discoveries were made. He noted that the new harbour wall had been built directly on top of the place where the burials were found.7 All of the finds were catalogued and published by Macalister in 1929.8 The Roman-type fibulae were discussed by Jope in his consideration of the origins of late Iron Age brooches from Ireland, in which he stressed what he believed to be clear links with parts of south-western Britain during this period.9 The Iron Age finds were later reappraised by Rynne,10 who offered some new parallels and interpretations for many of the finds and made reference to a decorated gold band or ribbon said to have been found on Lambay and catalogued in the Wilde collection of the Royal Irish Academy (RIA). The band was apparently found with a sword sometime in the 1860s, and Rynne recorded that, although the sword was lost before it could be drawn, the gold band was in the collection of the NMI. It is a highly decorated piece and is discussed more fully below. The material classified by Rynne is of the late Iron Age, with parallels in both La Tène and Roman style, and includes: • a coin of Trajan (AD 98–117) or Hadrian (AD 117–38) (said to be ‘copper’, so likely to be either a dupondius or a sestertius); • an iron sword (in pieces); • a bronze convex umbo or shield boss with short, protruding, disc-ended knop; 92

• three dolphin-type Roman fibulae, all of cast copper alloy: two large of simple ribbed moulding and a third smaller brooch with blue enamelling (Fig. 4.2); • a plain bronze scabbard mount (Fig. 4.4); • an iron mirror and suggested bone/antler handle (missing); • two highly decorated openwork bronze scabbard mounts (Fig. 4.4); • a rosette-type fibula; • a Langton Down-type fibula; • various rings, some of which are perhaps scabbard fitments; • a finger-ring, found on the middle digit of an individual; • a highly decorated repoussé disc, with freeflowing triskele decoration, a central decorative rosette and a beaded border; • a triangular bronze plaque with zoomorphic detailing on a central raised boss; • a beaded bronze torc, with separated beads and washers (Fig. 4.5); • a decorated bronze bracelet or armlet. The most comprehensive assessment, which remains the standard reference work for the material from Lambay, is the work undertaken by Barry Raftery as part of his review of Iron Age finds from Ireland. These were classified in his 1983 catalogue and discussed in greater detail in 1984 and 1994.11 Among the finds from Lambay were also many pieces of ‘decorative sheet-bronze’, some of which were used by Raftery to complete the reconstuction of the triangular plaque discussed in detail below.12 In keeping with a theme that ran throughout all of Raftery’s work on the Iron Age in Ireland, he proffered many parallels for these finds from Ireland, Britain and Europe. The present review aims to build on all of these sources to see whether closer parallels can be offered with some of the more recent material that has been published from local contexts within and beyond the Roman frontiers. Many of the finds that date from the late Iron Age in Ireland and the Roman Iron Age in Europe are culturally entangled (see Chapter 2) and reflect local late La Tène artistic motifs, but with the addition of new designs from the classical repertoire. What is noteworthy in this respect is that Raftery highlighted what he believed to be a reinvigoration of late La Tène style in the early centuries AD, as seen, for example, in the raised trumpet and triskele motifs on objects such as the Monasterevin discs from Ireland. Such designs, however, are also evident in provincial

4-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:29 Page 93

Investigations on Lambay, Co. Dublin Roman contexts; referred to as trompetenmuster decoration, they are common on openwork buckles, mounts and pendants across the Roman Empire.13 It remains unclear how many of the objects from Lambay were actually found with the burials themselves, although, as we shall see below, previous authors have suggested that the shield boss, sword and uncertain ‘ornaments’ were found together underneath an iron disc, believed to be a mirror. It is important to look at the range of material as a whole, as occasionally, in the absence of a clear or recoverable context, interpretation can rely on more obvious or diagnostic parallels for a specific object. As recently noted by Crummy, this can inadvertently bias the overall interpretation and ‘send an object from one functional category to another, from one gender association to another and en route introduce a new slant on the interpretation of some sites’.14 Crummy offered her comments in a cautionary sense and it would appear that one object in particular from Lambay, the beaded bronze torc (see Fig. 4.5), may have slanted previous interpretation towards a particular geographic origin for the burials among the people known as the Brigantes in northern Britain, although Rynne noted that that did not discount the possibility of connections to communities in southeastern Roman Britain.15 The geographical distribution of these torcs in Britain has a northern emphasis, and it is likely that this reflects primary distribution from a centre or centres of manufacturing. Objects move with people, however, and more recent finds discussed below have significantly extended the spread of the distribution into the midland and southern counties of England. Taken as a whole, the collection from Lambay remains unique in an Irish context,16 and a preliminary assessment based on more recent typologies for some of the objects, such as the brooches, is presented here before we consider whether the nature of the burial practice itself offers further insights into networks of movement and possible places of origin.

The Romano-British finds Although relatively little attention has been given in the past to the record of the nineteenth-century discovery of a single second-century AD coin from Lambay, our knowledge of the material from Drumanagh promontory fort offers a new line of investigation for this find. Coin issues of Trajan and Hadrian are unusual in numismatic studies, as they remained in circulation for much of the second

4cm

Fig. 4.2—The Lambay fibulae (clockwise from top centre): (1) Langton Down type; (2) rosette type; (3, 4) dolphin type; (5) Polden Hill/dolphin variant type (© National Museum of Ireland).

century AD, a period of relative economic stability in the Empire. The coin cannot be directly associated with the finds from the harbour burials, but what is interesting is that its issue corresponds with finds of bronze coins of Trajan and Hadrian from Drumanagh.17 As previously mentioned, the distribution of the finds from Drumanagh, Lambay, Ireland’s Eye, Howth Head and Shenick Island collectively indicates significant contacts between communities in the Dublin/Meath area and the Roman provinces from the first century AD through to the later Roman period. Considering the material found in the harbour area in the 1920s, the rosette brooch (no. 2, Fig. 4.2) belongs to Mackreth type 4.b and is a form derived from a Gaulish type.18 The bow has arched ribbing along its extent, around which sits a lozenge with open vesica moulding, and the catch-plate is perforated. As the later brooches in this type series have a different hinge mechanism, a closer date range might be established, but for the moment we can safely date it to before the Flavian period (i.e. before AD 69). This brooch type has a very defined distribution in Britain; as these are much more common finds in Gaul, many are regarded as imports in Roman Britain.19 The majority of known examples from Britain come from Hertfordshire and 93

4-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:29 Page 94

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland Lincolnshire, with a few known in Essex, Gloucestershire and Norfolk. The distribution is believed to reflect the movement of people, both civilian and military, in the early post-Conquest period.20 Another rosette brooch of very similar type, but with a plain (closed) lozenge plate, was found at Clontarf, Co. Dublin,21 and further research will hopefully establish a context for this find. The type series name for the Langton Down-type brooch (no. 1, Fig. 4.2) can be somewhat misleading, as it suggests that a primary distribution is in the Dorset region, whereas these brooches are found across most of the southern counties of England.22 Although the brooch from Lambay may appear small at c. 4cm in length, it is within the expected size range for this type. It appears to be well preserved, with a flat, plain spring case from which the bow develops from an arcuated top with reeding or fluting along the entire extent of the bow, and it has a perforated catch-plate. It sits within Mackreth’s type 2.b1 and hence later in his typological sequence for Roman Britain.23 Three other fibulae found on Lambay are all of cast copper alloy, as might be expected for this period. Two are of dolphin type (nos 3 and 4, Fig. 4.2) and are large, at just over 9.42cm and 9.32cm in length, and are of very similar design to each other. One of these appears to be non-functioning, and further research, including X-ray, would establish whether this is due to post-depositional corrosion or simply to miscasting.24 Both of these brooches have a relatively low bow profile, with a central raised rib running along the entire length to the foot, which ends in a knobbed terminal and closed catch-plate. There is additional circular decoration where the apex of the bow rises above the short, closed tubular wings, which then extends into a plain mid-section before ending in a further single ribbed detail. The smaller brooch (no. 5, Fig. 4.2), at 6.5cm in length, is closer to Polden Hill variants from Roman Britain, and it is decorated on the upper third of the bow with two parallel grooves of blue enamel on either side of a central incised decoration. All three of these fibulae are hinged and the wings are completely enclosed. The Langton Down brooch type is closely datable to the period AD 50–75, with the dolphin type overlapping and extending a little further to c. AD 85;25 the primary distribution for all of these brooches is at sites across southern England. The two larger dolphin-type fibulae may be Continental, as much larger types of these are known from northern Gaul.26 For the moment, until further work is completed, it seems reasonable to suggest that the southern bias in geographic distribution of these brooches in Roman 94

Britain may indicate that they originated within communities from southern Britain who had contacts with Roman Gaul in the mid-first century AD. The circular disc from Lambay was reconstructed by E.T. Leeds in 1932 from the many fragmentary pieces of sheet bronze that were recovered from the harbour burials.27 From the remaining pieces of plain and decorated sheet bronze found with the burials, Raftery completed a reconstruction of the unusual triangular plaque and catalogued a further c. 175 small fragments in 1983.28 The bronze circular disc is ornamented with an open, free-flowing triskele with a central rosette decorative finish and beaded border. The triskele motif is common on small finds from both Iron Age and Roman contexts in Britain and the provinces. As suggested by Raftery in his inventory in 1983, the open style of the triskele, but especially the beaded border, can be paralleled among the many (albeit a great deal smaller) Roman plate brooches from Britain.The Lambay disc is c. 17.5cm in diameter compared to the 3cm of the disc brooches. Good examples are those from Silchester in Hampshire and Brough in Cumbria.29 The reconstructed bronze triangular plaque is very distinctive and its closest parallel remains that originally suggested: the triangular bronze plaque from a hoard or cache of objects from the hillfort site of Moel Hiraddug in north-east Wales.30 This site, based on relative dating sequences, was dated to the late first century BC.31 It is notable that it lies only a few kilometres from the coast of north Wales and the sea routes into the Dee Estuary that formed the important Roman naval base and home of the Classis Britannica and legionary fortress of Deva Victrix (Chester), a site known to have been central to Agricola’s northern campaigns in c. AD 80–4.32 Parallels with decorated bronze discs from Roman contexts in Europe, the function of which remains uncertain, were offered by Lloyd Morgan in her review paper in 1976, and she used one in particular from Vechten with trompetenmuster design to highlight the melding of both Roman and local artistic designs into decorative forms of this period. As discussed in detail in Chapter 2, the interplay and exchange of technologies and artistic designs in the Roman period make it unwise to try to classify objects as either Roman or of local Iron Age types based on presumed Iron Age or Roman motifs; rather these form part of a repertoire of artistic designs widely used across the provinces and beyond.33 The previously mentioned decorated gold strip from Lambay (Fig. 4.3) remains an enigmatic piece and little is known about its original context.

4-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:29 Page 95

Investigations on Lambay, Co. Dublin

4cm

Fig. 4.3—Gold band from Lambay (© National Museum of Ireland).

Although a domestic function was proposed for it (like the many decorated bronze strips from vessels and buckets of the period elsewhere), it seems much more likely that it is in keeping with Rynne’s alternative suggestion and best considered an item of personal adornment with an as-yet-uncertain function.34 The choice of paired annulets with dotin-circle decoration is reminiscent of the decorative form of the Battersea shield, which has been dated on stylistic parallels to the second or first century BC. It is also paralleled in paired dot-in-circle decorative motifs on bronze-plated iron belt hooks of Kessel B type from Kessel-Lith in the Netherlands, more securely dated to the first or second century AD.35 There are two unusual bronze spearheads, one from a bog at Boho, Co. Monaghan, and a further example from the River Blackwater, Co. Tyrone, that are believed to be of Iron Age date and both are decorated with a dot-in-circle motif.36 As noted by Rynne, the use of the cross-in-circle or monad motif is known from only one other context from this period in Ireland, on one of the discs of the Petrie Crown,37 although it is common on finds from sites on the Continent. More research is needed to offer a closer parallel for it. The iron sword that was found with the harbour burials was in several pieces and its length was estimated at c. 45.7cm (although Macalister noted that several other pieces may have been left behind on the island at the time of its recovery). Raftery identified the remains among the collections at the NMI and included it within his work in 1984 and subsequent publication on the finds from Lambay. The remains were fragmentary and led him to suggest that little could be recovered in terms of identification.38 The design of the scabbard mounts from Lambay (Fig. 4.4), which were cast and finished by hand, is accomplished and not all may have come from the same scabbard, as the two openwork pieces are different in size and profile to the plainer third mount.The parallels offered by Rynne with the raised trumpet decoration on the Mortonhall scabbard and the incised work on the Tarnavie ring are not convincing for either the decorative style or the medium used. There are good parallels for the openwork bronze scabbard mounts from Lambay among Roman contexts at military sites in Roman Britain (such as the buckles or mounts mentioned by Macalister from Newstead Roman fort)39 and northern Gaul (such as Zugmantel on the limes or Goeblingen-Nospelt and Dangstetten).40 These latter two sites date from the later first century BC, but again show early Roman influences on local craftworking. 95

4-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:29 Page 96

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland

4cm

Fig. 4.4—Openwork scabbard mounts from Lambay (© National Museum of Ireland).

Rynne suggested that the small bronze bracelet or armlet (internal diameter 54.5mm, band width 8mm) found with the brooches most likely belonged to a child. It is described as having two ‘wide flatbottomed grooves’ that run around the outer surface and within which were traces of red enamel.41 Although it is likely that it was a child’s bracelet given its internal dimensions, there is another possibility that should be considered. During the early Roman period, strip armlets, known as military armillae, were awarded to serving soldiers to commemorate notable acts of bravery in various campaigns. A recent study has suggested that some of these armillae are quite small, and as a result some have been misclassified as jewellery in the past.42 Further work is needed, but for the moment we should remain open to the possibility that this, like the sword and scabbard mounts, may form part of a collection of military objects of early Roman date. The mirror in the collection is believed to be the disc that had covered some of the key finds. Although Macalister suggested that another find (a piece of 96

turned bone or antler) was the mirror’s handle, this seems unlikely. Mirrors of this type from Britain and Ireland more usually have a handle of bronze or iron that was cast separately, either in a simplified form or a highly decorated one, such as the mirror handle from Ballybogy, Co. Antrim.43 A small slit at the uppermost edge of the handle was used to slide the polished mirror into place, and the nature of the manufacture of these handles means that they are often much better preserved than the disc of the mirrors themselves. It seems much more likely that this bone piece may in fact be part of the grip for the sword. Even more puzzling, however, is the reconstructed bronze shield boss or convex umbo, which has a protruding knop or disc at its centre. Although the shape of the dome and its rim can be paralleled with some Roman types, no clear parallels have yet been established for the protruding button knop on a ‘Roman’ boss. Interestingly, there are parallels for this type of feature among the later shield bosses from Saxon contexts, but discussions with colleagues who are specialists in Roman and Saxon militaria have not offered parallels and it may be that this distinctive embellishment reflects a proto-form that may have originated in the earlier period in north-east Gaul.44 As mentioned earlier, the parallels for the material have been focused on northern Britain, based on the geographic distribution (now outdated) of related object types and the likely place of manufacture for the beaded torc (Fig. 4.5). As discussed in Chapter 2, however, we need to move away from interpretations of assumed ethnic origin based on a similarly assumed place of manufacture for just one object found in burial contexts. In a more recent reassessment, attention was drawn to the unusual nature and style of the beads from the Lambay torc and a convincing argument was made that this, and others of this type, may reflect an attempt to copy the form of the Roman beads that were fashionable in this period.45 Many new finds of sections and terminals of beaded torcs have now been recorded on the database for the Portable Antiquities Scheme in Britain and were recently published by Hunter.46 The torcs have been divided into type A, where the beads are ‘cast individually and then threaded onto a rod which slots into a girder-like hoop’, and type B, where the ‘beaded portion is cast in a single piece’.47 The Lambay torc is of type A. Where these have been found in dated contexts, type A appears to be the earlier, with Lambay one of the earliest if dated by the associated brooch finds. The more recent distributional analysis for both A and B types covers a much wider geographical range than those known to

4-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:29 Page 97

Investigations on Lambay, Co. Dublin

4cm

Fig. 4.5—Lambay beaded torc (© National Museum of Ireland).

MacGregor in her original assessment, from sites beyond the frontier in Scotland to a line from the Severn Estuary, with a discrete cluster of finds in Wiltshire in the south-west, to the Wash in the east.48 Many of the objects show evidence of wear patterns and, of the 44 torcs now classified, Hunter believes that they have a clear floruit in Romano-British, rather than late Iron Age, contexts.49 We know that among the objects from Drumanagh are some similar loose beads and spacers, and these, along with further mirrors and a collection of Roman fibulae and coins, may offer a contemporary link with the people living on Lambay in the first and early second centuries AD.

Towards a social context of the burials Throughout this volume, we have discussed how external influences affected and reshaped social constructs across parts of the eastern and south-eastern seaboard of Ireland during the late Iron Age. Later in this volume (Chapter 6) the likely mobility and migration of people from Britain and Europe is discussed, following the presentation based on new evidence from burials in this period and the later transition into the early medieval period. Burial practices and traditions are deeply embedded at a social and cultural level in all societies, so that any changes in tradition or in the treatment of individuals

at the time of burial are likely to reflect a significant break with long-held customs, or—importantly for Lambay—they may reflect migrants using their own burial customs. Although we may not be able to recover clear contexts for the Lambay burials, new approaches may enable us to add to what we already know. Accounts from the published sources suggest that at least two ‘crouched’ inhumations were uncovered during the reconstruction of the harbour, and these were described as being placed within relatively shallow pits and covered with clean white sand.50 We cannot now establish whether the Lambay burials were in fact crouched, in the strictest sense, with the knees pulled up sharply under the chin, rather than flexed (in a looser position). This is unfortunate, as O’Brien has convincingly argued that these may reflect two quite distinct burial practices in late Iron Age Ireland.51 Crouched burial in the first and second centuries AD in Ireland is accepted as a new burial rite that may have been introduced by people who originated in Britain and it re-emerges as a minority burial rite in later centuries.52 Given the nature of the associated cultural material and possible geographic areas of likely manufacture for it, it is important to consider parallels for the different burial practices evident across areas of Britain and Europe. The following discussion is based on the published accounts, with a caveat that interpretation may alter when additional scientific analysis and dating have been conducted on the physical remains of the individuals themselves. Despite the fact that cremation was the more common funerary custom among Roman communities in Britain and the provinces up to the second or third century AD, there is good archaeological evidence for the continuation of local practices of both flexed and crouched inhumation throughout the entire Roman period; importantly for considering parallels with Lambay, this is notable among communities in the south-west of Britain.53 Although there remain questions over the interpretation of the associated material, the burials from Lambay have been accepted and included within the wider corpus of ‘sword’ or ‘warrior’ burials from Britain and more recently were included within a published corpus of ‘mirror’ burials.54 Burial with decorated mirrors appears to be an essentially British tradition; the only known mirror burial outside Britain, from Nijmegen in the Netherlands, has been interpreted as the burial of a foreigner (i.e. a British individual).55 Interestingly, the handle of the mirror from the burial at Nijmegen offers the closest parallel 97

4-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:29 Page 98

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland to the mirror handle from Ballybogy mentioned above.56 At least one other mirror and a separate mirror handle are among the finds from the Drumanagh promontory,57 but it remains unclear whether these came from the same area where several cremation burials in bronze vessels were reportedly found. Some of these vessels have forms similar to the vessel from Fore, Co. Westmeath, that contained cremated bone and is believed to be an import, most likely from Britain. One of the Drumanagh vessels is very similar to that from Keshcarrigan, Co. Leitrim, and another from the River Bann, both believed to have been imports.58 Interestingly, a mirror burial from Birdlip in Gloucestershire, from an inhumation burial thought to be that of a female, included a bronze bowl very similar to the Keshcarrigan bowl but without the elaborately cast bird-head handle; this burial has been dated to around AD 50.59 Recent research on the excavation of the mirror and sword burial from Bryhyr, on the Isles of Scilly, has revealed the very careful (and likely symbolic) positioning of both the sword and the mirror in this burial.60 It is clear that we need to consider such mirrors as more than just cosmetic niceties; rather they may have been imbued or invested with some ritual significance that continued after burial. There are four geographic areas in Britain where mirror burials have been found and they date from the second century BC through to the early Roman period, with the earliest being cremations among the Arras tradition in Yorkshire. All are of middle to later Iron Age date and none of these have been dated later than the end of the first century AD, with the later burials consisting of both crouched and flexed inhumations.61 The Lambay burials fit within Joy’s ‘western’ group 4, which he dated to between AD 40 and AD 75. The skeletal material from the burials on Lambay was recently located and identified by Fibiger in the collections of the Natural History Museum in Dublin (now transferred to the Irish Antiquities Division).62 Fibiger’s work has confirmed that there may be up to eight individuals represented by the human remains, including at least one juvenile and an infant. These findings provide a very different perspective on the burials and the associated material, and it now seems much more likely that what was uncovered on Lambay in the 1920s was a late Iron Age community burial ground. The material assemblage appears to offer clear parallels in both dating and types of finds with the likely Iron Age trading activity taking place on the Drumanagh promontory during the preRoman Iron Age and throughout the first and second centuries AD. We no longer need to refer to these 98

individuals as ‘refugees’, as was suggested in the past; nevertheless, as outlined in Chapter 2, we should not automatically assume that these people were ‘Roman’. Was there perhaps an internationalised community on both Lambay and Drumanagh facilitating trade into Ireland through negotiation with the Roman military, the administrators and entrepreneurs in Britain and social élites in Ireland?

Geophysical surveys on Lambay The use of magnetic survey methods on Lambay is complicated to some extent by the island’s volcanic origins, as igneous geology can produce intense magnetic responses that have the effect of masking subtler, archaeological, anomalies.63 This is mitigated at Lambay, however, by the Irish Sea origin of the limestone and shale till overlying the bedrock across much of the island, which, in addition to the suite of volcanic rocks dominated by lava and tuffs, basalt and andesite, also includes sedimentary rocks (shale and limestone) along its fringes.64 Magnetometry (and resistivity) can, therefore, prove effective in some areas, as demonstrated by the successful results obtained by Cooney and Elliott at locations such as the promontory fort at Scotch Point at the north-west of the island, and in the area surrounding the medieval moated site and nineteenth-century chapel (the site of a medieval church) in the low-lying western part of the island.65 Moreover, despite the adverse effects of the igneous geology in some areas, a significant number of archaeological features were also revealed by the present investigations, further underlining the value of magnetometry as a research tool on Lambay. Survey aims and methodology The survey focused on four locations on the western side of Lambay, covering a total area of approximately 9ha (Fig. 4.6).66 The land here rises gradually from the sea eastwards towards Knockbane (127m above sea level (ASL)), the highest point on Lambay, and is mostly given over to pasture today, although traces of cultivation ridges associated with farming in recent centuries can still be seen in some areas. The geophysical investigations comprised magnetic gradiometry across all four areas (areas 1–4), as well as more limited electrical resistance survey around the harbour (area 2) and at Gouge Point (area 4).67 The magnetic surveys were undertaken using two Bartington Grad 601-2 fluxgate gradiometers (areas 1, 2 and 4) and a Geoscan FM256/FM36/CF6 dualmagnetometer system (area 3), and employed a

4-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:29 Page 99

Investigations on Lambay, Co. Dublin

´ AREA 4a/b AREA 3

AREA 2

AREA 1

Gradiometer survey Resistance survey

200m

Fig. 4.6—Aerial view of the western part of Lambay, showing the location of survey areas 1–4. (Aerial imagery © Ordnance Survey of Ireland. All rights reserved. Licence no. EN0059212.) 99

4-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:29 Page 100

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland

Fig. 4.7—View of the South Point promontory, from the east.

sampling interval of 0.25m x 1m. Resistance data were collected at 0.5m x 0.5m intervals using a Geoscan RM15 configured as a 0.5m twin-probe array. Survey area 1 lies to the south-west of the nineteenth-century chapel, on the promontory known as South Point. A medieval multiple grave containing the remains of five young adult males and an adolescent was excavated on the western tip of the promontory in 1995, while another burial, disturbed by coastal erosion, containing at least two individuals was identified in the same location in 2002.68 In assessing the broader archaeological potential of this distinctive headland, the survey also provided an opportunity to test whether South Point, like Scotch Point and Gouge Point at the north-west of the island, might be the site of a promontory fort. An area adjacent to and east of the harbour was also targeted for geophysical survey (area 2) in the hope of identifying any archaeological features in the vicinity of the Iron Age cemetery discussed above. In addition, it is worth noting that finds recovered from this area in the 1920s included an important assemblage of Middle Neolithic material.69 Area 3 encompasses the interior and exterior of the large univallate promontory fort at Scotch Point, at the north-western tip of the island, extending to the northern edge of 100

area 2. The survey here expands on earlier geophysical investigations, which indicated evidence of occupation and funerary monuments respectively inside and outside the fort.70 More limited investigations were also undertaken at the trivallate promontory fort at Gouge Point,71 some 200m to the east of Scotch Point (areas 4a and 4b). Survey areas and result AREA 1, SOUTH POINT (Figs 4.7–4.10) Forming the westernmost tip of the island, South Point is the largest promontory within the western area of Lambay; apart from a small area in the vicinity of the excavated burials, it had not previously been subject to geophysical survey. The promontory is in permanent pasture and is flanked to the north-east by a grass-covered landing strip, which was built in the 1960s (see Fig. 4.7). The surface of the promontory slopes very gently south-westwards to the coast. There is a storm beach to the west extending to the tip of the promontory, with steeper low cliffs on the south around Talbot’s Bay. Gradiometer survey was undertaken over the entire promontory, an area totalling approximately 2.5ha with maximum dimensions of 180m north/south by 220m east/west. Of all the areas investigated, the survey in the

4-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:29 Page 101

Investigations on Lambay, Co. Dublin

Fig. 4.8—Area 1 (South Point): greyscale image of gradiometry results.

Fig. 4.9—Area 1 (South Point): interpretative plan showing principal geophysical anomalies. 101

4-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:29 Page 102

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland

Fig. 4.10—Area 1 (South Point): detail of gradiometry results recorded in the eastern quadrant of the survey area.

large field at South Point (known as the ‘Chapel West Field’), together with area 3 (below), revealed the greatest number of features of archaeological potential, with a range of anomalies of geological and more recent origin also represented. The effects of near-surface volcanic geology are particularly pronounced in this area, giving rise to large-scale, high-intensity (bipolar) responses over many parts of the promontory. Fortunately, these responses are fairly localised and therefore had little adverse impact on the acquisition of data in adjacent areas. Traces of former cultivation, for example, were detected across much of the survey area as a pattern of faint linear trends running north-east/south-west, parallel to the northwestern edge of the promontory. The cultivation pattern overlaps with two linear responses (G1 and G2) which are likely to represent relict field boundaries that once divided the promontory into two roughly rectangular fields. A large number of ferrous-type responses occur along the line of the northern field boundary (G2) and, like the many other examples scattered across the survey area, are probably indicative of near-surface iron litter of relatively recent date. Of greater archaeological interest are a range of 102

circular, linear and discrete magnetic anomalies concentrated mainly in the eastern quadrant of area 1 (see Fig. 4.9 and detail in Fig. 4.10). All are defined by positive magnetic responses, suggesting that they represent ‘negative’ features which have been cut into the subsoil (e.g. ditches, trenches and pits) and have subsequently become filled with magnetically enhanced material. One of the most striking is a semicircular feature (G3) defined by a slender, discontinuous lineation (1m in average width) and up to a dozen discrete magnetic anomalies. Collectively, these anomalies may describe the northern half of a large circular enclosure, defined by a ditch and/or palisade, measuring some 50m in diameter. Just to the south and south-east of G3 are a number of smaller, annular, penannular and arcuate anomalies (G4–G10) with diameters ranging from 7m to 16m, some of which overlap. On the basis of their size, form and layout, these features can be provisionally described as ring-ditches (i.e. funerary monuments rather than buildings), a hypothesis perhaps supported by the localised increases in magnetic values recorded along the circuit of some examples (e.g. G4 and G9) which could represent formal (cremation/ritual) deposits. Without excavation, however, the interpretation of these features remains tentative. Two more extensive linear anomalies (G11 and G12) were also recorded in this area; G11 overlaps with the putative enclosure (G3) on the north, while G12, a more slightly curving example, overlaps with two of the ring-ditches (G8 and G10). Neither of these lineations exhibits any surface expression and they may, for instance, be associated with an earlier phase of land division. Several fainter anomalies of varying shape and size (e.g. G13 and G14) were also detected elsewhere in the survey area and hint at the former presence of a range of other structures and features on the promontory. Although further work is needed to clarify the precise nature and extent of many of the features identified, multi-phase activity is clearly indicated. 2, HARBOUR AREA (Figs 4.11–4.13) Area 2 lies directly to the east of the harbour and encompasses the southern portion of a large, roughly rectangular field (known as the ‘Quarry Field’) which extends as far north as Scotch Point. This part of the field slopes gently westwards towards the coast and is bounded to the south, east and west by post-and-wire fencing. The area covered by the gradiometer survey has maximum dimensions of 160m north/south by 160m east/west (total area c. 2ha) and adjoins area 3, to the north. Electrical resistance survey was also AREA

4-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:29 Page 103

Investigations on Lambay, Co. Dublin

Fig. 4.11—Area 2 (harbour area): greyscale image of gradiometry results.

Fig. 4.12—Area 2 (harbour area): interpretative plan showing principal geophysical anomalies. Area of electrical resistance survey highlighted in yellow. 103

4-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:29 Page 104

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland

Fig. 4.13—Area 2 (harbour area): greyscale image of resistance data.

conducted over a 60m x 40m area within the western quadrant of area 2, which extends to within 20m of the site of the Iron Age burials. A small area (60m east/west by 20m north/south) at the centre of area 2 was also targeted for resistance survey in order to further investigate one of the features revealed by gradiometer survey (for location see Fig. 4.6). As in area 1, the results of the gradiometer survey to the east of the harbour are dominated by intense, broad-scale magnetic responses of geological origin. The relict cultivation ridges in this field also registered clearly in the gradiometer survey as a series of parallel, positive/negative linear responses, aligned east/west. A similar pattern is discernible in the resistance results, with a more limited system of cultivation trends (of low resistance) running perpendicular to it near the centre of area 2 (see Fig. 4.13). A number of subtler anomalies were also identified, some of which may be of archaeological significance. Of potential interest are two anomalies detected by the gradiometer survey in the north-western quadrant of area 2, not far from where the Iron Age burials were uncovered. The more clearly defined of the two registers as a narrow, discontinuous, positive magnetic lineation (G1), which can be traced running in a south-easterly direction for c. 50m from the north-western edge of the survey area.This feature has no surface expression and may represent an infilled ditch or trench, possibly associated with an earlier phase of land division. Although resistance survey was undertaken near the centre of area 2 to investigate whether it may continue further to the east—where the strength of the geological responses might mask any weaker magnetic anomalies—no traces of G1 or any other features of archaeological potential were identified. Faint traces of a possible oval feature (G2), 104

defined by a narrow lineation of negative magnetic gradient, are discernible just to the north of G1 on the gradiometry image. The interpretation of this feature is tentative. It could represent some form of enclosure measuring c. 40m in maximum (north/south) diameter. While none of the features identified in area 2 can be linked in any definitive way with the nearby cemetery, the possibility that additional burials may be present in this area should not be dismissed. Indeed, inhumation burials in simple, unlined graves—such as those identified at the harbour—are extremely difficult to detect geophysically, as there is often no discernible contrast between the grave fill and the subsoil into which the grave is cut. 3, SCOTCH POINT (Figs 4.14–4.16) Area 3 was positioned to investigate the promontory fort at Scotch Point and the area adjacent to it on the south (see Fig. 4.14). The survey here was conducted over a large, irregularly shaped grid with maximum dimensions of 220m north/south by 460m east/west (total area c. 4.2ha), comprising the northern portion of the ‘Quarry Field’. This part of the field descends gently northwards towards the promontory, the narrow neck of which is transected east/west by a low earthen bank and shallow outer ditch, which together define the promontory fort defences. About 30m to the south of these features, the promontory is bisected by an east/west wire fence. Apart from the bank and ditch of the fort (G3), as well as a low-profile ringbarrow (G1)72 immediately outside it and a field bank (G2) running along the northern side of the promontory (and overlying the fort bank and ditch), no features of obvious archaeological significance are visible on the promontory today. Nevertheless, a AREA

4-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:29 Page 105

Investigations on Lambay, Co. Dublin

Fig. 4.14—Looking north-westwards towards the promontory forts at Gouge Point (centre) and Scotch Point (centre background). number of subsurface features identified by previous geophysical survey focused on the area of the fort defences, including a second funerary monument (ring-ditch) in the vicinity of the ring-barrow,73 further highlight the archaeological potential of this locale. Near-surface igneous geology had a major impact on the survey across the southern half of area 3 and may also account for some of the more localised strong responses recorded within the promontory fort. The bank and ditch of the fort exhibit characteristic (negative and positive) linear responses (G3), with an irregular band of discrete positive anomalies also revealed by the survey directly inside the bank. Rather than marking the line of a second, inner, ditch, the latter anomalies are more likely to represent small archaeological features (e.g. pits, spreads, etc.) and/or an accumulation of magnetically enhanced material along the inner edge of the rampart. While these anomalies support indications in earlier surveys of a

concentration of archaeological features in this area, the ring-ditch identified outside the fort defences in 2005 is not readily visible in the present survey data. A linear feature extending north-eastwards from the rampart corresponds with the derelict field bank (G2) mentioned above, the alignment of which is shared by some of the south-west to north-east linear trends inside the fort area, suggesting former cultivation. More significant, perhaps, is an array of faint, positive circular anomalies identified by the survey inside and outside the fort (e.g. G4 and G5). While difficult to discern above the local background values, the size (c. 10–20m) and form of these anomalies suggest that they may represent ring-ditches, though some, particularly inside the fort, could equally denote the subsurface remains of circular structures/buildings. As well as possible domestic structures, the potential presence of additional funerary monuments in the vicinity of the extant ring-barrow is perhaps not surprising. 105

4-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:29 Page 106

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland

Fig. 4.15—Area 3 (Scotch Point): greyscale image of gradiometry results.

4, GOUGE POINT (Figs 4.17–4.18) Investigations on a more limited scale were also undertaken at Gouge Point, the smaller and more impressive of the two promontory forts (also known as the ‘Garden Fort’) on Lambay.74 The promontory here comprises an elongated area of approximately 0.25ha, bounded by steep cliffs and cut off from the mainland

AREA

106

Fig. 4.16—Area 3 (Scotch Point): interpretative plan showing principal geophysical anomalies.

by three earthen ramparts with external ditches (see Figs 4.14 and 4.17). Owing to the rugged nature of the terrain, the restricted space and the dangers presented by the cliffs, only two small areas were accessible for survey. Both were heavily overgrown with dense vegetation and had to be cleared by hand prior to survey. The first area investigated (area 4a) lies

4-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:29 Page 107

Investigations on Lambay, Co. Dublin

Fig. 4.17—Area 4a/b (Gouge Point): results of electrical resistance survey (+25 to +50 omhs) overlaid on an aerial image (aerial image courtesy of UCD School of Archaeology).

Fig. 4.18—Area 4a/b (Gouge Point): results of gradiometry survey (-12nT to +12nT) overlaid on an aerial image (aerial image courtesy of UCD School of Archaeology). 107

4-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:29 Page 108

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland between the outer bank and the substantial, rock-cut middle ditch and comprises a small, wedge-shaped terrace or annexe defined on the south by a low bank and to the north by the cliff edge. The gradiometer and electrical resistance surveys here were conducted over a roughly rectangular area with maximum dimensions of 20m north/south by 10m east/west. Both techniques were also applied across a 20m x 10m grid in area 4b, which encompasses the western portion of a rectangular area bounded by the middle rampart and the inner ditch and rampart. No new features of interest were identified by the surveys in area 4a (Figs 4.17–4.18). The lowerresistance values recorded at the southern side of this area correspond with the inner slope of the extant earthen bank, while the high-resistance readings in the north-eastern corner are associated with a concentration of loose stones in the topsoil. Apart from a band of enhanced magnetic values in the area of the bank, the only anomalies recorded by the gradiometer survey in area 4a are a scatter of discrete ferrous responses indicative of small iron objects, of probable modern origin, in the topsoil. Low-resistance values were also recorded immediately east of the middle rampart in area 4b, while an amorphous zone of high-resistance readings (R1) is apparent further to the east (Fig. 4.17). This increase in resistance values partly overlaps with a broad magnetic response (G1) recorded by the gradiometer survey (Fig. 4.18), which measures up to 5m across and extends beyond the limits of the survey. With values in the 40–60nT range, this anomaly may denote an area of burning (archaeological or modern), although the possibility that it marks the edge of a localised seam of igneous geology cannot be ruled out. Finally, a broad band of increased magnetic values (G2), some 2m in width, extending at right angles from the middle rampart (south of G1), corresponds with a low-profile topographical feature mapped by aerial photogrammetry that is likewise considered to be of archaeological potential.

Discussion It might be useful to begin by setting the LIARI surveys and reassessment of the burials and Iron Age and Roman material from Lambay in a wider context in terms of the settlement history of the island. We know that Lambay was inhabited from the Mesolithic period onwards.75 From then on there were locations on the island, such as the zone adjacent to the west coast, that appear to have been ‘persistent places’, 108

utilised on a recurring basis. Human occupation would have been based not just on the resources available on the island but also on its strategic location as the largest offshore island in the Dublin island group. As Freeman has pointed out, while we may not be able to identify Lambay specifically with one of the islands described by Pliny and Ptolemy, their knowledge of island names must reflect an increase in traffic between Ireland and the Roman world from the first century AD, an observation backed up by finds of Roman material on the Dublin island group.76 Two other times when we have clear evidence of Lambay being situated in a wider Irish Sea world are around 3000 BC, during the middle/late Neolithic, when the island was linked in with the wider Boyne–Orcadian passage tomb tradition, and during the Viking period, when Iona and its fellow Columban monastery on Rechra (Lambay) were among the early raiding targets.77 Given the pattern of currents in the Irish Sea, movement along the coasts is likely to have until recently been a major motif in the patterns of travel and trade.78 Hence we should view the three periods and contexts mentioned here, notably the late Iron Age period which is the focus of this chapter, as times when Lambay’s continuing wider cultural context becomes more apparent. The LIARI geophysical surveys (Fig. 4.19) provide significant additional information on later prehistoric activity as well as indicating aspects of the longer settlement history of the island. For example, the consistent occurrence within areas 1–3 of linear trends associated with cultivation provides indications of a very different agricultural regime on the island up to the recent past. Given the relatively shallow depth of soil over most of the island, this cultivation history may also provide the reason for the faint character of some of the anomalies identified in the areas surveyed. The most significant results came from the South Point area, where there was the greatest range of features of archaeological potential (Fig. 4.9). Here magnetic anomalies indicated potential early land division, what appears to be the northern half of a large circular enclosure about 50m in diameter and what may be a ring-ditch cemetery. In the north-west of the harbour area (Fig. 4.12) there were traces of what may be an early land division in the form of a linear anomaly, and also tentative evidence of an enclosure about 40m in diameter. The results from the interior and exterior of the promontory fort at Scotch Point (Fig. 4.16) revealed a number of faint positive circular anomalies; while interpretation of these is somewhat open-ended, it is likely that they are either roundhouses (an interpretation that might fit those

4-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:29 Page 109

Investigations on Lambay, Co. Dublin

Fig. 4.19—Combined gradiometry survey results and aerial image of the western part of Lambay. (Aerial imagery © Ordnance Survey of Ireland. All rights reserved. Licence no. EN0059212.)

109

4-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:29 Page 110

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland inside the promontory fort rampart and ditch) or ring-ditches (an interpretation that might fit the anomalies to the south and east of the promontory fort), potentially complementing the visible ringbarrow just to the south of the fort. The results from the areas surveyed at the Gouge Point promontory indicated features of archaeological potential but of an ambiguous character. Overall, the results of the geophysical surveys (Fig. 4.19) suggest that, as in the context of the wider landscape of the promontory fort at Drumanagh discussed in Chapter 3, there was significant, ongoing human activity on the island. The anomalies with potentially the closest chronological tie to the late Iron Age are the potential ring-ditch clusters at South Point and Scotch Point. It should be emphasised that this type of funerary monument has a long chronology in Ireland. On the other hand, the occurrence of a visible ring-barrow of possible Iron Age date in the putative cluster at Scotch Point, the location of a second cluster at South Point and the recognition of a further ring-ditch in a geophysical survey undertaken in Little Mason’s field, about 300m east and upslope from Lambay Castle, all point to an important potential record of later prehistoric funerary activity on the island.79 The ring-ditch complex on the top of Popeshall hill discussed in Chapter 3 is visible from all the locations of potential ring-ditches on Lambay (see Fig. 3.27). The character of the enclosures at South Point and the harbour areas suggests that they are defined by narrow ditches or palisade trenches and are more likely to be prehistoric than historic in date.80 The survey was also important in apparently ruling out the possiblity that the large South Point promontory might have been enclosed. On the other hand, both the promontory forts at Scotch Point and Gouge Point show evidence of activity. The anomalies in the interior of Scotch Point are very cautiously interpreted as domestic structures, which might or might not be contemporary with the promontory fort. As noted above, the lack of any obvious anomalies in the harbour area that could be associated with the Iron Age burials should not be read as necessarily ruling out the presence of as-yet-undetected burials. The material associated with the burials and the burials themselves were the subject of a critical desktop review that formed the first section of this chapter. This has indicated that the cultural context of the individuals was much more complex than the still frequently proffered suggestion that they were people with affinities with the Brigantes of northern Britain who may have been displaced by the progress of the 110

Roman army in the decades following the Claudian invasion.81 We appear to be seeing individuals who were buried in a mortuary rite and with objects that indicate a diverse range of cultural influences. The mortuary practice appears to have its background in native practice in Britain.82 The range of objects seems to include material made in Britain or traded from Gaul and, as noted above, is characterised by the entanglement of technologies and designs coming from both Roman and local Iron Age influences, interchanged in the fluid cultural world of Ireland on the edge of empire. Who were these people? Refugees? Traders? The local élite? It is clear that Lambay and Drumanagh were occupied by people who had strong links with the Roman world, as evident in the material from the two places. Were these locations (particularly Drumanagh) entrepôts— trading and cultural interfaces between two worlds, where prestige objects from the Roman world were linked into the network of trade and exchange supplying the social élites in eastern Ireland? Are we seeing a spatial compression of the concept of a market zone beyond the Roman frontier with the movement of ‘globalised’ Roman objects into the hands of local élites and the social display of those products in burials, as reflected in the warrior and mirror burial on Lambay?83 Clearly there is more to follow from the detailed study and analysis of the material itself and dating combined with contextual, osteological and isotopic analysis of the human skeletal material.This, combined with a targeted programme of verification of the results of the geophysical survey, holds the promise of elucidating more of the complex cultural tapestry of Lambay in the late Iron Age.

Notes 1. For a summary see Cooney 2009a. 2. Cooney 2005; Cooney, Bayliss et al. 2011. 3. On the geology of Lambay see Stillman 1994; Geological Survey of Ireland 2008; Parkes 2012, 12–13. 4. The island is in private ownership and the authors are very grateful to the Lambay Estate Company for granting access to the survey teams and for their support while we carried out the surveys. 5. Drummond 1840; Bateson 1973, 35. 6. For full details of this find see Lewis 1837. The finds and burials from Bray are discussed in Chapters 2 and 6 of this volume. 7. RMP DU009-001012. 8. Macalister 1928–9. 9. Jope 1961–2. 10. Rynne 1976.

4-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:29 Page 111

Investigations on Lambay, Co. Dublin 11. Raftery 1983; 1984; 1994, 125–8 and 205–8. 12. See Raftery 1983, 288, for full details of the catalogue entries for finds from Lambay. 13. See Laing 1987, 10–11, on the different types of motifs common to what he refers to as ‘Dark Age art’ in Scotland and Ireland. See also Harding 2007 for a more detailed outline of both native and Roman artistic styles throughout Europe, Britain and Ireland. 14. Crummy 2005, 93. 15. Rynne 1976, 241. 16. As described by Raftery (1994, 201). 17. See Chapter 2 for details of these coins. 18. Mackreth 2011, vol. 1, pl. 17 (no. 5855 for circular plate, nos 5876 and 5879 for lozenge shape). 19. Bayley and Butcher 2004, 150; Mackreth 2011, vol. 1, 29. 20. Bayley and Butcher 2004; Mackreth 2011, vol. 1, 35. 21. Bateson 1973, 75; see also Rynne 1976, 241. 22. Mackreth 2011, vol. 1, 23. An example was given to Wheeler to create a type series for similar brooches that he excavated at the Romano-British fort and temple complex at Lydney Park in Gloucestershire, and Wheeler coined the name of the type series; Bateson 1973, 67. 23. Mackreth 2011, vol. 1, 23, no. 6380. 24. Macalister 1928–9; Rynne 1976, 240; Raftery 1994, 216. 25. But with some variant types known from the early second century AD, although these may have been residual; see Mackreth 2011, vol. 1, 33–4. 26. My thanks (JCW) to colleagues at the University of Bristol, Bristol Museum and Art Gallery and the RömischGermanischen Kommission, Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, for discussions on the large variants that are common on the Continent. 27. Rynne 1976, 234. 28. Raftery 1984, 284. 29. See Laing 1987 on Celtic art in Roman contexts. 30. Rynne 1976, 234–6; Raftery 1984, 282–4. 31. Lloyd Morgan 1976; Raftery 1983, 284; 1984; 1994. 32. Mason 2012, 34; Woolliscroft and Hoffman 2010. 33. See Harding 2007 for examples from both earlier and later contexts in Britain and Europe. 34. See Raftery 1983, 279, for a full description of the decorative motif. The ‘Mill Hill crown’ found on the head of a burial in a cemetery in Kent suggests that we should not discount the possibility that this was part of a larger or more elaborate piece of costume/dress; for a full discussion see Stead 1995. 35. Roymans 2005, 178, pl. 16 (in particular the bronze-plated iron belt hooks). 36. For discussion of the unusual Boho spearhead see Raftery 1984, 110; Wallace and Ó Floinn 2002, 145. For the spearhead from the River Blackwater, Co. Tyrone, see Bourke and Crone 1993. 37. For the full catalogue entry, photographs and interpretation of this object see Raftery 1984, 268–72. 38. Raftery 1983; 1984, 74. 39. Macalister 1928–9; Hunter and Keppie 2012. 40. See Bishop and Coulston 2006, 145, for a range of both early and, more commonly, later openwork plates, buckles and scabbard fitments found at Roman sites throughout Europe. See Harding 2007 for a detailed review of Roman and native artistic designs, and in particular his discussion on the early Roman influence on finds in the late La Tène local burials. 41. Rynne 1976, 240.

42. Crummy 2005, 93. 43. Kelly 1993, 41. 44. The author (JCW) is grateful to Peter Twinn (University of Bristol) and Kurt Adams (Finds Liaison Officer) at the Bristol Museum and Art Gallery for discussing the boss with me, and also to Helen Geake (University of Cambridge), Thomas Grane and Xenia Pauli-Jensen (National Museum of Denmark) for their specialist opinions on this. 45. Hooker 2001. 46. See Hunter 2010. The Portable Antiquities Scheme (PAS) was developed as a centralised on-line searchable database (www.finds.org.uk) to record finds made by local people and metal-detectorists in Britain. It contains detailed records of small finds that have been classified and catalogued by dedicated Finds Liaison Officers across Britain. 47. Hunter 2010, 91. 48. MacGregor catalogued fourteen and there are now 44 of these recorded; see MacGregor 1976. 49. Many good examples of these torcs can be viewed on the PAS on-line database (www.finds.org.uk). 50. Macalister 1928–9, 240; Rynne 1976, 234; Raftery 1994, 200. 51. E. O’Brien 1990, 37–8; 1999b; 2009a, 136–8; Cahill Wilson 2012a. 52. E. O’Brien 2009a, 137; McGarry 2009. 53. Philpott 1991. 54. See Whimster 1981; Joy 2010; 2012. 55. Harding 2007, 161; Johns 2006; Joy 2012. 56. Jope 1954, where this mirror handle and the Keshcarrigan bowl are discussed and both are considered as imported sometime in the middle of the first century AD, but see Raftery 1984, 223; although Raftery believes these to be native in design, he does offer parallels with a bowl from Colchester. 57. See Chapter 2 for discussion and circumstance of these finds. 58. Raftery 1984, 215–16. 59. See www.pastscape.org.uk, accessed March 2013; David Rice, Keeper, Gloucester Museum, pers. comm.; Jope 1954; Raftery 1984, 223. 60. Stead and Hill 2006. 61. Joy 2012. 62. Linda Fibiger (University of Edinburgh) has worked closely with Cooney on Lambay, with special reference to human remains and mortuary practices. Special thanks are due to Nigel Monaghan and Andy Halpin of the NMI for their help with access to this material. 63. See, for example, Aspinall et al. 2009; Gaffney and Gater 2003. 64. Stillman 1994, 62–4; Hoare 1975. 65. RMP DU009-001013, RMP DU009-00106 and RMP DU009-00107. See also Cooney 2009a, 15, 21. 66. The authors would like to thank Roseanne Schot (NUI Galway), Siân Thomas (Cardiff University), Karen Dempsey (UCD) and Discovery Programme staff for assistance with the survey. 67. The surveys in areas 1–4 were undertaken in August 2012 under licence no. 12R078. 68. RMP DU009-001003/4. Cooney 1996; 2003. 69. Macalister 1928–9; Herity 1982. 70. See Cooney 2009a, 21. The previous geophysical survey at Scotch Point was conducted by Elliott in April 2005 (licence no. 05R051).

111

4-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:29 Page 112

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77.

78. 79.

112

RMP DU009-001001. RMP DU009-001014. Cooney 2009a, 21. For an early description of the promontory fort at Gouge Point see Westropp 1922, 68–70. Cooney 2009a; Dolan and Cooney 2010. Freeman 2001. Cooney, Ballin et al. 2013. For discussion of the early Viking raid on Lambay see Herbert 1996, 67; and for the view that it was Rathlin rather than Lambay that was attacked in AD 795 see, for example, Graham-Campbell 1998. See discussion in Cooney 2004. Geophysical survey (licence no. 13R049) was carried out by Ian Elliott of Irish Geophysical and Archaeological Surveys

80. 81. 82. 83.

(IGAS) and Cultural Resource Development Services (CRDS) to inform the design and location of proposed development. Our thanks to IGAS, CRDS and the Lambay Estate Company for this information. For chronology of ring-ditches and barrows see, for example, Newman 1997, 153–70. For discussion of Iron Age ring-ditches see papers in Corlett and Potterton 2012. For roundhouses see, for instance, Tierney and Johnston 2009. See, among others, E. Cotter 2013. Cunliffe 2012, 384. E. O’Brien and Bhreathnach 2013. See Cunliffe 2008, 397, fig. 11.17, 497 (further reading); Soderberg 2013.

5-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:17 Page 113

5. REFLECTIONS ON A LAKE: A MULTI-PROXY STUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE AND HUMAN IMPACTS AT LOUGH LUGH, UISNEACH, CO. WESTMEATH ROSEANNE SCHOT, INGELISE STUIJTS, SEAMUS MCGINLEY AND AARON POTITO

The growing emphasis on innovative interdisciplinary research in archaeology and the palaeoenvironmental sciences is contributing to an ever more coherent understanding of the relationships between people and the environment through time. Although palynology has traditionally played a leading role in the reconstruction of past environments and land-use patterns, multiproxy studies utilising data from related fields such as palaeolimnology and palaeoentomology are becoming increasingly common, albeit only quite recently in Ireland.1 In tandem with these developments, the growing number of studies focused on lakes and bogs with relatively small catchments is creating a more complex picture of past human activity across many parts of the island. An inherent constraint in many archaeoenvironmental studies, however, is that wetland environments, and in particular large bogs (from which the majority of sediment cores derive), tend to be marginal from an agricultural perspective and are often located some distance away from the target archaeological sites or landscapes being investigated. In framing the research agenda for new palaeoenvironmental investigations by the LIARI Project (see Chapter 1), it was decided that sites of high archaeological potential, with evidence to indicate late Iron Age activity, should, where possible, be targeted in order to obtain high-quality data across a range of contemporary scientific approaches. Following preliminary fieldwork to identify sites that might provide suitable locations for coring, a pond known as Lough Lugh, on the Hill of Uisneach, Co. Westmeath, emerged as a priority candidate for investigation. The pond, which lies at the centre of a multi-period archaeological complex with a significant Iron Age horizon, provides a unique opportunity to assess environmental change and human interaction with the landscape through an integrated analysis of localised, in situ archaeological and palaeoenvironmental data. A sediment core was extracted from Lough Lugh in April 2012 by a team from the Discovery Programme and the Palaeoenvironmental Research Unit, School of Geography and Archaeology, NUI Galway, and is currently being analysed as part of a

collaborative multi-proxy study.2 The study combines pollen, non-pollen palynomorphs, chironomids (Chironomidae: non-biting midge flies), loss-on-ignition (LOI) at 550°C and 950°C and geochemical analyses (C:N, δ13C, δ15N)3 with the interpretation of existing archaeological evidence to characterise and elucidate changes over time in the local environment, human activity and land use at Uisneach. Owing to their life-history traits, chironomids are very sensitive to changing water conditions and have been used to reconstruct lake response to changing land-use practices. LOI is a measure of the organic component of lake muds by weight and can show changes in lake productivity, lake level or other catchment processes. The geochemistry of the organic portion of the lake sediments can provide information on lake productivity, sources of lake-sediment organic matter (including inputs from animal waste) and changing land-use practices. A recent multi-proxy study has successfully shown the potential for reconstructing prehistoric farming practices within Irish lake catchments by using these indicators.4 The sediment samples have so far been analysed for pollen, non-pollen palynomorphs, chironomids and LOI, and will soon be analysed for geochemistry of the organic portion of the lake muds. Additional samples for pollen and chironomids are also being analysed to enhance the data set. This paper provides an interim statement on the results and some preliminary interpretations arising from the research to date.

Archaeological background Lough Lugh5 is the name given locally to a natural pond on the summit of Uisneach,6 a low but prominent hill renowned in early literary sources as the ‘navel’ of Ireland and meeting place of the ancient provinces. The hill (180m ASL), located some 15km south-west of Mullingar, forms part of a belt of scattered limestone uplands that extends north-eastwards from Knockast to Frewin Hill, on the western shore of Lough Owel (Fig. 5.1). The fertile, elevated lands of 113

5-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:17 Page 114

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland Inny River

´

Lough Lene

LONGFORD Lough Derravaragh Lough Ree

iver yR Inn

Lough Owel

Fig. 5.1— Location map of site (shaded relief model base © ESRI, GTOPO30).

W E S T M E AT H Lough Ennelll

Hill of Uisneach

h er S Riv

ve rB ro sn a

on ann

Main Map

Ri

10km

O F F A LY

the region are interspersed with numerous small lakes, bogs and eskers, and traversed by a dense network of minor rivers and streams that drain into the River Inny, to the north, and the River Brosna, to the east and south. This topographically diverse landscape is rich in archaeological remains, with sites and finds of Bronze Age and early medieval date particularly well represented.7 Apart, however, from Uisneach, which displays remarkable longevity as a regional focal centre, there is little direct evidence of Iron Age activity in the wider landscape, consisting mainly of a small but significant assemblage of chance finds.8 The main concentration of monuments at Uisneach is spread over a broad, undulating ridge which provides spectacular panoramic views across the central plain of Ireland. Alongside a diverse array of archaeological remains that appear to range in date from the Neolithic to the medieval period, the hill is also notable for its many curious topographical features, which, in addition to Lough Lugh, include a number of springs and the striking rock formation known as the ‘Cat Stone’, on its south-western slope (Fig. 5.2).9 These features play a central role in the mythology of Uisneach, a site also famed for its venerable ash tree, Craeb Uisnig, one of the five sacred trees of Ireland.10 114

Lough Lugh (166m ASL) lies at the approximate centre of the monument complex in a slight hollow between the western and eastern summits of the hill, both of which are crowned by prehistoric funerary monuments and enclosures. These monuments, together with several sites of early medieval date, suggest that Uisneach was a cemetery and religious sanctuary for much of its history and that it continued to be a focus for ceremonial activity into the early medieval period, when the hill was appropriated as a royal seat by the southern Uí Néill and we see the first definitive evidence of settlement.11 Significant insights into activity at Uisneach during the first millennium AD were provided by excavations conducted in the 1920s by Macalister and Praeger at a large figure-of-eight-shaped enclosure near the eastern summit of the hill, in Rathnew townland.12 This monument—which has been interpreted by Schot as a conjoined high-status or royal ringfort— was built on top of an earlier ceremonial enclosure defined by a penannular ditch (c. 50m in diameter) with possible traces of an outer stone wall and a number of ancillary ditches and internal pits. Evidence of feasting, the lighting of great fires and possible animal sacrifice, coupled with the presence of fragments of human bone in the ditch and interior of the penannu-

5-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:17 Page 115

Reflections on a lake: a multi-proxy study of Lough Lugh, Uisneach, Co. Westmeath

Fig. 5.2—Map of the archaeological complex at Uisneach (after Schot 2011, fig. 5.2).

115

5-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:17 Page 116

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland

Fig. 5.3—Lough Lugh, viewed from the east, with ditch of 200m enclosure in foreground (marked by ranging rod). A trigonometric station on the cairn known as St Patrick’s Bed, on the western summit, is just visible on the horizon.

lar enclosure, suggests activity of a ritual nature. Alongside an iron knife from one of two large pits just inside the eastern entrance, a Roman type 1a barrelpadlock key of second- to fourth-century AD date13 from the site (for which no find context was recorded by the excavators) might also belong to this early horizon. Overall, the stratigraphical and artefactual evidence suggests that the penannular enclosure was constructed during the late Iron Age, perhaps sometime between the third and fifth centuries AD.14 Interestingly, an unclassified Roman coin of the Emperor Magnentius (AD 350–3), provenanced only to ‘Uisneach’,15 may provide further evidence for the presence on the hill of individuals with links to—or access to material from— Roman Britain at a time when Uisneach had developed into a major cult centre. Recent geophysical investigations at Uisneach have also revealed a host of previously unrecorded archaeological monuments and features, including a large ditched enclosure, c. 200m in diameter, surrounding a prominent mound on the eastern summit of the hill.16 Traces of the ditch are still visible on the west, where the enclosure overlooks Lough Lugh (Fig. 5.3). The juxtaposition of pond, summit mound and hilltop enclosure is intriguing and finds parallels at 116

other major ceremonial and ‘royal’ centres such as Navan Fort, Co. Armagh, where activity during the Iron Age included ritual deposition in the neighbouring lake of Loughnashade.17 There is good reason to suspect that Lough Lugh may have been a focus for similar activity in later prehistory; at present, however, the strongest evidence to indicate a ritual or otherworldly significance for the pond is found in early documentary sources. Indeed, not only do early texts attribute the origin of various lakes and rivers to supernatural events at Uisneach but also there can be little doubt that Lough Lugh and the summit mound are the features referred to in a topographical account which describes the drowning of the god Lug in Loch Lugborta during an assembly on the hill and his burial in nearby Carn Lugdach.18 In addition to the mound, funerary activity on this part of the hill is also indicated by a number of ring-ditches identified by geophysical survey, while the area immediately to the north of Lough Lugh was described as ‘the site of an old burying ground’ in the 1830s by the occupants of a cottage on the western side of the pond.19 The cottage, which now lies in ruins, is surrounded by the remains of several stone walls; however, apart from these and a few derelict

5-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:17 Page 117

Reflections on a lake: a multi-proxy study of Lough Lugh, Uisneach, Co. Westmeath field banks and townland boundary walls that meet at the pond, no significant features are visible in this area today. Although much of the hill has been cultivated in recent centuries, all of the lands at Uisneach—with the exception of a large arable field on its lower, northern slope—are currently given over to pasture, and up until last year Lough Lugh was used as a watering-hole for livestock. A few of the enclosures and field boundaries on the hill are likely to be associated with pastoral farming in medieval/post-medieval times, but the nature and extent of early agricultural activity at Uisneach is difficult to gauge on the basis of current archaeological evidence. The large assemblage of cattle and other faunal remains revealed by excavation at Rathnew, some 200m south-east of Lough Lugh, and in lesser quantities at a second large enclosure to the north, in Togherstown townland,20 testifies to the presence of livestock at Uisneach during the late Iron Age and early medieval period, though whether animals were raised on site or brought in from elsewhere is a question that cannot be addressed using traditional archaeological methods alone. The same is true with respect to arable farming, with several disc querns from Rathnew attesting to the processing of cereal,21 rather than its cultivation, at Uisneach during the early medieval period. While the potential of palaeoenvironmental studies to provide valuable glimpses into past land use and farming practices has been amply demonstrated at other ‘royal’ sites, most notably at Navan and Tara, Co. Meath,22 the results of the present research, discussed below, have proved less conclusive in this regard.

Site description and coring methodology Lough Lugh, which is roughly oval in shape and varies from c. 60m to 80m in diameter, displays no obvious inflow or outflow of water, suggesting that it is mainly fed by subsurface seepage through the bedrock or an underground spring. It is the most elevated of no less than four watery features at Uisneach, which also include two springs, Tobernaslath (In Finnflescach) and St Patrick’s Well, and another large pond on the southern slope of the hill. The latter pond only appeared in recent decades but is in an area that may also have been prone to waterlogging or intermittent pooling in the past. The centre of Lough Lugh is covered by a floating vegetation mat, surrounded in places by small, lichen-covered willow shrubs. The vegetation mat consists of grasses and sedges in hummocks and hol-

lows that float on water some 1.5m deep. This mat is thin and fragile in places, especially in the area of the willow trees, and can only be walked upon with extreme care. The outermost part of the pond is relatively shallow, with the limestone bedrock clearly visible through the water in places. This part of the pond is covered by dense patches of Equisetum fluviatile (horsetail reeds). The shore vegetation consists of various grasses, in which thistles and various buttercups abound. Fraxinus (ash), Crataegus (hawthorn) and Prunus spinosa (sloe) represent the dominant trees in the wider surrounding area, but they are sparse and widely spaced. The vegetation mat is of interest as it represents a transition stage between an open body of water and an infilled lake. It does not appear on a watercolour of the pond dating from c. 1820–30, which suggests that it is of relatively recent origin (Fig. 5.4).Vegetation mats of this sort usually exist for a period of 40–50 years— although durations of up to 100 years are not unknown—before gradual changes in the local environment lead to an increased growth of peatmoss (Sphagnum) and the development of (raised) bog. If no remedial action is taken, involving, for instance, the careful cutting of the grasses and sedges, the pond will disappear in a relatively short period of time. The bottom of the pond was initially probed with a bamboo rod and the sediment checked with a 2cm-diameter gouge auger. Following probing, an area near the centre of the pond where the lake sediments are deepest, reaching a maximum thickness of approximately 1m, was selected for coring. Given the fragile nature of the vegetation mat in the centre of Lough Lugh, some form of structure was needed to obtain a core. A wooden platform assembled on site provided a stable surface on which to balance, while a hole in the centre of the platform allowed maximum power to be exerted on the corer without destroying the underlying vegetation mat (Fig. 5.5). Three parallel cores (LL1, LL2 and LL3)23 were extracted using a Livingstone piston corer with a diameter of 5cm, which can take 1m sediment sections. LL3, the longest core at approximately 92cm, was analysed and three samples were submitted for radiocarbon dating (see below). Each level of the core was sampled for pollen, non-pollen palynomorphs, chironomid, LOI and geochemical analyses. The local vegetation at Lough Lugh was also partially sampled. The marsh vegetation, which includes various buttercups (Ranunculaceae), watercress (Rorippa nasturtium-aquaticum), marsh cinquefoil (Potentilla palustris) and bogbean (Menyanthes trifoliata), suggests a clean environment that has some form of 117

5-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:17 Page 118

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland

Fig. 5.4—Early nineteenth-century watercolour of Lough Lugh and cottage, by Emma Kelly (photographed with the kind permission of David and Angela Clarke).

influx of fresh water, probably, as noted above, through the limestone bedrock. In wetland environments, such plants are often only visible for a very short period of time before they retreat back underwater.

Sediment stratigraphy and radiocarbon dating

Fig. 5.5—Coring in progress at Lough Lugh. 118

The three cores from Lough Lugh were correlated on the basis of sediment stratigraphy (Fig. 5.6) and organic content measured by percentage LOI. The length of the cores varied: LL1 is 65cm long, from 145cm, at the surface of the lake bed, to 210cm at its base; LL2 measures 75cm in length (145–220cm); and LL3 extends from 145cm to 237cm depth (92cm). Although differing somewhat in stratigraphy, the two uppermost layers of the three cores match by sediment type and LOI.The upper stratum consisted of brown clay, which overlay a mottled layer comprising brown lake sediment intermixed with sediment of a lighter hue. A drastic drop in LOI occurs at the bottom of the mottled layer in each core, with low levels of organic carbon persisting to within the top 5cm of the sediment profile, when levels rise again.The lower part

5-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:17 Page 119

Reflections on a lake: a multi-proxy study of Lough Lugh, Uisneach, Co. Westmeath

Fig. 5.6—Stratigraphy of the sediment cores from Lough Lugh. of the cores consisted of varying layers of brown lake sediment and black lake mud, with glacial clay only present at the base of LL1. Three samples from LL3 were submitted to the 14CHRONO Centre for Climate, the Environment and Chronology in Belfast for AMS dating. The dates were calibrated using CALIB 7.0.024 and are cited below as 2-sigma age ranges; depths are given with reference to distance from the vegetation mat surface. The earliest date, 8349–8236 cal. BC (UBA-22929: 9088±42 BP), was obtained from a hazelnut shell at 170cm depth, which, together with the basal clay layer in core LL1, suggests a pre-Holocene origin for the lake. Owing to the absence of suitable organic remains for dating above c. 170cm in LL3—and in corresponding levels of cores LL1 and LL2—the remaining

dates were obtained from bulk sediment. Lake mud at 164cm was selected for dating after preliminary analysis indicated the first presence of cereal pollen at 167.5cm, and this was followed by a second bulk sample from 155–6cm. These samples yielded dates of 404–230 cal. BC (UBA-21917: 2286±30 BP) and 1054–854 cal. BC (UBA-24544: 2814±32 BP) respectively, signalling an age-depth reversal in the upper sediment sequence. As lake mud represents a mix of lake and terrestrial organics, however, potential distortion of the 14C/12C ratio by older carbon from the limestone basin/catchment means that these dates should be treated only as maximum estimates of depositional age. Despite this, the results are useful insofar as they suggest that the sediments above 164cm were deposited after c. 400 BC, and possibly many centuries later. In this context, the late Bronze Age date from 155–6cm might be interpreted as reflecting a higher random concentration of calcium carbonate-rich sediment in the bulk sample rather than a ‘true’ age-depth reversal. Significantly, moreover, the long time-lag between the lower two dates (UBA-22929 and UBA21917), which are only separated by 6cm in the core, points to a hiatus in the sediment record spanning much of the Holocene. Possible explanations for this include sediment erosion owing to fluctuating water levels and/or anthropogenic modification of the lake, potentially involving the removal of sediment, in antiquity or in the more recent past. Alongside a marked change in the sediment stratigraphy, from black to brown mottled lake mud, an abrupt shift at the 169–70cm interval—corresponding with the hiatus—is also indicated in the pollen and chironomid records, and by a dramatic drop in LOI from 84% to 25% organic content in zone 3 (167–70cm). This will be reviewed below.

Methodology Pollen Pollen was prepared at 10cm intervals from 237–185cm and at 5cm intervals from 185–145cm, with a few extra samples taken in between. In addition, pollen from moss on the vegetation mat was subjected to preparation and analysis. Samples were prepared using alkali digestion and acetolysis and were washed in alcohol before being mounted in silicon oil.25 The identification of individual grains was based on comparison with reference literature and a small reference collection.26 The pollen and non-pollen palynomorphs were counted at 400x magnification 119

5-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:17 Page 120

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland

Chironomids Twelve depths were subsampled for chironomid analysis. The sampling strategy focused on the time period of interest, with seven samples taken at 2.5cm intervals between 170cm and 155cm depth. Additional samples were also analysed from the bottom of the core (at 237cm, 230cm and 180cm), before the sediment hiatus, and towards the top of the core to represent modern conditions (at 150cm and 145cm). Chironomid analysis followed standard procedures.29 Between 1cc and 11cc of sediment was analysed in an attempt to extract a minimum of 40 head capsules per sample. This was not possible at 230cm (30.5 head capsules), 170cm (21) and 167.5cm (26.5), however, where head capsule concentration was low. For each sample, the sediment was deflocculated in a 10% KOH solution and heated at 30°C for 30 minutes. Owing to the high abundance of organics, the sediment was then sieved through two meshes (250µm and 90µm in diameter), and from 195cm to 170cm a third (900µm) mesh was used to remove the largest organic fragments. The remaining material from each mesh was rinsed with distilled water and backwashed into a beaker. The resulting solution was poured into a Bogorov plankton counting tray to be sorted with the aid of a Motic® SMZ Series dissection microscope at 10–40x magnification. Chironomids were removed with forceps and permanently mounted on slides with Entellan® for identification. Chironomid identifica120

Fig. 5.7—Preliminary pollen diagram.

using a Nikon Eclipse 80i microscope. Higher magnification of 1,000x was used for difficult grains as well as for the photographs of the pollen. Gramineae pollen larger than 37µm with an annulus size of 8µm or more was included in Cerealia-type pollen. Triticum (wheat) and Hordeum (barley) pollen were distinguished on the basis of their surface structure. Pollen-counting is still ongoing, with the aim of obtaining a minimum of 500 terrestrial grains to allow for future landscape modelling in collaboration with Jane Bunting.27 This is probably only possible with the upper part of the core, as the amount of tree pollen in the lower part of the sequence is quite low. The preliminary pollen diagram presented below (Fig. 5.7) was made using C2 version 1.4.2.28 Percentages are based on total terrestrial pollen (excluding water plants). A selection of pollen is shown that focuses on the most common pollen types and excludes non-pollen palynomorphs. The pollen diagram is divided into four main zones and five subzones, with the uppermost sample at 145cm.

5-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:17 Page 121

Reflections on a lake: a multi-proxy study of Lough Lugh, Uisneach, Co. Westmeath

Fig. 5.8—Chironomid stratigraphy with loss-on-ignition (LOI).

tions were made using a Motic® BA210 compound microscope at 100–400x magnification. Taxa identifications and ecological interpretations were based on leading chironomid literature.30 Forty-two distinct chironomid taxa were identified in the twelve samples, with seven to nineteen (mean = eleven) different taxa identified per sample. The chironomid percentage diagram below (Fig. 5.8) was constructed using C2 version 1.4.2,31 and is divided into four main zones with one subzone.

weight of the dry samples was then recorded before the crucibles were placed in a muffle furnace for four hours at 550oC. The loss in weight at this stage of the process, expressed as a percentage of dry weight, provides the LOI values. Finally, the crucibles were returned to the furnace and heated to 950oC for two hours, with subsequent weight loss providing an estimate of total inorganic carbon (TIC) in the lake sediment. TIC is not presented here, as the results were not deemed significant.

Geochemical analysis

Interim results

Altogether, 40 sediment samples have been processed for chironomid analysis, and all of these samples will soon be subject to geochemical (δ13C, δ15N, C:N) analysis at the University of Hawaii, Manoa. Sampling design follows LOI subsampling as shown in Fig. 5.8. Samples were taken at 1cm intervals after the hiatus and at 5cm intervals for the earlier portion of the core.

Zone 1 The initial results indicate that sedimentation in Lough Lugh was not straightforward. The lowermost sediment in pollen zone 1a includes characteristic pollen types such as Hippophae rhamnoides (sea buckthorn) and Helianthemum (rock rose), indicative of a pioneer vegetation (Fig. 5.7). Alongside pollen of Juniperus (juniper) and Artemisia (mugwort), this might indicate a pre-Holocene date. In zone 1b, between 230cm and 225cm, values for Hippophae and Helianthemum disappear. Juniperus declines sharply, while an increase in Betula (birch), Salix (willow) and Poaceae is noted. Pollen zone 1c is characterised by a significant increase in various tree pollen types, especially Betula and Juniperus, and a slight rise in Pinus (pine) values. Salix is well represented. Values for Poaceae and Cyperaceae decline. The local vegetation

Lake sediment characteristics LOI was conducted near the base of the core (237cm), at 5cm intervals between 230cm and 170cm, and at 1cm intervals from 169cm to the top of the core (145cm), following standard procedures (Fig. 5.8).32 The laboratory process began by weighing each labelled crucible with an accurate scale and placing each 1cc subsample of wet sediment in its designated crucible before drying for 24 hours at 100oC. The

121

5-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:17 Page 122

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland also includes water plants such as Myriophyllum (water milfoil), which are very common in zone 1c at 220cm and 210cm, above which other water plants such as Nymphaea (water lily) and Sparganium/Typha (burreed/bulrush) also occur. The chironomid assemblage in zone 1 represents Late Glacial or Early Holocene conditions. Cold stenotherms of Corynocera ambigua-type and Psectrocladius septrionalis-type are predominant in this zone, along with cold stenotherm Thienemannimyiatype (Fig. 5.8). These are mixed with taxa more representative of temperate, mesotrophic conditions, including Microtendipes pedellus-type, Glyptotendipes, Psectrocladius sordidellus/psilopterus-type and Tanytarsus lactescens-type (typically found in temperate, carbonate lakes). Several eutrophic taxa—Chironomus plumosustype, Procladius and Cricotopus intersectus-type—are also present in this zone, although they are less abundant than in modern samples. This mixture of cold-water and temperate taxa is typical of Late Glacial and Early Holocene sequences in Ireland.33 LOI results show that the sediment comprises approximately 50% organic content during this time. Zone 2 From pollen zone 2a upwards, a general increase in tree pollen is noted, especially the appearance and increase of Corylus (hazel).Values for Betula are high but fluctuate with a declining trend, and Juniperus is no longer well represented. Pinus occurs regularly. Quercus (oak) makes its first appearance at the upper part of zone 2a. Values for local taxa, including Poaceae and Cyperaceae, are low. Total tree pollen remains low, and the environmental remains are dominated by algae such as Botryococcus and various Desmidiaceae (desmid algae, which are indicators of water quality). The latter disappear at the uppermost level of zone 2a, at 180cm. This level also marks the first appearance of Ulmus (elm) and Fraxinus (ash). In pollen zone 2b, at 175cm, the tree vegetation is dominated by Corylus, which peaks strongly, and there is a good representation of Pinus, while Betula declines. Pollen grains at this level are corroded, but identification is still possible. Salix represents the most common local tree. Cladium mariscus (sawtooth sedge) appears at 200cm and remains present until the bottom of zone 3, after which it becomes rare. This cypergrass is characteristic of calcareous fens and was common on lake margins in early post-glacial times. Its presence may also indicate the start of the influx of water through the underlying bedrock. In zone 2, chironomids are only represented by one sample, at 180cm depth. Taxa are representative of temperate to warm, mesotrophic to slightly eutrophic 122

lake conditions. Several taxa that are found at this depth are associated with macrophytes, including Paratanytarsus, Lauterborniella, Ablabesmyia and Corynoneura edwardsi-type. Prominent temperate or mesotrophic taxa at this depth include Psectrocladius sordidellus/psilopterus-type, Cladopelma, Guttipelopia and Polypedilum nubeculosum-type. All of these taxa are associated with the littoral zone, which, together with the macrophyte-dwelling taxa, suggests shallow water conditions. LOI increases to 80–90% through most of this zone, further supporting reconstructed shallow water conditions with high within-lake productivity. Zone 3 Between zones 2b and 3 many changes occur and a hiatus is indicated by the pollen record. Above 170cm, Corylus and other tree pollen decline sharply and an open landscape emerges. Plantago (plantain, especially Plantago lanceolata, ribwort plantain) abounds, along with various Asteraceae. Characteristic are various pollen of Fabaceae such as Trifolium (clover), Lotus uliginosus (greater bird’s-foot trefoil) and probably also Vicia (vetch). It is not always possible to distinguish the various Fabaceae pollen grains, though they do indicate grassland-type vegetation around the pond. Charcoal is also well represented and cereals (Triticum and Hordeum) are present. In essence, we are looking at a pastoral landscape, with some indication of arable farming locally. The quality of the pollen is not always great, however, and a large number of pollen grains could not be identified. The reason for this might be local water fluctuations. Corylus pollen re-establishes somewhat above 165cm, though values remain lower than before. Quercus and Ulmus pollen are slightly better represented than in zone 2, but this might be the result of longdistance transport, as total tree pollen is less than 40%. Values for Quercus and Ulmus remain consistent, and Alnus (alder) is continuously present in low values. Corylus generally reaches 20%. Between 175cm and 166cm, in zone 2b and the lower part of zone 3, water plants are absent. The chironomid community in zone 3a is dominated by two terrestrial or semi-terrestrial taxa, Limnophyes/Paralimnophyes and Parametriocnemus/ Paraphaenocladius. This zone may represent a closing-in of the lake, or the early stages of renewed open-water conditions, with semi-terrestrial taxa present during the initial open-water phase. The drastic drop in LOI recorded at the start of this zone is unusual in a lake record and may suggest modification of the lake or an abrupt natural shift in local hydrological conditions.

5-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:17 Page 123

Reflections on a lake: a multi-proxy study of Lough Lugh, Uisneach, Co. Westmeath The zone 3b chironomid assemblage is dominated by two taxa commonly found in warm, eutrophic lakes—Chironomus plumosus-type and Procladius. Three other taxa found predominantly or exclusively in this zone—Cricotopus intersectus-type, Micropsectra contractatype and Tanytarsus pallidicormis-type—are also typical of warm, productive lakes. These productive conditions persist until the present, where nutrient enrichment from grazing and wading cattle is evident. The dominance of Chironomus plumosus-type and Procladius may also be indicative of higher water levels in zone 3b, as both taxa are often associated with the profundal zone of warm, productive lakes. In addition, plant macrofossils become significantly less apparent within the sieved sediment matrix from 166cm to the top of the core, suggesting that macrophytes became less predominant. Finally, Smittia/Parasmittia appears at 162.5cm and 157.5cm. This taxon is terrestrial and its presence in lake sediment is often indicative of erosion events. LOI remains relatively low at around 20%, showing a significant minerogenic component in the sediment matrix. Zone 4 The uppermost pollen sample in zone 4 includes introduced species such as Abies (silver fir) and Picea (spruce), indicating a modern age. This level sees a sharp reduction in total tree pollen down to 10%, which affects all species percentages. The local vegetation sees a sudden rise in Equisetum (horsetail). The testate amoebae Arcella discoides occurs regularly. The chironomid community in zone 4 shows the influence of the newly emergent floating vegetation mat. Terrestrial or semi-terrestrial taxa Limnophyes/ Paralimnophyes and Parametriocnemus/ Paraphaenocladius dominate, and Smittia/Parasmittia is again present. LOI increases to 55%, indicating a greater organic component in the lake sediment.

Pollen and chironomid interpretation The pollen profile in zone 1a is typical of Late Glacial vegetation, with pioneer tree species and an unstable and dynamic local environment. A Preboreal horizon is indicated for zone 1c, with a transition to the Boreal in zone 2a. The top of zone 2a marks the first occurrence of Ulmus, still a Boreal indicator. From zone 2a upwards, trees such as Pinus and Corylus, and later Quercus, Fraxinus and Ulmus, replaced Betula and Juniperus in the wider landscape. The chironomid community in zone 1 is also typical of the Late Glacial in Ireland, supporting the pollen evidence suggesting

that the base of the core pre-dates the Holocene. The sample at 180cm (zone 2) suggests a shallow, temperate, mesotrophic to slightly eutrophic lake during this time. The pollen profile in zone 3 reflects a completely different landscape, characterised by open pasture with indications of a continuous human presence (charcoal, some cereals, plantain, nettles, clovers) to the present day.The radiocarbon dates from 170cm (top of zone 2b) and 164cm (zone 3) indicate that this marked shift in the pollen composition coincides with a hiatus in the sediment record spanning thousands of years, the potential causes of which are discussed further below. The zone 3a within-lake indicators also provide evidence of a major transition at Lough Lugh, as exemplified by high percentages of terrestrial or semi-terrestrial chironomid taxa and an abrupt shift in LOI. Since the transition, warm, eutrophic conditions have persisted at Lough Lugh. The high proportion of profundal chironomid taxa also suggests that the lake was relatively deep, with open-water conditions during this time. Persistent eutrophic conditions support the pollen data, which reflect an open pastoral landscape with evidence of a continuous human impact following the hiatus. Furthermore, a near-modern sample at 150cm exhibits no notable differences from other chironomid samples in zone 3, showing that nutrient influx from grazing practices (including cattle presence in and around the lake itself) has not changed exceptionally over the centuries represented by the upper 22cm of lake sediment. Finally, the presence of a terrestrial chironomid taxon at 162.5cm and 157.5cm indicates periods of erosion which can potentially be linked to changing land-use practices.

Discussion Ongoing palaeoenvironmental investigations at Lough Lugh are providing intriguing new insights into the history of the lake and the impact of human activity on the physical landscape of Uisneach. The pollen and chironomid records indicate a Late Glacial origin for the lake, and this is supported by a radiocarbon date of 8349–8236 cal. BC from a hazelnut shell at 170cm depth.When considered alongside its unusual (upland) setting and striking appearance, the dating evidence lends weight to the view that Lough Lugh—together with the remarkable glacial erratic known today as the Cat Stone—was one of a suite of conspicuous natural features to inspire the perception of Uisneach as a ‘place apart’ from early prehistory onwards. 123

5-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:17 Page 124

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland The chrono-stratigraphic horizon from which the dated hazel shell derives, however, indicates that the greater part of core LL3 (approximately 73%, from 237cm to 170cm) pre-dates the earliest human presence in Ireland. That the upper section of the core represents but a fraction of the long history of human activity indicated by the archaeological remains on the hilltop is also underscored by the fact that the early Iron Age and late Bronze Age dates produced by bulk sediment, from 164cm and 155–6cm respectively, are almost certainly too old (and show a false age-depth reversal) owing to a limestone ‘reservoir effect’. Moreover, the successive natural shifts in lake ecology and local vegetation that characterise the Late Glacial and Early Holocene sequences give way to an abrupt and drastic change at the 169–170cm interval, above which a markedly different landscape, shaped in large part by human agency, emerges. The dramatic nature of this shift is illustrated most clearly by the pollen and LOI curves and supported by the chironomid and litho-stratigraphic records and, together with the widely disparate dates of the layers straddling the transition, points to a hiatus in the sediment record spanning thousands of years. Although Lough Lugh is not unique in having a hiatus, identifying the likely cause of ‘missing’ sediment—whether natural, anthropogenic or a combination of the two—is rarely straightforward. Significantly, the chironomid and pollen records show open-water conditions following the hiatus at Lough Lugh, but exhibit traits of shallowing with an abundance of terrestrial or semi-terrestrial chironomid species and no evidence of aquatic plants just prior to the transition. If the water dropped to a level at which the lake mud began to oxidise, it is possible that any exposed sediment was removed by aeolian forces. This scenario, occurring either as a single event or as the cumulative result of a series of major water-level fluctuations, could have led to the disappearance of a substantial volume of lake sediment as well as the desiccation of aquatic plant life, creating the lacuna in the pollen record and causing the drastic reduction in sedimentary organic matter (as measured by LOI) when the lake reinitiated. Such a scenario, however, would require exceptional natural events and, if oxidation did occur, would normally be evident as a distinct soil horizon in the sediment profile. The lack of an obvious soil horizon of this type in all three cores from Lough Lugh is noteworthy, and invites comparison with sites such as Ardnurcher Glebe, Co. Offaly, where the short sequence also proved to be much older than anticipated, with sediment of Late Glacial age and a 124

dearth of younger deposits. In the absence of an oxidised soil horizon in the lake core from Ardnurcher Glebe, deliberate removal was seen by O’Carroll as the most likely explanation for the ‘missing’ sediment, which may have comprised up to 3–7m of organic-rich deposits representing sedimentation over the last 10,000 years.34 The possibility of a similar explanation for the sediment lacuna at Lough Lugh may be given added weight by the fact that one of the cores, LL1, showed a particularly angled (63°) transition at the juncture of the sediment layers to either side of the hiatus (see Fig. 5.6). While interpretation remains tentative, excavation of the lake sediment currently provides the most likely scenario to account for all of the evidence, including the dramatic shift in the pollen assemblage, the precipitous drop in LOI and the sloping angle of some of the strata in core LL1. Anthropogenic modification of the landscape for the purpose of creating or enhancing a body of water is not without precedent. One of the most intriguing examples of this phenomenon is the artificial ritual pool known as the King’s Stables in the Navan complex, Co. Armagh, which was dug into an area of marshy ground near Haughey’s Fort, a late Bronze Age hillfort, around 1000 BC.35 The offerings placed in this and the nearby lake of Loughnashade over the course of the first millennium BC highlight the special significance of these bodies of water within the precincts of a high-status ceremonial complex that is closely comparable with Uisneach. A cognate desire to maintain Lough Lugh as an open-water ‘ritual’ pond may have provided an impetus for the removal of surface vegetation and lake sediment in antiquity, although, given the obvious importance of water as a resource, economic considerations could also have played a role. An eighth-century Irish law-text, for instance, makes clear that access to water significantly enhanced the value of land, and lists the presence of a permanent cattle pond (gelestar) as a particularly desirable feature.36 Archaeological evidence for the presence of cattle and other domesticates at Uisneach during the late Iron Age and early medieval period, and the use of Lough Lugh as a watering-hole in modern times, suggests that (intermittent?) cleaning out of the lake to improve water access for livestock might also provide a viable explanation for the hiatus in the sediment record. It is worth noting that the scenarios described above are not mutually exclusive and that a multi-causal explanation for the hiatus cannot be ruled out. Indeed, as well as the potential impact of natural fluctuations in lake levels over time, it is reasonable to assume that a resource as rare and

5-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:17 Page 125

Reflections on a lake: a multi-proxy study of Lough Lugh, Uisneach, Co. Westmeath valuable as a hilltop lake would have been carefully managed, which may from time to time have involved the removal of surface vegetation and sediment. A continuous human impact following the hiatus is clearly demonstrated by the palaeoenvironmental evidence from the upper section of core LL3 (c. 167–145cm). The open grassland-type vegetation indicated by the pollen assemblage, eutrophic lake conditions and persistently low LOI values are all consistent with intensive agricultural activity in the vicinity of Lough Lugh, with the increase in aquatics and sedimentary organic matter noted at the top of the core reflecting the newly emergent vegetation mat. In contrast to the sharp rise in Plantago lanceolata above 170cm, which points to the use of the surrounding lands for grazing, the scarcity of cereal pollen in the record suggests that arable farming was not practised on any significant scale.This is somewhat surprising in view of the geophysical and topographical evidence for extensive cultivation on the hill in recent centuries, particularly as a post-c. 1850 date is indicated for the sediments above 155cm by the appearance in the pollen record of imported species such as Abies and Picea. More detailed sampling of pollen from the upper part of the core, together with forthcoming geochemical analysis, should, however, provide a clearer picture of farming practices and changes in land use at Uisneach over time. Given the current lack of suitable organic material for dating above the hiatus, establishing the age of the upper sediment sequence at Lough Lugh is also a key priority.The shallow depth of the sediments above the lacuna in core LL3 (a mere 22cm), coupled with pollen evidence from the uppermost samples, raises the possibility that, collectively, these strata may be no more than a few centuries old. Agricultural activity is also likely to have had a bearing on sediment deposition within Lough Lugh, as lake sediment accumulation rates are often accelerated by soil erosion associated with intensive farming or changing land-use practices.37 As sedimentation is influenced by a wide range of variables, however, it is not possible to estimate accurately the rate of sediment deposition in the absence of wellconstrained 14C dates. These difficulties are further emphasised at Lough Lugh by the fact that the posthiatus sequences recorded in cores LL1 and LL2 are significantly longer than that of LL3. Additional work will soon be undertaken in an effort to address these issues, which will involve auguring the lake at 10m intervals across its north/south and east/west axes and extracting another core to obtain suitable (terrestrial plant macrofossil) samples for dating the post-hiatus

strata. It is hoped that this will provide a more detailed picture of changes in the litho-stratigraphy of the lake across time and space, and help to elucidate further the nature of past human–environment interactions within this most extraordinary landscape.

Notes 1. See, for example, Murphy and Whitehouse 2007. 2. This work was undertaken under licence no. 12E056 from the National Monuments Service (NMS), Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, and the National Museum of Ireland (NMI). The authors wish to thank Ger Dowling (the licence-holder) and Jacqueline Cahill Wilson of the Discovery Programme, and Karen Molloy (NUI Galway), for their contributions to the project. The pollen samples were prepared by Bettina Stefanini (NUI Maynooth) and funding for radiocarbon dates was provided by the LIARI Project/Discovery Programme. The project team would also like to thank the landowners, David and Angela Clarke, for facilitating the work at Lough Lugh. 3. Geochemical analysis is being conducted by Professor David Beilman, University of Hawaii. 4. Taylor et al. 2013. 5. RMP WM024-064; see note 23 for National Grid coordinates. 6. RMP WM024-177. 7. Schot 2008, especially vol. 1, 255–93. 8. Ibid., vol. 1, 285–6; vol. 2, 462–6, nos 233–46. Many of the Iron Age finds—which include a ring-headed pin from the Monaghantown River (in Clonsingle townland), a bronze boar’s-head figurine from Clare Hill, and three small hoards containing various combinations of horse-bits,Y-shaped pendants and iron axes from Streamstown, Kilbeg and Mullingar—are described in Raftery 1983 and 1984. 9. Schot 2011. 10. Ibid.; Best 1910, 150–1, §29; Gwynn 1903–35, III, 148–9. 11. Schot 2011. 12. Macalister and Praeger 1928–9. The following discussion is based on a detailed reassessment of the excavations by Schot (2006). See also Schot 2011. 13. Classification after Donaghy 1991. 14. Schot 2006, 50–4. 15. The coin (NMI E499:841) was discovered through illegal metal-detecting and was acquired by the NMI in 1992, but its present whereabouts are unknown. 16. Schot 2011, 97–104 and fig. 5.5. 17. See, for example, Lynn 2003b and various articles in the journal Emania. 18. Gwynn 1903–35, IV, 278–81. For further discussion on Uisneach’s association with water see Schot 2011, especially 93–6. 19. RMP WM024-064: Topographical files. 20. Macalister and Praeger 1928–9, 122–4; 1929–31. 21. Macalister and Praeger 1928–9, 117, nos 10–15. 22. Weir 1993; Mallory 2000; Ellis 2002. 23. NGR LL1: E229386.345, N248946.326; LL2: E229387.255, N248948.901; LL3: E229386.317, N248954.219. 24. Stuiver and Reimer 1993; Reimer et al. 2013.

125

5-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:17 Page 126

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland 25. Faegri and Iversen 1989. 26. Beug 2004. 27. Bunting is Senior Lecturer in Geography at the University of Hull. See Bunting et al. 2004; Bunting and Middleton 2005; 2009; Bunting 2008. 28. Juggins 2003. 29. Walker 2001. 30. Brooks et al. 2007; Rieradevall and Brooks 2001; Wiederholm 1983.

126

31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37.

Juggins 2003. Heiri et al. 2001. Watson et al. 2010. O’Carroll 2012, 195–7. Lynn et al. 1977; Lynn 2003b, 51–4. F. Kelly 2000, 394–7. See, for example, Roberts 2002, 223; Webb and Webb 1988.

6-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:21 Page 127

6. INVESTIGATING MOBILITY AND MIGRATION IN THE LATER IRISH IRON AGE JACQUELINE CAHILL WILSON, CHRISTOPHER STANDISH AND ELIZABETH O’BRIEN1

Formal burial in the Iron Age remains rare—in fact, it is the exception—and the instances and numbers of known burials in Ireland dating from this period are unlikely either to be proportional to the population groups actually living in Ireland at this time or to reflect all of the traditions of funerary practice. In keeping with our research on landscapes and identities, it became clear that changes in burial practices were likely to be linked to the evidence of British and Roman material at central places around Ireland. It had also become clear that this was a period within which people were moving, both within Ireland and into Ireland from elsewhere. Our approach to this element of the LIARI Project links into wider dialogues taking place in archaeological research about the importance of studies into population movement and migration and the impact of even small migratory population groups on social dynamics across different time periods. This scientific investigation fits well into aspects of relational change (as discussed in Chapter 2) that in many instances have challenged older interpretations or offered new lines of enquiry. Traditional archaeological investigation into population movement has been primarily based on artefact studies and it has sought out similarity in material remains—in class, form and function—along with parallels to be found elsewhere; this has led to a tendency towards generalisation rather than addressing the specificity likely in individual contexts or sites. Building on past approaches, we sought to develop new methods that might help us to understand and explain why differences occur in the burial record, and how this might be relevant in a wider landscape and cultural setting. Contemporary approaches to burial archaeology and ritualistic behaviour have to acknowledge that changes to long-held practices might reflect a complex range of emotional, cultural, social and political reasons. Each of these in turn may be situationally specific, but attempting to establish greater understanding is essential if we are to investigate how these may have affected innovation and change (or not) at a wider level in society. Moving back from the broader or generalised archaeological interpretation to that of the individual, whether in life

or in death (as in this case), allows us to use the results of complementary research on other aspects of archaeological investigations from Ireland. The aim of this research was to test whether we could identify migrants buried at sites in Ireland, to offer a probable geographic origin for them and to begin to evaluate the likely impact of their presence against a background of localised cultural change.2 Just as the old adage reminds us that pottery does not move itself, it is also a fact that the dead do not bury themselves;3 their final interment reflects not just the funerary practices current at that time but also the social and symbolic relevance of mortuary and funerary rituals to their communities. Those who mourned and grieved committed these individuals to their final resting place, and it is they who chose to represent the individual in a manner most befitting the life he or she lived.

Burial in the late Iron Age in Ireland Our investigations follow contemporary scientific research methods that seek to marry studies of osteological material, from both humans and animals, with the application of isotope geochemistry, the value of which has been demonstrated in recent research into the mobility of people in both prehistory and more modern diaspora studies.4 This approach allows us to investigate patterning and distribution of any unusual burials, along with those that may have had associated material (in the burial context itself, or found in associated contexts close by) and that were interpreted as culturally distinctive. The scientific analysis allows us to assess whether what we are seeing are the burials of people who originated outside Ireland but who were buried in a manner deemed appropriate by their community using their own funerary practices, or whether it reflects the burial of local people who had altered existing socially embedded funerary practices. One further aspect that should be noted here is that our analysis will only indicate first-generation migrants, but in many cases unusual or new burial practices may reflect the burial of second or later generations whose 127

6-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:21 Page 128

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland funerary rituals were deemed important to their community and were maintained. Detailed reviews of the changes in burial practices in Ireland throughout the late Iron Age have been published in full and it is not necessary to replicate these here.5 The most comprehensive analysis of possible ‘intrusive’ burial practices in Leinster was published by O’Brien in 19906 and it remains the starting point from which all subsequent analyses have begun.7 Some of the more recent research in this area has offered additional evidence that helps to explain and interpret changes taking place in funerary practices at this time. Most academic studies agree that the earliest form of burial rite used in the Iron Age was cremation, and this is likely to be a continuation of the cremation rites which are widely evidenced from the Irish Bronze Age.8 That said, one important difference was noted at the burial site of Ballymacaward, Co. Donegal, where clear phases/sequences of burial evidence suggest that two discrete forms of cremation were being carried out at different times.9 This was demonstrated through 14C dates from the site,10 so it is essential that we do not assume that apparent similarity in method equates to similarity in date. The short-term phenomenon of crouched inhumation in the first century AD appears to have been introduced into Ireland from Britain. It has a discrete regional focus between the River Liffey, Co. Dublin, and the River Boyne, Co. Meath, and the practice does not appear to have been adopted more widely. There is evidence of non-local material associated with these burials in Ireland, while the burial practice itself has parallels in those parts of Britain where this was the common form during this period. These connections may be traceable back to the first century BC, perhaps reflecting earlier links between communities. A bronze cremation vessel from Fore, Co. Westmeath (mentioned in Chapter 2),11 which has parallels with one from Spetisbury in Dorset, is comparable in date. Perhaps the most important point in O’Brien’s assessment was that the changes she identified in the burial practices themselves might suggest that at least some of these were foreigners rather than local Irish people. At the time of O’Brien’s research in 1990 it was not possible to test this hypothesis further, but it was followed up in 2008 with the application of strontium and oxygen isotope analysis by Cahill Wilson as part of her doctoral research on these and other culturally discrete burials from around Ireland. Cahill Wilson’s results supported many of O’Brien’s earlier observations. It is now clear that the pattern she discerned by the wider use of 14C dating on these burials alongside 128

the isotope analysis confirms the adoption and maintenance of new burial practices in the late Iron Age. The gap between first- and second-century AD crouched burials and a small number of known crouched burials of the later fifth and sixth centuries AD most likely represents a reintroduction of this practice (rather than a continuance), suggestive of a small number of migrants using their own burial practices in the later period. This important point relates also to the burials in the later period: it is clear that in some instances the positioning of extended supine inhumations with an east–west orientation (with the head at the west) has been interpreted as Christian, and it follows that the individuals themselves have been described as such.12 This form of burial is more correctly described as a Roman (formerly Greek) form of burial rite that was introduced to the Roman provinces by the end of the second century AD and began to replace the existing burial customs in Roman Britain by the middle of the third century AD. It was adopted as the appropriate form of Christian burial during the earliest stages of conversion in the Roman world,13 where it can be widely demonstrated to have formed an important aspect of community burial in late Roman managed cemeteries.14 The form that Christian burial took in Britain followed the correct Roman form; bodies were generally laid supine on their backs (although some prone burials are also known, these are considered to be outside the norm) in a grave with either a stone or a timber lining but often with no attempt at protection. The more elaborate sarcophagi, along with evidence for mausoleums, although known from Roman Britain, were clearly designed for the very apex of society. The role of the principal burial in these managed cemeteries of the later Roman period is important and it is clear that in some cases these must have been the primary focus, given that later burials appear to respect their presence. The practice of extended inhumation in protected and unprotected dug graves appears to have been introduced into Ireland sometime after the wider adoption of this burial practice in the provinces and Roman Britain. In her more recent work, O’Brien has stressed the importance of not assuming that the use of a Romantype burial practice infers that an individual was a Christian.15 It seems likely that different burial practices continued in some instances, despite the gradual pace of Christianisation. For instance, cremation burials (in some cases token human cremation deposits) at Carrickmines Great, Co. Dublin, Furness, Co. Kildare, and Ask, Co.Wexford, have all been radiocarbon-dated to between the fifth and eighth centuries AD.16

6-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:21 Page 129

Investigating mobility and migration in the later Irish Iron Age In Chapter 4 we offered a new interpretation for the burials found at Lambay Harbour in 1927 and, in offering a new classification for some of the material, we suggested that virtually all of the parallels point to an origin for the people buried on Lambay in the Severn Valley region in early Roman Britain (with perhaps direct contacts in continental Europe). This is in contrast to previous interpretations that linked these people and their material to northern Britain by the presence of one important artefact, the segmented beaded torc. As the skeletal remains have now been located by Linda Fibiger, work can be undertaken to date them, prior to proceeding with strontium and oxygen analysis to investigate their geographic origin. In Chapter 2 we also made mention of the Roman burials that were uncovered in Bray, Co. Wicklow, which were found along the seashore by workmen building gateposts for a entrance to an avenue in 1835. There appear to have been several burials uncovered, which were described by Lewis as ‘skeletons of large dimensions, lying regularly east and west, with a stone at the head and another at the feet of each, but which crumbled into dust on exposure to the air, several Roman coins of the Emperor “Adrian” were found at the same time, and are now in Mr Putland’s possession’. Drummond, writing slightly later, describes ‘the skeletons of several human bodies placed regularly side by side, and separated each from its neighbour, by thin partitions of flag or of stone, the bones crumbled to atoms; the teeth alone were more durable and in tolerable preservation and a number of Roman copper coins, one or two of which lay on or beside the breast of each’.17 Although the earliest description differs somewhat from the later considerations, what we know is that the burials contained Roman coins of the emperors Trajan (AD 97–117) and Hadrian (AD 117–38) found in the thoracic area of the remains, which is consistent with a coin placed in the mouth. The careful and deliberate placement of coins on bodies is in keeping with the Roman practice of including payment to Charon for crossing the mythical River Styx in the underworld and suggests that the mourners were completely familiar with correct Roman burial practices.18 One of the most interesting burials to be found in Ireland is the cremation from Stoneyford, Co. Kilkenny (townland of Cotterellsbooly),19 discovered in 1852 near the Kings River (a tributary of the navigable River Nore). The burial consisted of three items: a 10in.-tall green glass urn of Isings 67A type; a glass unguentarium (a cosmetic vessel) of Isings 28A type; and a bronze disc mirror that is reported to have sealed the top of the urn. Other Roman objects were

found in the immediate vicinity, including a commashaped decorated toilet implement and a bezeled ring, but it remains unclear whether these formed part of the grave-goods accompanying the cremation itself. The glass urn would originally have functioned as a domestic jar, while the bronze mirror has many clear parallels from Roman Britain, and there is also a fine silver example from Pompeii.20 There is no question that this is a Roman burial, but how it came to be found within a box cist, again of a typical type for Roman cremation, has raised questions about its authenticity in the past. It was recorded in the antiquarian Edward Clibborn’s scrapbook as ‘found in a rath and protected by stones in a field’,21 and some observers have commented on the unlikely use of an Irish-type domestic enclosure for a Roman-type burial, especially since raths are believed to date from the early medieval period;22 given the sheer variation in burial practices in Roman Britain at this time, however, the idea of a local element alongside an essentially Roman burial practice need not be considered problematic (as discussed below). The burial at Stoneyford, albeit containing some Roman grave-goods, could not be regarded as of particularly high status, and this leads us to another very important aspect of the burial record in Ireland. There is almost a complete absence of high-status burials such as the more famous ones found at Hoby in Denmark or Mušov in the Czech Republic, and none with Roman swords or high-quality vessels or jewellery, many of which have been found in virtually all other areas beyond the contact zones discussed in detail in Chapter 2. The one obvious exception from Ireland is Lambay, but, as discussed in detail in Chapter 4, these are clearly not just two ‘warrior’ burials and the gravegoods most likely reflect all of the individuals who are now known to have been interred in this community burial area. The lack of any known burials of this type is particularly interesting if we consider how these have been interpreted elsewhere. From around the third century AD in areas such as Denmark, burial with high-status grave-goods appears to have been replaced with a move towards monumentality above ground, with the raising of immense tumuli or barrows that left permanent markers of status in the landscape in this area beyond the frontier.23 At Varpelev, Valloby and Himlingøje in Denmark, this major change has been recognised and interpreted as a move towards expressing an individual’s élite status, and has been convincingly shown to reflect a social response to stable contacts with the Roman world and the consequent emergence of a new social power base of the élite.24 129

6-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:21 Page 130

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland There are around 100 Roman barrow burials known throughout Britain, with a concentration in distribution in the south-east but also a group near Hadrian’s Wall.25 Although many of these are much earlier than the dated examples from continental Europe, they too have been interpreted as reflecting local individuals expressing their status and their identities within the landscapes while living within, rather than beyond, Roman administration. Some of these barrows were very large, the tallest at over 15m high, with conical mounds held in place on stone skirts, such as those at Bartlow Hills in Cambridgeshire.There are, however, also simpler mounds, with just a surrounding ditch and inner bank, such as those at Six Hills (Stevenage) in Hertfordshire,26 and many of these were thought to be of Bronze Age date (given the apparent similarity in morphology) before excavation. Although most of these barrows cover cremations, there are also some that contained inhumations, such as those from Richborough in Kent, Rougham in Suffolk and Holborough in Kent.27 Along with the cinerary urn from Stoneyford, there are three other glass Roman-type cinerary vessels from Ireland.There is one in the collection of the National Museum of Ireland (NMI) that has no provenance and a second that cannot be reliably provenanced which formed part of the Carruthers collection. The fourth was found at Dunadry, Co. Antrim, along with a second stone urn accompanying an extended inhumation within a cist. The vessel was classified as Isings 67a type and the burial was recorded as being found under ‘an exceedingly large mound’.28 Unfortunately there remains great uncertainty around the nature of this antiquarian discovery, the glass and stone vessels and other associated finds, but we should not discount the possibility that this large mound may have been a Romano-British-type barrow burial on the Antrim coast. Recent work by Mount at the site of Rathdooney Beg, Co. Sligo, has provided the first absolute dates for two conjoined barrow monuments: the earlier (a bowl-barrow) was later physically joined to a ring-barrow, and both were constructed close to and copying the extant Neolithic barrow in this impressive landscape position.29 Mount has argued convincingly that this needs to be seen as a deliberate physical expression of people’s attempts to appropriate an existing monument to either a new or existing lineage, and he draws parallels with other monuments, such as those evident in the wider Tara environs. His work supports much recent scholarship that had highlighted the problematic nature of assuming dates based on the morphology of sites alone.30 Although the Stoneyford cremation has been referred to as ‘the only 130

burial of genuinely Roman type from Ireland’,31 the missing Dunadry urn raises important questions about the possibility of other such burials in Ireland.32 Both Raftery and Warner rightly suggested that the burial at Stoneyford ‘must surely imply the presence of a strong and secure Roman community’.33 One further burial is highlighted here, as it demonstrates the value of additional scientific analysis on burials where, as in this case, a grave find of a Roman-type earring was used to infer a possible ‘intrusive’ burial. The burial from Rossnaree, Co. Meath, was found in 1942 during military operations,34 and more recently was radiocarbon-dated to between AD 257 and 533.35 Fragments of a silver ring with herringbone incised decoration and a niello finish were found with the female flexed inhumation. The orientation is also noteworthy, as she appears to have been positioned with her head to the east rather than to the west.36 As noted by Cahill and Sikora, the ring is not unlike one of the three toe-rings found on a young crouched female in a ditch at Rath, Co. Meath, which was also decorated with a herringbone design.37 Schweitzer suggested parallels for the rings in Britain during the late first century BC or early first century AD. The decorative form and the use of silver are, however, more commonly associated with Roman contexts.38 Based on object identification alone, it was assumed that this woman was a foreigner of possibly British origin;39 strontium and oxygen analysis could not, however, rule out an origin close to where she had been buried.40

LIARI research Many of the burials first identified as reflecting new burial practices in the late Iron Age have now been analysed using isotope analysis and, as more comparative data are collected from these, we can start to refine our interpretations and conclusions. As mentioned, Cahill Wilson completed the first strontium and oxygen isotope investigation on multiple samples of human and faunal material for Ireland, focusing on late Iron Age burials that had been classified as ‘intrusive’ in past archaeological interpretation.41 She demonstrated that many of these burials were indeed from outside Ireland and that some may have originated in what would have been Roman Britain or areas with similar lithologies in Europe. Others who had been regarded as intrusive based on the adoption of a new burial practice appeared to be of local origin, however, and in some cases new 14C dates offered surprisingly late dates for several of the burials originally

6-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:21 Page 131

Investigating mobility and migration in the later Irish Iron Age thought to be of late Iron Age date.42 Furthermore, some of the burials that were originally thought to reflect local burial practices (and consequently local people) contained individuals who were born and spent their early childhood outside Ireland. One burial in particular, a crouched male burial (B12) from Brookside, Bettystown, Co. Meath, dated to the fourth–seventh century AD,43 yielded an oxygen result suggestive of an origin in either southern Portugal or the northern African coast. Given that crouched burial was no longer a local practice at this time, it is possible that this individual is linked directly to the traders bringing late Roman and later material directly to Ireland (discussed in Chapter 2). Importantly, and despite the fact that they had been buried using different practices, some individuals could be offered an origin in Ireland; what was especially notable was the level of movement among females sampled as part of the research. Set against more recent research using similar scientific analysis, it is now apparent that we should avoid attempting to determine an origin for an individual buried at a site in Ireland based on the type of burial practice used, or the evidence (or absence) of imported material, without the benefit of further scrutiny. In this report we present new research undertaken by the LIARI Project in collaboration with Elizabeth O’Brien (for the INSTAR Mapping Death Project),44 Christopher Standish and Alistair Pike, conducted under licences from the NMI. It was agreed that, as the LIARI Project covers the entire period from the first to the sixth century AD, we should sample material from both the late Iron Age and the transition into the early medieval period, with our primary indicator for selection being that there was something unusual or culturally distinctive about the burial itself or its associated finds that warranted additional investigation. Fourteen samples of human and animal teeth from nine sites around Ireland were chosen for strontium and oxygen isotope analysis to test whether their unusual or different burial practice was due to localised responses to new influences in burial customs or simply that these individuals had a geographic origin elsewhere. After discussion with the LIARI team, the sites were chosen and the samples licensed by O’Brien45 as a progression of the work of the Mapping Death Project and aided by a recent grant from the Heritage Council,46 but in collaboration with the LIARI team. Full details, including all published references, for each of the sites discussed are available on the on-line interactive Mapping Death database.

Strontium and oxygen isotope analysis Tooth enamel is the most highly mineralised tissue in the body and while it is forming it records the chemical signatures of the geological and climatic environment in which people and their livestock lived. Unlike bone, which is completely remodelled within the body over an approximately ten-year cycle, once complete mineralisation of enamel has taken place in humans (usually around the age of twelve) it does not alter further in life.47 Measuring the ratios of the various isotopes present in the tooth enamel can therefore offer an indication of an individual’s place of geographic origin and/or where they spent their early childhood years. There are four naturally occurring isotopes of strontium, three of which are non-radiogenic (84Sr, 86Sr, 88Sr) and one that is radiogenic (87Sr). The strontium isotope composition of teeth is primarily derived from the geological environment through everything that we eat and drink. The majority of the food and water consumed by past societies originated from local sources; thus by comparing the isotopic composition of an individual’s enamel to the biologically available strontium for the region in which they were found, it is possible to discuss the likelihood that they were born and/or spent their early childhood in the same region in which they were buried. Measuring the concentration of strontium (shown as parts per million, ppm) offers a control by which any diagenetic change that has taken place within the depositional environment can be assessed,48 and this can indicate whether isotopic heterogeneity in a community is a function of contrasting geographical origins or mixing between more than one local source of strontium.49 The ratio of the radiogenic 87Sr to the non-radiogenic 86Sr (conventionally expressed as 87Sr/86Sr) varies with changing geology. Expected values for the strontium isotopes can be estimated from knowledge of local geology. Radiogenic 87Sr is formed from the decay of 87Rb, and young rock, or rock with low Rb/Sr, tends to give lower 87Sr/86Sr from c. 0.706. Conversely, older or high Rb/Sr rock tends to give higher ratios of 87Sr/86Sr > 0.715. Accurately defining the expected local 87Sr/86Sr range is essential to the success of migration studies employing Sr isotope analyses, but we do not yet have a complete comparative data set for the biologically available strontium isotope ranges in Ireland (typically characterised through the analyses of soil, floral and faunal samples). Consequently, an estimated range has been used (as on all prior analyses of Irish material) based on the local geology of each sample site (Fig. 6.1) and the signature 131

6-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:21 Page 132

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland

´ Ballymacaward

Knowth

Ninch Bettystown

Collierstown

Ballygarraun Farta

Lehinch Greenhills

Location of sites discussed

TERTIARY CRETACEOUS JURASSIC / TRIASSIC / PERMIAN CARBONIFEROUS

IGNEOUS ROCKS DEVONIAN

Basalt, minor rhyolite - Tertiary Volcanic rocks - Precambrian to Carboniferous Granite & gabbro - Tertiary Granite - Ordovician to Devonian Gabbro & related rocks - Ordovician

SILURIAN ORDOVICIAN CAMBRIAN PRECAMBRIAN

Clay Basalt Chalk Shale, limestone & new red sandstone ndstone Sandstone & shale Limestone Sandstone & shale Old red sandstone Sandstone & shale Sandstone & shale Shale & sandstone, basalt & rhyolite Sandstone & slate, quartzite Schist & gneiss, quartzite

100km Base map © Geological Geolog Survey of Ireland 2003

Fig. 6.1—Geological locations of sites discussed (geological map © Geological Survey of Ireland).

132

6-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:21 Page 133

Investigating mobility and migration in the later Irish Iron Age of biologically available strontium from corresponding lithologies in Britain.50 Recent work has advocated the analysis of smaller mammals from either the immediate burial context or the site at which the burials were excavated, as these are not likely to have moved far from the local context.51 Wherever possible this was completed for prior studies, but owing to the absence of such samples from the locations investigated in this study it was agreed that an additional analysis of dentine would be undertaken on one tooth per site investigated. When teeth are buried within soil, the strontium isotope signature of dentine is significantly more susceptible to diagenetic alteration than enamel (with higher strontium concentrations of dentine evidence for local Sr uptake). As a result, the isotopic signature of dentine is typically intermediate between that of the unaltered enamel and that of the local soil/groundwater.52 The isotopic signature of the dentine samples therefore provides a further proxy for the local strontium signature of each sample site, and was employed alongside the comparative database of biologically available strontium in Britain in considering the origins of the individuals investigated in this study. The creation of a database of biologically available strontium for locations across Ireland is considered essential for future strontium isotope studies, and further work is now being undertaken to develop a network of researchers around Ireland through the Irish Isotopes Research Group (IIRG) coordinated through the LIARI team at the Discovery Programme. One of the key aims of this network is to prioritise the collection and analysis of suitable material that can be collated to form a database of biologically available strontium for Ireland. Ultimately, these data will be used to create a strontium isotope map of Ireland (an Isoscape) and will be accessible for comparative study by researchers working on Irish samples in the future. Strontium isotope analysis was performed on a Thermo Fisher Scientific Triton thermal-ionisation multi-collector mass spectrometer at the Bristol Isotope Group, University of Bristol. Methodologies employed for Sr isotope analyses follow those published in Haak et al. 2008.53 The typical internal precision of a single 87Sr/86Sr analysis (expressed as two relative standard errors (S.E.) of the mean of the 288 cycles comprising one analysis) was 10ppm. External reproducibility of 87Sr/86Sr over a five-month period (expressed as two relative standard deviations (S.D.) of the mean) for analyses of both strontium isotope standard NIST SRM987 (n = 20) and an in-house seal tooth standard (n = 10) was barca (ship), sesra > sextarius (a measure), dírna > denarius (weight/coin denomination), scibar > pipar (pepper) and even argat > argentum (silver), all of which he believed to be early borrowings that derived from contacts through trade in the Roman period.34 Alongside these he placed other words that appear to have a Roman origin, such as Mercúir > Mercury, trebun > tribune and legión > legion. In many respects these historical and linguistic studies offer interpretations that link well with our earlier discussion of the importance of the role of merchants and traders for the dissemination of social and cultural ideas from the Roman world. They also strengthen many of the suggestions presented earlier on the nature and role of Irish participation in the Roman military or the presence of auxiliaries in Ireland. One possible interesting new line of research in this area would be to perform scientific analysis, such as lipid analysis, on all of the later imported wares in Ireland and Britain to determine what functions these may have had in a domestic culinary context (or not), or what was being transported in them. In a review of the likely origins of literacy in Ireland, Stevenson argued for direct influence through mercantile trade in the Roman period and literacy among certain sections of Irish society.35 Harvey has also argued convincingly that at least some sections of Irish society were literate in the early centuries AD.36 In her most recent work, Johnston has outlined the mechanisms by which we might better understand the development of the centres of learning and literacy in early medieval Ireland; her work and those of scholars working in these fields of research are essential to our own interpretations. An early date, perhaps in the fourth, or even the third, century AD, has also been proposed for the origin of the Irish epigraphical script, ogham, in the context of the emergence of parallels with contemporary Roman epigraphy on gravestones and milestones, and the development of the runic alphabet in northern Europe37 and the earlier Celtiberian script in northern Spain.38 Apart from the better-known series of mostly bilingual stones in Wales,39 there are ogham inscrip181

8-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:25 Page 182

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland tions from along the western littoral of Britain, but there are also two inscriptions from late Roman sites in Britain at Wroxeter (Viroconium) and Silchester (Calleva Atrebatum). Along with this is the evidence from some of the ogham inscriptions, six of which are from the southern counties of Ireland. Three of these commemorate individuals with Latin personal names (Sagittarius, Marianus and Amadu (Amatus)), while the other three suggest that fathers with Latin names had given their sons Irish names: Dunaidonas son of Marianus, Coimagnas son of Vitali(us) and Maqiddeccedas son of Marin(us).40 Writing implements, stili, are known from early medieval sites in Ireland; some, such as those from Lagore Crannog and Carraig Aille, may be earlier than previously thought, given that at both of these sites there is also evidence of Roman material. A lead seal which would have been used to secure a written message, either on a waxed tablet or the type of wooden leaf diptychs found at Vindolanda, was found among the Roman material at the Rath of the Synods; a Roman-type stylus was found among the Roman material at Knowth; there is a Latin inscription in pointillé, or punched-dot style, on a small gold torc end from Newgrange; and an enamelled rhomboid seal box of later first-century AD date was found at Drumanagh (see above). More in-depth scholarship is needed to investigate the evidence from the historical, linguistic and onomastic sources from Ireland and Wales that might offer further evidence of the links between these areas in earlier periods.

Priorities for future research Future avenues of research have been agreed and are under way as part of LIARI Phase 2, including a new campaign of geophysical survey and landscape analysis in the Meath/north Dublin region. Our focus is now moving to include other areas of Ireland where we know that there are multiple finds of provincial Roman material, and we hope to target new fieldwork and geophysical surveys in the south-east of Ireland, where there is a cluster of provincial Roman material. Along with the earlier first- or second-century AD material such as the Stoneyford burial and the collyrium stamp from Golden, there are two recently found third-century coins from the River Nore and the fourth-century AD material from Freestone Hill. Alongside these are some likely early ogham inscriptions and a cluster of probable early church (domnach) sites, as well as the important multi-period settlement site of Baysrath and a recently recognised D-shaped 182

enclosure just below the site of Freestone Hill.41 The recognised sherd of Phocaean Red Slip Ware from Kilree adds a longer time-span to the contacts in the wider Kilkenny area, probably through the navigable River Nore, and this links well with the other clear riverine routes from the coast in County Dublin that brought material well inland to counties Meath and Westmeath. One important site for investigation is the promontory fort at Dunabrattin, Co. Waterford; as explained in Chapter 2, there are good parallels between this site and Drumanagh, not just morphologically but also through the association of exploitable copper resources and a local find of part of a copper bun ingot. As in the first phase of research, priority will be given to conducting new aerial and geophysical surveys, establishing new dating and obtaining new palaeoenvironmental evidence for monuments that are assumed to be of late Iron Age date. In this way we can verify through absolute dating that our assumptions are correct. New fieldwork on the Hill of Lloyd and Faughan Hill, Co. Meath, and Knockbrack, Co. Dublin, has already been completed with exciting results, and further collaborative geophysical surveys are being finalised with colleagues from the RömischGermanische Kommission/Deutsches Archäologisches Instituts and Kilkenny Archaeology for the summer of 2014. All of these surveys will provide even greater levels of detail that will further help to characterise the nature of settlement in this period in Ireland. A number of scholars cited throughout this volume have highlighted the similarity in decorative style, function and media of material from Ireland to material from early and late Roman contexts in Britain, and indeed Scotland. The parallels offered by scholars are now clearer, and many items of dress and personal toilet equipment that have been found at sites around Ireland need to be considered as indicating sequences of late Iron Age activity rather than as belonging to the early medieval period. Our investigations into all of the Roman finds from Ireland are revealing more culturally entangled material that requires further study, along with antiquarian finds that may (or may not) have been brought into Ireland in the Roman period. Our aim is publish on-line a new catalogue, and our collaborations with museum staff in Ireland and Britain will be essential in order to offer new contexts and likely provenances. Our scientific investigations using isotope geochemistry on burials of the period and the later transition into the early medieval period have already offered further evidence of the probable movement of people (notably women) within Ireland, but also of those from else-

8-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:25 Page 183

Findings and priorities for future research where who appear to have settled and were buried in Ireland. This work will now continue to investigate animals of the same period. Investigation into the exploitation of natural minerals and metals will allow us to assess whether objects were being manufactured in Ireland for both the internal and (judging by the material on Drumanagh) external Roman markets. Contemporary dialogues in both Iron Age studies and Roman studies have highlighted the immensely fluid nature of cultural influences read through the archaeological record, in artistic style and design, architecture and technology, language and literacy, and the ways these become manifest in the archaeological record. The ripples of change in the wake of Roman military aggression and control of the provinces in the west are well attested as regards the political, social and economic dynamics in societies beyond the formal frontiers.42 In recent work Heather has highlighted the need to ensure that both the history and the archaeology of migration, whether people were moving for economic opportunity (traders and contractors) or out of political necessity (to avoid persecution or subjugation), have to be integrated within our considerations of the reshaping of community dynamics both within and beyond the formal frontiers of Rome.43 Throughout this work we have tried to ensure that our investigations of the material and the landscapes, but most importantly of the people, of the late Iron Age reflect what our research suggests to have been an innovative and transformative period that helped shape and frame Ireland’s important role in the early medieval period. Just as there were many ways to be ‘Roman’ throughout the 400 or more years of Roman administration and occupation in the western provinces, there are many ways that Roman cultural influences can be read through the archaeology of those who were living and dying in the late Iron Age in Ireland.

Notes 1. See previous endnotes for the more recent research and publications by scholars, but in particular see Mattingly 2004 on discrepant identities and experiences in Roman Britain and the provinces, and more recently Mattingly 2011 on imperial power. See also Hingley 1994; 1997b; 2005; Wells 1999; 2005; Storgaard 2003; Hunter 2001. 2. Hunter 2001. 3. Tate and Troalen 2009. 4. Warner 2009. Some of the fourth-century Roman material found at Clogher, such as the fragment of a Lydney-type bracelet, appears to have been cut up for reworking.

5. Sindbaek 2009. 6. Ibid., 102. 7. See Ian Doyle’s work on the later post-Roman ceramics, especially Doyle 1998. 8. Hedeager 1978; 1987; 1992. 9. A description used by Eszter Banffy in her introduction to the author’s recent paper at the Römisch-Germanische Kommission, Deutsches Archäologisches Institut (RGK/DAI) in Frankfurt am Main, Germany. 10. Kaul 2003. 11. This parallel was identified by Alexandra Guglielmi, who was an MA student placement in the LIARI team. Alexandra’s placement within LIARI focused on a complete review of the Roman finds from Lagore Crannog, and she was supervised by Aidan O’Sullivan at UCD and Jacqueline Cahill Wilson at the DP. The sword identification was confirmed by Xenia Pauli-Jensen (National Museum of Denmark) and Thomas Grane (University of Copenhagen), and we are grateful to them both for their help. 12. Lead is present in copper as a trace element on a ‘parts per million’ (ppm) scale. There are four stable isotopes of Pb, three of which are radiogenic (206Pb, 207Pb and 208Pb) and are the final decay products from the breakdown of different isotopes of uranium or thorium, and one of which is unradiogenic (204Pb) and so its abundance on the Earth remains consistent throughout time. The abundance of a particular radiogenic lead isotope is controlled by the age of the source material, the half-life of the parent isotope and the abundance of the parent isotope at the beginning of the decay series. It follows that it is possible to characterise discrete ore deposits if they are formed at different times and/or from differing starting compositions. This method provides a secondary analysis and is extremely useful when used in conjunction with elemental analysis. See W. O’Brien 1996; 2004; 2007; 2013. 13. We are grateful to Christopher Standish and Alistair Pike for their ongoing collaboration with the LIARI Project and for their generous contributions to our investigations and considerations in this area of the scientific research for LIARI. 14. There is a preference in Irish archaeology for the use of compositional or elemental analysis (X-ray fluorescence, XRF) as it is regarded as non-invasive, but objects subject to this non-destructive technique are often similarly altered to create clean surface areas for the analysis. XRF methods are extremely useful and they offer a list of relative proportionate properties within the composition of the metals themselves that can then be cross-referenced against existing comparative data. 15. Pliny [1962], Natural histories, vol. IX (33–5) and vol. X (36–7); Dungworth 1997. 16. Kenyon 1987, 33. 17. Ó Floinn 1995; 2001; 2009. 18. Gavin 2013. 19. See, for example, Henderson 1987. 20. Stapleton et al. 1999, 915. 21. Ó Floinn 2009. 22. Lynn 1983; Mytum 1992. See also Johnston 2013, in particular her discussion on p. 12, where she suggests that Irish people had access to literate training, along with others on the margins of the Roman Empire. 23. Importantly, see Ó Cróinín 1992.

183

8-DPR8_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:25 Page 184

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland 24. Schot et al. 2011. 25. Hedeager 2002. 26. Sindbaek 2009; see also Dowling 2011, fn. 79, who draws attention to the site of Gudme and posits a similar role for sites in Ireland in relation to Tara. 27. Bhreathnach 2005b. See also Warner 1988. 28. See Gosden and Marshall 1999 on the social biography of objects, but see also Appedurai 1986. 29. Photograph viewed by kind permission of E.P. Kelly. 30. E.P. Kelly, pers. comm. 31. For the details of dedicatory inscriptions from Hadrian’s Wall and elsewhere in Roman Britain, see the fascicules of the Roman inscriptions of Britain (RIB), first edited by R.G. Collingwood and R.P. Wright (1965), and completely revised up to 2006 by the additional volumes with various editors and contributors through Britannia and JRA. See Keppie 1998 for the complete indexing series. 32. See, for example, Stevenson 1989; Harvey 1987; Bhreathnach 2014; Johnston 2013.

184

33. McManus 1983, 43; Bhreathnach 2014. 34. McManus (1983) highlights many other words as likely to date from this early contact period. 35. Stevenson 1989, 130. 36. Harvey 1987, 12. 37. For the best interpretation of likely contexts, translations and texts see Looijenga 1997. 38. See Koch 2006, 364, on the origins of the term ‘Celtiberia’ for an area of east central Spain. 39. Nash-Williams 1950; Thomas 1994. 40. All of these are discussed in detail in Thomas 1998, 11, and McManus 1992, 113. 41. Our thanks to Cóilín Ó Drisceoil for the aerial images of this recently recognised enclosure that will be the subject of investigation by our friends and colleagues at Kilkenny Archaeology in the coming months. 42. Wells 2005; Galestin 2010; Jørgensen et al. 2003. 43. Heather 2009.

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:27 Page 185

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abdy, R. 2002 Romano-British coin hoards. Shire, Princes Risborough. Aitchison, N.B. 1988 Roman wealth, native ritual: coin hoards within and beyond Roman Britain. World Archaeology 20, 270–84. Albarella, U., Johnstone, C. and Vickers, K. 2008 The development of animal husbandry from the Late Iron Age to the end of the Roman period: a case study from south-east Britain. JAS 35, 1828–48. Allason-Jones, L. 2008 Appendix A: the small finds. In E. Grogan, The Rath of the Synods, Tara, Co. Meath: excavations by Seán P. Ó Ríordáin, 107–12. Wordwell/UCD Archaeology, Dublin. An Foras Talúntais 1980 General soil map of Ireland (www.agresearch.teagasc.ie, accessed October 2011). Anderson, C., Flynn, R., O’Byrne, R., Walsh, N. and Weadick, S. 2013 Mysteries of the crypt: the inventory project of the Irish Antiquities Division, National Museum of Ireland. AI 27 (1), 17–21. Anon. 1993 Bord Gáis loses the head. AI 7 (1), 4. Appadurai, A. 1986 Introduction: commodities and the politics of value. In A. Appadurai (ed.), The social life of things: commodities in cultural perspective, 3. Cambridge University Press. Armit, I. 2007 Social landscapes and identities in the Irish Iron Age. In C. Haselgrove and T. Moore (eds), The later Iron Age in Britain and beyond, 130–40. Oxbow, Oxford. Armit, I., Swindles, G. and Becker, K. 2013 From dates to demography in later prehistoric Ireland? Experimental approaches to the meta-analysis of large 14C data-sets. JAS 40, 433–8. Aspinall, A., Gaffney, C. and Schmidt, A. 2009 Magnetometry for archaeologists. Altamira Press, Plymouth. Baillie, M.G.L. 1988 The dating of the timbers from Navan Fort and the Dorsey, Co. Armagh. Emania 4, 37–40. Baillie, M.G.L. 1993 Dark ages and dendrochronology. Emania 11, 5–11. Baker, S. 2007 Ancient Rome—the rise and fall of an

empire. BBC Books, London. Bateson, J.D. 1973 Roman material from Ireland: a reconsideration. PRIA 73C, 21–97. Bateson, J.D. 1976 Further finds of Roman material from Ireland. PRIA 76C, 171–80. Bayley, D. 2004 Fort Hill, Balriggan, Dundalk: medieval hillfort, Co. Louth. In I. Bennett (ed.), Excavations 2002: summary accounts of archaeological excavations in Ireland, 373. Wordwell, Bray. Bayley, J. and Butcher, S. 2004 Roman brooches in Britain: a technological and typological study based on the Richborough collection. Reports of the Research Committee of the Society of Antiquaries of London. Bayliss, A. and Grogan, E. 2013 Chronologies for Tara and comparable royal sites of the Irish Iron Age. In M. O’Sullivan, C. Scarre and M. Doyle (eds), Tara—from the past to the future: towards a new research agenda, 105–44. Wordwell, Dublin. Beard, M. 2009 The Roman triumph. Harvard University Press. Beard, M., North, J. and Price, S.R.F. 1998 Religions of Rome: vol. 1. A history, 177–84. Cambridge University Press. Becker, K. 2012 Redefining the Irish Iron Age. In C. Corlett and M. Potterton (eds), Life and death in Iron Age Ireland in the light of recent archaeological excavations, 1–14. Wordwell, Bray. Becker, K., Ó Néill, J. and O’Flynn, L. 2008 Iron Age Ireland: finding an invisible people. Unpublished report to the Heritage Council for project 16365. Bendrey, R., Thorpe, N., Outram, A. and van Wijngaarden-Bakker, L.H. 2013 The origins of domestic horses in north-west Europe: new direct dates on the horses of Newgrange, Ireland. PPS 79, 1–13. Bentley, R.A. and Knipper, C. 2005 Geographical patterns in biologically available strontium, carbon and oxygen isotope signatures in prehistoric south-west Germany. Archaeometry 47, 629–44. Best, R.I. (ed.) 1910 The settling of the manor of 185

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:27 Page 186

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland Tara. Ériu 4, 121–72. Beug, H.J. 2004 Leitfaden der Pollenbestimmung für Mitteleuropa und angrenzende Gebiete. Pfeil, München. Bhreathnach, E. 1995 Tara: a select bibliography. Discovery Programme Monographs 1. Royal Irish Academy/Discovery Programme, Dublin. Bhreathnach, E. (ed.) 2005a The kingship and landscape of Tara. Four Courts Press/Discovery Programme, Dublin. Bhreathnach, E. 2005b Níell cáich úa Néill nasctar géill: the political context of Baile Chuinn Chétchathaig. In E. Bhreathnach (ed.), The kingship and landscape of Tara, 49–69. Four Courts Press/Discovery Programme, Dublin. Bhreathnach, E. 2011 Transforming kingship and cult: the provincial ceremonial capitals in early medieval Ireland. In R. Schot, C. Newman and E. Bhreathnach (eds), Landscapes of cult and kingship, 126–48. Four Courts Press, Dublin. Bhreathnach, E. 2012 From fert(ae) to relic: mapping death in early sources. In C. Corlett and M. Potterton (eds), Death and burial in early medieval Ireland in the light of recent archaeological excavations, 23–31. Wordwell, Dublin. Bhreathnach, E. 2014 Ireland in the medieval world, AD 400–1000: landscape, kingship and religion. Four Courts Press, Dublin. Bhreathnach, E. and O’Brien, E. 2010 Mapping death: people, boundaries and territories in Ireland, 1st to 8th centuries AD. Mapping Death Project, final report 10. Unpublished report for the Heritage Council (http://www.heritagecouncil.ie/fileadmin/user_ upload/INSTAR_Database/AR01054_Mapping _Death_Final_Report_10.pdf, accessed March 2013). Birley, A. 1976 The lives of the later Caesars: the first part of the Augustan history, with newly compiled lives of Nerva and Trajan. Penguin, London. Bishop, M.C. and Coulston, J.C.N. 2006 Roman military equipment from the Punic Wars to the fall of Rome. Oxbow, Oxford. Bland, R. 2012 Gold for the barbarians: uniface gold medallions of the house of Constantine found in Ireland. Britannia 43, 217–25. Bland, R. and Johns, C.M. 1993 The Hoxne Treasure: an illustrated introduction. British Museum, London. Bolton, J. 2008 Martello Tower Research Project. Unpublished report prepared for Fingal County Council, Dún Laoghaire–Rathdown County Council and the Heritage Council 186

(http://patrimoniomm.files.wordpress.com/201 3/09/martello-towers.pdf, accessed January 2013). Bolton, J., Carey, T., Goodbody, R. and Clabby, G. 2012 The Martello towers of Dublin. Dún Laoghaire–Rathdown and Fingal County Councils, Dublin. Boon, G.C. 1983 Potters, oculists and eye-troubles. Britannia 14, 1–12. Bourke, C. and Crone, D. 1993 Antiquities from the River Blackwater II. UJA 56, 109–13. Bourke, E. 1989 Stoneyford: a first-century Roman burial from Ireland. AI 3 (2), 56–7. Bourke, E. 1994 Glass vessels of the first nine centuries AD in Ireland. PRIA 94C, 163–209. Bowman, A.K. and Thomas, J.D. 1984 Vindolanda: the Latin writing tablets. Britannia Monograph Series No. 4. Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies, London. (Images of the original tablets and translations are now available on-line at http://vindolanda.csad.ox.ac.uk, accessed May 2014.) Bowman, A. and Wilson, A. 2009 Quantifying the Roman economy—methods and problems. Oxford University Press. Bradley, J. 1998 The monastic town of Clonmacnoise. In H.A. King (ed.), Clonmacnoise studies, vol. 1. Seminar Papers 1994, 42–56. Dúchas, the Heritage Service, Dublin. Bradley, R. 2005 Ritual and domestic life in prehistoric Europe. Routledge, London. Brannon, N.F. 1981–2 A rescue excavation at Lisdoo, Lisnaskea, County Fermanagh. UJA 44–5, 53–9. Breeze, D.J. 2006 The Antonine Wall. John Donald, Edinburgh. Brindley, A.L. and Lanting, J.N. 1990 A Roman boat in Ireland. AI 4 (3), 10–11. Brooks, S.J., Langdon, P.G. and Heiri, O. 2007 The identification and use of Palaearctic Chironomidae larvae in palaeoecology. Quaternary Research Association, London. Brown, P. 1989 The world of Late Antiquity, AD 150–750. W.W. Norton, London and New York. Brück, J. 1995 A place for the dead: the role of human remains in Late Bronze Age Britain. PPS 61, 245–77. Brück, J. 1999 Ritual and rationality: some problems of interpretation in European archaeology. EJA 2 (3), 313–44. Buckley, L. 2010 Ninch, Laytown, Co. Meath, within the context of North Leinster early medieval cemeteries. In C. Corlett and M.

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:27 Page 187

Bibliography Potterton (eds), Death and burial in early medieval Ireland in the light of recent archaeological excavations, 43–8. Wordwell, Dublin. Budd, P., Chenery, C., Montgomery, J. and Evans, J. 2003 You are where you ate: isotopic analysis in the reconstruction of prehistoric residency. In M. Parker Pearson (ed.), Food, culture and identity in the Neolithic and Early Bronze Age, 69–78. BAR International Series 1117. Archaeopress, Oxford. Bunting, M.J. 2008 Pollen in wetlands: using simulations of pollen dispersal and deposition to better interpret the pollen signal. Biodiversity and Conservation 17, 2079–96. Bunting, M.J. and Middleton, R. 2005 Modelling pollen dispersal and deposition using HUMPOL software: simulating wind roses and irregular lakes. Review of Palaeobotany and Palynology 134, 185–96. Bunting, M.J. and Middleton, R. 2009 The Multiple Scenario approach—a pragmatic method for past vegetation mosaic reconstruction. The Holocene 19, 797–801. Bunting, M.J., Gaillard, M.-J., Sugita, S., Middleton, R. and Broström, A. 2004 Vegetation structure and pollen source area. The Holocene 14, 651–60. Burenhult, G. 1984 The archaeology of Carrowmore: environmental archaeology and the megalithic tradition at Carrowmore, Co. Sligo, Ireland. Theses and Papers in North-European Archaeology 9. University of Stockholm. Burnham, B.C. and Davies, J.L. (eds) 2010 Roman frontier in Wales and the marches. Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Wales, Aberystwyth. Byrne, F.J. 1973 Irish kings and high kings. Four Courts Press, Dublin. Caesar, Julius, The Gallic war (trans. W.A. McDevitte and W.S. Bohn) (http://classics.mit.edu/Caesar/gallic.5.5.html). Cagney, L., O’Hara, R., Kelleher, G. and Morkan, R. 2009 M3 Clonee–North of Kells, Contract 2, Dunshaughlin–Navan, report on the archaeological excavation of Dowdstown, Co. Meath, Ministerial Directions No. A008/033, E3086, final report (www.m3motorway.ie/ Archaeology/Section2/Dowdstown2, accessed January 2013). Cahill, M. 1982 A Roman-type fibula from the Rock of Cashel. North Munster Antiquarian Journal 24, 99–101. Cahill, M. and Sikora, M. (eds) 2011 Breaking ground, finding graves: reports on the excavations of burials by the National Museum of Ireland,

1927–2006 (2 vols). National Museum of Ireland Monograph Series 4. Wordwell, Dublin. Cahill Wilson, J. 2010 Becoming Irish: the materiality of transcultural identities in the later Irish Iron Age. Unpublished Ph.D thesis, University of Bristol. Cahill Wilson, J. 2012a Lost in transcription: rethinking our approach to the archaeology of the later Iron Age in Ireland. In C. Corlett and M. Potterton (eds), Life and death in Iron Age Ireland in the light of recent excavations, 15–34. Wordwell, Dublin. Cahill Wilson, J. 2012b The Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland (LIARI) Project. AI 26 (4), 3. Cahill Wilson, J., Usborne, H., Taylor, C., Ditchfield, P. and Pike, A.W.G. 2012 Strontium and oxygen isotope analysis on Iron Age and early historic burials around the Great Mound at Knowth, Co. Meath. In G. Eogan (ed.), Excavations at Knowth 5: the archaeology of Knowth in the first and second millennia AD, Appendix 5, 775–88. Royal Irish Academy, Dublin. Campbell, E. 2007 Continental and Mediterranean imports to Atlantic Britain and Ireland, AD 400–800. Council for British Archaeology, York. Carew, M. 2003 Tara and the Ark of the Covenant: a search for the Ark of the Covenant by BritishIsraelites on the Hill of Tara (1899–1902). The Discovery Programme/Royal Irish Academy, Dublin. Carew, M. 2012 The Harvard Mission, eugenics and the Celts. AI 26 (4), 38–40. Carroll, J. 2008 Archaeological excavations at Rosepark, Balrothery, Co. Dublin. Environmental Publications, Dublin. Carroll, J., Ryan, F. and Wiggins, K. 2008 Excavations at Darcystown and Glebe South, Balrothery, Co. Dublin, 2000–2005. Environmental Publications, Dublin. Carson, R.A.G. and O’Kelly, C. 1977 A catalogue of the Roman finds from Newgrange. PRIA 77C, 35–55. Carty, N. and Gleeson, P. 2013 Kingship, violence and Loch Da Gabhor: royal landscapes and the production of authority in early medieval Brega. Ríocht na Midhe 24, 29–72. Carver, M. 2011 Making archaeology happen: design versus dogma. Left Coast Press, Walnut Creek. Casey, P.J., Hoffmann, B. and Dore, J. 1999 Excavations at the Roman temple of Lydney Park, Gloucestershire, in 1980 and 1981. Antiquaries Journal 79 (1), 89–143. Caulfield, S. 1977 The beehive quern in Ireland. 187

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:27 Page 188

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland JRSAI 107, 104–38. Channing, J. 2012 N9/N10 Kilcullen to Waterford Scheme: Phase 2: Waterford to Knocktopher— archaeological resolution, final report, volumes 1–3, Ministerial Direction: A032/000, Registration No.: E2517, Site AR053/54, Baysrath townland, Co. Kilkenny. Unpublished report prepared for Kilkenny County Council. Chapple, R.M. 2010 One point through time: archaeological continuity at Gortlaunaght, Swanlinbar, Co. Cavan. AI 24 (1), 35–9. Chapple, R.M. 2011 Cultural continuity and site use: excavations at Gortlaunaght, Swanlinbar, Co. Cavan. Journal of Cumann Seanchais Bhreifne 12 (46), 162–202. Charles-Edwards, T. 2000 Early Christian Ireland. Cambridge University Press. Charles-Edwards, T. 2003 After Rome, c. 400 to 800 AD. Short Oxford History of the British Isles. Oxford University Press. Chenery, C., Muldner, G., Evans, J., Eckardt, H. and Lewis, M. 2010 Strontium and stable isotope evidence for diet and mobility in Roman Gloucester, UK. JAS 37, 150–63. Clark, L. and Long, P. 2009a N7 Nenagh to Limerick high quality dual carriageway, archaeological resolution project, Sallymount Site 1, E3420, Co. Limerick, final excavation report. Unpublished report prepared for Limerick County Council. Clark, L. and Long, P. 2009b N7 Nenagh to Limerick high quality dual carriageway, archaeological resolution project, Killalane Site 2, Co. Tipperary, E2495, final report. Unpublished report prepared for Limerick County Council. Clarke, A. 1990 Seeing beneath the soil: prospecting methods in archaeology. Routledge, London. Clarke, L. 2009a M3 Clonee–north of Kells, Contract 2, Dunshaughlin–Navan, report on the archaeological excavation of Ardsallagh 5, Co. Meath, Ministerial Directions No. A008/038, E3091, final report (www.m3motorway.ie/Archaeology/Section2/ Ardsallagh5, accessed October 2011). Clarke, L. 2009b M3 Clonee–North of Kells, Contract 3, Navan Bypass, report on the archaeological excavation of Boyerstown 3, Co. Meath, Ministerial Directions No. A023/015, E3107, final report (www.m3motorway.ie/Archaeology/Section3/ Boyerstown3, accessed January 2013). Clarke, L. and Carlin, N. 2008 M3 Clonee–north of 188

Kells, Contract 2, Dunshaughlin–Navan, report on the archaeological excavation of Ardsallagh 1, Co. Meath, Ministerial Directions No. A008/035, E3088 (www.m3motorway.ie/Archaeology/Section2/ Ardsallagh1, accessed December 2011). Cleary, K. 2005 Skeletons in the closet: the dead among the living in Irish Bronze Age settlements. JIA 14, 23–42. Clutterbuck, R. 2012 Iron Age ritual and settlement at Cookstown, Co. Meath. In C. Corlett and M. Potterton (eds), Life and death in Iron Age Ireland in the light of recent archaeological excavations, 35–51. Wordwell, Bray. Coffey, G. 1904 On the excavation of a tumulus near Loughrea, Co. Galway. PRIA 25, 14–20. Collingwood, R.G. 1930 The archaeology of Roman Britain. Methuen, London. Collingwood, R.G. and Wright, R.P. 1995 Roman inscriptions of Britain. Oxford University Press. Collins, R. 2013 Soldiers to warriors: renegotiating the Roman frontier in the 5th century. In F. Hunter and K. Painter (eds), Late Roman silver: the Traprain treasure in context, 29–45. Society of Antiquaries of Scotland/National Museum of Scotland, Edinburgh. Collis, J. 2003 The Celts: origins, myths and inventions. Tempus, Stroud. Collis, J. 2008 Book review of P. Schmid, Die keramikfunde der grabung Feddersen Wierde: (1.J h. v. bis 5. Jh. n. Chr.). In Proceedings of the Prehistory Society (http://www.ucl.ac.uk/ prehistoric/reviews/08_02_schmid.htm, accessed 8 May 2014). Comber, M. 2002 M.V. Duignan’s excavations at the ringfort of Rathgurreen, Co. Galway, 1948–9. PRIA 102C, 137–97. Comber, M. and Dawson, E. 2011 The archaeology of change—Ireland from the fourth to the seventh century AD. Unpublished report for the Discovery Programme, Dublin. Comber, M. and Hull, G. 2010 Excavations at Caherconnell Cashel, the Burren, Co. Clare: implications for cashel chronology and Gaelic settlement. PRIA 110C, 133–71. Conway, M. 2003 Northern Motorway Road Project, Contract 7, Gormanstown–Monasterboice. Report on the resolution of archaeological site, Platin Fort. Licence number: 01E0044. Unpublished report for Meath County Council. Cooney, G. 1996 The Point, Lambay. In I. Bennett (ed.), Excavations 1995: summary accounts of

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:27 Page 189

Bibliography archaeological excavations in Ireland, 25–6. Wordwell, Bray. Cooney, G. 2003 The Point, Lambay. In I. Bennett (ed.), Excavations 2002: summary accounts of archaeological excavations in Ireland, 170–1. Wordwell, Bray. Cooney, G. 2004 Neolithic worlds: islands in the Irish Sea. In V. Cummings and C. Fowler (eds), The Neolithic of the Irish Sea: materiality and traditions of practice, 145–59. Oxbow, Oxford. Cooney, G. 2005 Stereo porphyry: quarrying and deposition on Lambay, Ireland. In P. Topping and M. Lynott (eds), The cultural landscape of prehistoric mines, 1–29. Oxbow, Oxford. Cooney, G. 2009a The prehistory of Lambay, a long view. In C. Baker (ed.), Axes, warriors and windmills: recent archaeological discoveries in north Fingal, 9–23. Fingal County Council, Dublin. Cooney, G. 2009b Tracing lines across landscapes: corporality and history in later prehistoric Ireland. In G. Cooney, K. Becker, J. Coles, M. Ryan and S. Sievers (eds), Relics of old decency: archaeological studies in later prehistory. Festschrift for Barry Raftery, 375–88. Wordwell, Bray. Cooney, G. and Grogan, E. 1994 Irish prehistory: a social perspective. Wordwell, Bray. Cooney, G., Ballin, T. and Warren, G. 2013 Island quarries, island axeheads and the Neolithic of Britain and Ireland. North American Archaeologist 34 (2), 409–31. Cooney, G., Bayliss, A., Healy, F. et al. 2011 Chapter 12: Ireland. In A. Whittle, F. Healy and A. Bayliss (eds), Gathering time: dating the early Neolithic enclosures of southern Britain and Ireland, 562–669. Oxbow, Oxford. Cooney, G., Becker, K., Coles, J., Ryan, M. and Sievers, S. (eds) 2009 Relics of old decency: archaeological studies in later prehistory. Festschrift for Barry Raftery. Wordwell, Bray. Coplen, T.B. 1988 Normalization of oxygen and hydrogen isotope data. Chemical Geology (Isotope Geosciences) 72, 293–7. Corlett, C. and Potterton, M. (eds) 2010 Death and burial in early medieval Ireland in the light of recent archaeological excavations. Wordwell, Bray. Corlett, C. and Potterton, M. (eds) 2012 Life and death in Iron Age Ireland in the light of recent archaeological excavations. Wordwell, Bray. Cotter, C. 2013 The Western Stone Forts Project: excavations at Dún Aonghasa and Dún Eoghanachta (2 vols). Wordwell, Bray. Cotter, E. 2013 Ballybrowney Lower 1—nucleated settlement. In K. Hanley and M.F. Hurley (eds),

Generations: the archaeology of five national road schemes in County Cork, 93–104. National Roads Authority, Dublin. Coughlan, T. 2011 The occupation of earlier prehistoric monuments in the early medieval period: the evidence from Cappydonnell Big, Co. Offaly. In C. Corlett and M. Potterton (eds), Settlement in early medieval Ireland in the light of recent archaeological excavations, 73–92. Wordwell, Bray. Coughlan, T. 2012 ‘Follow me up to Carlow’: an outline of the Iron Age sites found along the M9/N10 route from Knocktopher, Co. Kilkenny, to Powerstown, Co. Carlow. In C. Corlett and M. Potterton (eds), Life and death in Iron Age Ireland in the light of recent archaeological excavations, 59–78. Wordwell, Bray. Coyle McClung, L. 2013 The Late Iron Age Lull— not so late Iron Age after all! Emania 21, 73–83. Crabtree, P. 2002 Ritual feasting in the Irish Iron Age: re-examining the fauna from Dún Ailinne in light of contemporary archaeology theory. In S.J. O’Day, W. Van Neer and A. Ervynck (eds), Behaviour behind bones: the zooarchaeology of ritual, religion, status and identity. Proceedings of the 9th ICAZ Conference, Durham, 62–5. Oxbow, Oxford. Craig, H. 1957 Isotopic standards for carbon and oxygen and correction factors for massspectrometric analysis of carbon dioxide. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 12, 133–49. Crawford, O.G.S. 1953 Archaeology in the field. Phoenix House, London. Creighton, J. 2005 Britannia, the creation of a Roman province. Routledge, London. Creighton, J. 2009 Coins and power in late Iron Age Britain. New Studies in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press. Creighton, J. and Wilson, R.J.A. 1999 Roman Germany: studies in cultural interaction. International Roman Archaeology Conference Series. JRA Supplementary Series, 35–54. Portsmouth, Rhode Island. Crerar, B. 2012 Contextualising Romano-British lead tanks. Britannia 23, 135–66. Crummy, N. 2005 From bracelets to battlehonours: military armillae from the Roman conquest of Britain. In N. Crummy (ed.), Image, craft and the Classical world: essays in honour of Donald Bailey and Catherine Johns, 93–105. Monographie Instrumentum 29. Editions Monique Mergoil, Montagnac. Crummy, P. 1997 City of victory: the story of Roman 189

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:27 Page 190

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland Colchester, Britain’s first Roman town. Colchester Archaeological Trust. Crummy, P. 2003 Colchester’s Roman town wall. In P. Wilson (ed.), The archaeology of Roman towns: studies in memory of John S. Wacher, 44–52. Oxbow, Oxford. Cunliffe, B. 1978 Hengistbury Head. Archaeological Sites Series. Elek, London. Cunliffe, B. 1991 Iron Age communities in Britain. Routledge, London. Cunliffe, B. 1992 Pits, preconceptions and propitiation in the British Iron Age. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 11 (1), 69–83. Cunliffe, B. 2001 Facing the ocean: the Atlantic and its peoples, 8000 BC–AD 1500. Oxford University Press. Cunliffe, B. 2008 Europe between the oceans.Yale University Press, New Haven. Cunliffe, B. 2012 Britain begins. Oxford University Press. Daffy, S. 2002 A site for sore eyes: a HibernoRoman curative cult at Golden, Co. Tipperary. AI 16 (2), 8–9. Danaher, E. 2009 M3 Clonee–north of Kells, Contract 2, Dunshaughlin–Navan, report on the archaeological excavation of Blundelstown 1, Co. Meath, Ministerial Directions No. A008/022, E3075, final report (www.m3motorway.ie/Archaeology/Section2/ Blundelstown1, accessed September 2011). Danielsson, I.-M.B. 2008 Bodies and identities in the Scandinavian Late Iron Age. In A. Jones (ed.), Prehistoric Europe: theory and practice, 312–29. Blackwell, Chichester. D’Alton, J. 1838 The history of the County of Dublin. Hodges and Smith, Dublin. Darcy, R. and Flynn, W. 2008 Ptolemy’s map of Ireland: a modern decoding. Irish Geography 41 (1), 49–69. Dark, K.R. 1993 Roman period activity at prehistoric ritual monuments in Britain and the Armorican Peninsula. In E. Scott (ed.), Theoretical Roman Archaeology: first conference proceedings, 133–46. Worldwide Archaeology Series 4. Oxbow, Oxford. Dark, K.R. 2000 Britain and the end of the Roman Empire. Tempus, London. Darling, J.R., Hawkesworth, C.J., Lightfoot, P.C., Storey, C.D. and Tremblay, E. 2010 Isotopic heterogeneity in the Sudbury impact melt sheet. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 289, 347–56. Darling, W.G., Bath, A.H. and Talbot, J.C. 2003 The O and H stable isotopic content of fresh waters 190

in the British Isles. 2. Ground and surface waters. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences 7, 183–95. Daux, V., Lécuyer, C., Héran, M. et al. 2008 Oxygen isotope fractionation between human phosphate and water revisited. Journal of Human Evolution 55, 1138–47. Davies, H. 2002 Roads in Roman Britain. Tempus, London. de Feachem, R.W. 1951 Dragonesque fibulae. Antiquaries Journal 31, 32–44. de Feachem, R.W. 1968 Dragonesque fibulae. Antiquaries Journal 48, 100–2. de Paor, L. 1993 Saint Patrick’s world: the Christian culture of Ireland’s apostolic age. Four Courts Press, Dublin. Delaney, S. 2010 An early medieval landscape at Balriggan, Co. Louth. In C. Corlett and M. Potterton (eds), Death and burial in early medieval Ireland in the light of recent archaeological excavations, 91–102. Wordwell, Bray. Delaney, S., McKeon, J. and McNamara, S. 2012 Two Iron Age ring-ditches in Ballyboy, Co. Galway. In C. Corlett and M. Potterton (eds), Life and death in Iron Age Ireland in the light of recent excavations, 93–104. Wordwell, Bray. Diefendorf, A.F. and Patterson, W.P. 2005 Survey of stable isotope values in Irish surface waters. Journal of Paleolimnology 34, 257–69. Doherty, C. 1985 The monastic town in early medieval Ireland. In H.B. Clarke and A. Simms (eds), The comparative history of urban origins in non-Roman Europe, 45–75. BAR International Series 255(i). Archaeopress, Oxford. Doherty, C. 2005 Kingship in early Ireland. In E. Bhreathnach (ed.), The kingship and landscape of Tara, 3–32. Four Courts Press/Discovery Programme, Dublin. Dolan, B. and Cooney, G. 2010 Lambay lithics: the analysis of two surface collections from Lambay, Co. Dublin. PRIA 110C, 1–33. Dolley, M. 1976 Roman coins from Ireland and the date of St Patrick. Proceedings of the RoyaI Irish Academy 76C, 181–91. Donaghy, C. 1991 Barrel padlocks and their keys in Ireland. Unpublished MA thesis, University College Dublin. Doody, M. 1995 The Claidh Dubh. Interim report. Discovery Programme Reports 2, 19–23. Doody, M. 2000 Bronze Age houses in Ireland. In A. Desmond, G. Johnson and M. McCarthy (eds), New agendas in Irish prehistory: papers in commemoration of Liz Anderson, 135–60.

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:27 Page 191

Bibliography Wordwell, Bray. Doody, M. 2008 The Ballyhoura Hills Project. Discovery Programme Monographs No. 7. Wordwell, Bray. Dowling, G. 2006 The liminal boundary: an analysis of the sacral potency of the ditch at Ráith na Ríg, Tara, Co. Meath. JIA 15, 15–37. Dowling, G. 2009 The architecture of power: an examination of the concept of closely-spaced multivallation in Ireland. Unpublished Ph.D thesis, NUI Galway. Dowling, G. 2011 The architecture of power: an examination of the origin of closely spaced multivallate monuments in Ireland. In R. Schot, C. Newman and E. Bhreathnach (eds), Landscapes of cult and kingship, 213–32. Four Courts Press, Dublin. Dowling, G. and Cahill Wilson, J. 2014 Tracing the footprint of our ancestors. AI 28 (1), 20–2. Dowling, G. and McCarthy, N. 2011 Preliminary Iron Age settlement project. Unpublished report for the Discovery Programme, Dublin. Doyle, I. 1998 The early medieval activity at Dalkey Island, Co. Dublin: a reassessment. JIA 9, 89–104. Doyle, I.W. 2005 Excavation of a prehistoric ringbarrow at Kilmahuddrick, Clondalkin, Dublin 22. JIA 14, 43–76. Doyle, T. 2009 N9/N10 Kilcullen to Waterford Scheme: Kilcullen to Powerstown. Archaeological Services contract No. 4— Resolution, Prumplestown to Powerstown. Final report on archaeological investigations at Site E2597, in the townland of Moyle Big, Co. Carlow. Unpublished report for Carlow County Council. Drummond, W.H. 1840 On Roman coins found in Ireland. PRIA 2 (1836), 185–90. Dungworth, D.B. 1997 Iron Age and Roman copper alloys from northern Britain. Internet Archaeology 2, 10.2 (http://intarch.ac.uk/journal/issue2/dungworth _toc.html, accessed 7 May 2014). Dunne, L. and Bartlett, T. 2009 Knockanacuig/Lohercannan, Co. Kerry: hillfort. In I. Bennett (ed.), Excavations 2006: summary accounts of archaeological excavations in Ireland, 227. Wordwell, Bray. Dupras, T.L. 2001 Strangers in a strange land: stable isotope evidence for human migration in the Dakleh Oasis, Egypt. JAS 28, 1199–208. Eckardt, H. (ed.) 2010 Roman diasporas: archaeological approaches to mobility and diversity in the Roman

Empire. JRA Supplementary Series 88. Portsmouth, Rhode Island. Eckardt, H. and Crummy, N. 2008 Styling the body in late Iron Age and Roman Britain: a contextual approach to toilet instruments. Monographies Instrumentum 36. Éditions Monique Mergoil, Montagnac. Eckardt, H., Brewer, P., Hay, S. and Poppy, S. 2009 Roman barrows and their landscape context: a GIS case study at Bartlow Hills in Cambridgeshire. Britannia 40, 65–98. Edwards, N. 1990 The archaeology of early medieval Ireland. Routledge, London. Edwards, Z. 2013 Stoke Hammond, Buckinghamshire: aerial investigation and mapping of two possible Neolithic enclosures. English Heritage Research Report Series No. 41 (http://research.englishheritage.org.uk/report/?15171, accessed May 2014). Elder, S., O’Connor, E. and Owen, J. 2009 M3 Clonee–North of Kells, Contract 1, Clonee–Dunshaughlin, report on the archaeological excavation of Raynestown 1, Co. Meath, Ministerial Directions No. A017/016, E3038, final report (www.m3motorway.ie/Archaeology/Section1/ Raynestown1, accessed January 2013). Ellis, C. 2002 Appendix 6. Ráith na Ríg, Tara: soil micromorphological and bulk sample analysis. Discovery Programme Reports 6, 127–65. Ellis, P. 1987 Excavations at Sea Mills Abonae. Transactions of the Bristol and Gloucestershire Archaeological Society 105, 15–108. Eogan, G. (ed.) 2012 Excavations at Knowth 5: the archaeology of Knowth in the first and second millennia AD. Royal Irish Academy, Dublin. Eogan, J. 2010 Excavation of an unenclosed early medieval cemetery at Bettystown, Co. Meath. In C. Corlett and M. Potterton (eds), Death and burial in early medieval Ireland in the light of recent archaeological excavations, 101–16. Wordwell, Bray. Evans, J., Chenery, C. and Fitzpatrick, A.P. 2006 Bronze Age childhood migration of individuals near Stonehenge, revealed by strontium and oxygen isotope tooth enamel analysis. Archaeometry 48 (2), 309–21. Evans, J., Montgomery, J., Wildman, G. and Boulton, N. 2010 Spatial variations in biosphere 87 Sr/86Sr in Britain. Journal of the Geological Society 167, 1–4. Evans, J., Stoodley, N. and Chenery, C. 2006 A strontium and oxygen isotope assessment of a 191

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:28 Page 192

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland possible fourth century immigrant population in a Hampshire cemetery, southern England. JAS 33, 265–72. Faegri, K. and Iversen, J. 1989 Textbook of pollen analysis. Wiley, Chichester. Fenwick, J. 2011 Review of The Rath of the Synods, Tara, Co. Meath: excavations by Seán P. Ó Ríordáin by Eoin Grogan. Ríocht na Midhe 22, 280–5. Fenwick, J. and Newman, C. 2002 Geomagnetic survey on the Hill of Tara, Co. Meath, 1998–9. Discovery Programme Reports 6, 1–17. Fibiger Bang, P. 2008 The Roman bazaar: a comparative study of trade and markets in a tributary empire. Cambridge University Press. Finley, M.I. 1973 The ancient economy. University of California Press. Fitzpatrick, A.P. 1997 Everyday life in Iron Age Wessex. In A. Gwilt and C. Haselgrove (eds), Reconstructing Iron Age societies: new approaches to the British Iron Age, 72–86. Oxbow, Oxford. FitzPatrick, E. 2004 Royal inauguration in Gaelic Ireland, c. 1100–1600: a cultural landscape study. The Boydell Press, Suffolk. FitzPatrick, E. 2009 Native enclosed settlement and the problem of the Irish ‘ringfort’. Medieval Archaeology 53, 271–307. Fletcher, C., Swainbank, I. and Colman, T. 1993 Metallogenic evolution in Wales: constraints from lead isotope modelling. Journal of the Geological Society 150, 77–82. Foley, C. 1988 An enigma solved: Kiltierney, Co. Fermanagh. In A. Hamlin and C.J. Lynn (eds), Pieces of the past: archaeological excavations by the Department of the Environment for Northern Ireland 1970–1986, 24–6. HMSO, Belfast. Fowler, E. 1960 The origins and development of the penannular brooch in Europe. PPS 26, 14–177. Freeman, P. 2001 Ireland and the Classical world. University of Austin Press. Fulford, M.G. 1985 Roman material in barbarian society c. 200 BC to AD 400. In T.C. Champion and J.V.S. Megaw (eds), Settlement and society: aspects of west European prehistory in the first millennium, 91–109. Leicester University Press. Fulford, M.G. 1989 Roman and barbarian: the economy of Roman frontier systems. In J.C. Barrett, A.P. Fitzpatrick and L. Macinnes (eds), Barbarians and Romans in north-west Europe from the later Republic to late Antiquity, 81–96. BAR International Series 471. Archaeopress, Oxford. Fulford, M.G. 2007 Coasting Britannia: Roman trade and traffic around the shores of Britain. In C. Gosden, H. Hamerow, P. de Jersey and G. 192

Lock (eds), Communities and connections. Essays in honour of Barry Cunliffe, 54–74. Oxford University Press. Gaffney, C. and Gater, J. 2003 Revealing the buried past: geophysics for archaeologists. Tempus, Stroud. Galestin, M. 2010 Roman artefacts beyond the northern frontier: interpreting the evidence from the Netherlands. EJA 13, 64–88. Gansum, T. 2004 Role of bones—from iron to steel. Norwegian Archaeological Review 37 (1), 41–57. Gardner, A. 2007 Fluid frontiers: cultural interaction on the edge of empire. Stanford Journal of Archaeology 5, 43–60. Gaskell Brown, C. and Harper, A.E.T. 1984 Excavations on Cathedral Hill, Armagh. UJA 47, 109–60. Gavin, F. 2013 Insular military-style silver pins in late Iron Age Ireland. In F. Hunter and K. Painter (eds), Late Roman Silver—the Traprain treasure in context, 427–41. Society of Antiquaries of Scotland and National Museums of Scotland, Edinburgh. Geological Survey of Ireland 2008 GIS bedrock geological map of Ireland. Dublin. Giles, M. 2007 Making metal and forging relations: ironworking in the British Iron Age. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 26 (4), 395–413. Gillespie, R. [n.d.] Lowpark, Co. Mayo, multiperiod archaeological complex, Registration No. E3338, Ministerial Direction No. A020/012, final report. Unpublished report for Mayo County Council. Gleeson, P. 2012 Constructing kingship in early medieval Ireland: power, place and ideology. Medieval Archaeology 56, 1–31. Gleeson, P. (forthcoming) Making provincial kingship in early medieval Ireland: Cashel and the creation of Munster. In A. Reynolds, B. Yorke and J. Carroll (eds), Later Roman and early medieval Europe: interdisciplinary perspectives on governance and civil organization. British Academy, London. Goldhahn, J. and Oestigaard, T. 2008 Smith and death—cremation in furnaces in Bronze and Iron Age Scandinavia. In K. Chilidis, J. Lund and C. Prescott (eds), Facets of archaeology: essays in honour of Lotte Hedeager on her 60th birthday, 215–41. Oslo Archaeological Series 10. Oslo Academic Press. Gosden, C. 2004 Archaeology and colonialism: cultural contact from 5000 BC to the present. Cambridge University Press.

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:28 Page 193

Bibliography Gosden, C. and Marshall, Y. 1999 The cultural biography of objects. World Archaeology 31 (2), 169–78. Gowen, M., Ó Néill, J. and Phillips, M. (eds) 2005 The Lisheen Mine Archaeological Project 1997–8. Wordwell, Bray. Graham-Campbell, J. 1998 The early Viking Age in the Irish Sea area. In H. Clarke, M. Ní Mhaonaigh and R. Ó Floinn (eds), Ireland and Scandinavia in the early Viking Age, 104–30. Four Courts Press, Dublin. Grane, T. 2008a Varpalev, Denmark: evidence of Roman diplomacy. Bolletino di Archaeologia online, Volume Speciale (curis.ku.dk/ws/files/74251236/AIAC_article.p df, accessed May 2014). Grane, T. 2008b Southern Scandinavian foederati and auxiliarii. In T. Grane (ed.), Beyond the Roman frontier: Roman influences on the northern barbaricum, 83–104, pls 163–4. Analecta Romana Instituti Danici Supplementum XXXIX. Edizioni Quasar, Roma. Griffiths, D., Philpott, R. and Egan, G. 2007 Meols: the archaeology of the north Wirral coast. Oxford University School of Archaeology Monograph Series 68. Grogan, E. 2005 The North Munster Project (2 vols). Discovery Programme Monographs No. 6. Wordwell, Bray. Grogan, E. 2008 The Rath of the Synods, Tara, Co. Meath: excavations by Seán P. Ó Ríordáin. Wordwell/UCD School of Archaeology, Dublin. Grundy, D. 2011 Ancient stone crucible or lamp found at Skerries, Co. Dublin. AI 25 (2), 13–14. Gudeman, A. 1900 Agricola’s invasion of Ireland once more. Classical Review 14, 51–3. Guest, P. 2008a Roman gold and Hun kings: the use and hoarding of solidi in the late fourth and fifth centuries. In A. Bursche, R. Ciolek and R. Wolters (eds), Roman coins outside the empire: ways and phases, contexts and functions, 295–307. Proceedings of the ESF/SCH Exploratory Workshop, Nieborów, Poland. Collection Moneta, Vol. 82. Moneta, Wetteren. Guest, P. 2008b The early monetary history of Roman Wales: identity, conquest and acculturation on the imperial fringe. Britannia 39, 33–58. Guido, M. 1978 The glass beads of the prehistoric and Roman periods in Britain and Ireland. Society of Antiquaries of London. Gwynn, E.J. (ed.) 1903–35 [1991 reprint] The metrical dindshenchas (5 vols). Todd Lecture Series

VIII–XII. Royal Irish Academy/Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies, Dublin. Haak, W., Brandt, G., de Jong, H.N. et al. 2008 Ancient DNA, strontium isotopes and osteological analyses shed light on social and kinship organization of the later Stone Age. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 105, 18226–31. Hackett, L. and Hanbidge, R. 2009 N9/N10 Kilcullen to Waterford Scheme: Kilcullen to Powerstown. Archaeological Services Contract No. 4—Resolution, Prumplestown to Powerstown. Final report on archaeological investigations at Ballybar Lower, Co. Carlow, Licence Number: E2622. Unpublished report for Carlow County Council. Hansen, L. 1982 Scandinavian finds of Samian ware: their origin, dating and relation to the other Roman imports during the later Empire. Studien zur Sachsenforschung 3, 75–100. Harden, D.B. 1968 Appendix 10: notes on glass fragments from Dalkey Island. In G.D. Liversage, ‘Excavations at Dalkey Island, Co. Dublin, 1956–1959’. PRIA 66C, 193–5. Hårdh, B. and Larsson, L. (eds) 2002 Central places in the Migration and Merovingian periods. Uppåkrastudier 6. Acta Archaeologica Lundensia 8:39. Almqvist and Wiksell International, Stockholm. Harding, D.W. 2007 The archaeology of Celtic art. Routledge, London. Harvey, A. 1987 Early literacy in Ireland: the evidence from Ogham. Cambridge Medieval Celtic Studies 14, 1–15. Harvey, A. 1999 Some observations on Celtic-Latin name formation. In J. Carey, J.T. Koch and P.Y. Lambert (eds), Ildánach Ildírech: a Festschrift for Proinsias Mac Cana, 53–62. Celtic Studies Publications, Andover and Aberystwyth. Haverfield, F.J. 1913 Ancient Rome and Ireland. English Historical Review 28, 1–12 (http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Journ als/EHR/28/Ancient_Rome_and_Ireland*.htm l, accessed 2 February 2014). Haworth, R. 1971 The horse harness of the early Irish Iron Age. UJA 34, 26–41. Heather, P. 2009 Empires and barbarians: the fall of Rome and the birth of Europe. Oxford University Press. Hedeager, L. 1978 A quantitative analysis of Roman imports in Europe north of the Limes (0–400 AD) and the question of Roman–Germanic exchange. In K. Kristiansen and C. Paludan193

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:28 Page 194

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland Muller (eds), New directions in Scandinavian archaeology: studies in Scandinavian prehistory and early history, vol. 1, 191–217. Aarhus University Press. Hedeager, L. 1987 Empire, frontier and the barbarian hinterland: Rome and northern Europe from AD 1–400. In M. Rowlands, M. Larsen and K. Kristiansen (eds), Centre and periphery in the ancient world, 125–40. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Hedeager, L. 1992 Iron Age societies from tribe to state in northern Europe, 500 BC to AD 700 (trans. J. Himes). Blackwell, Oxford. Hedeager, L. 2001 Asgard reconstructed? Gudme— a central place in the north. In M.B. de Jong, F. Theuws and C. Van Rhijn (eds), Topographies of power in the early Middle Ages, 467–507. Brill, Leiden. Hedeager, L. 2002 Scandinavian ‘central’ places in a cosmological setting. In B. Hårdh and L. Larsson (eds), Central places in the Migration and Merovingian periods, 3–18. Uppåkrastudier 6. Acta Archaeologica Lundensia 8:39. Almqvist and Wiksell International, Stockholm. Heiri, O.F., Lotter, F. and Lemke, E.G. 2001 Loss on ignition as a method for estimating organic and carbonate content in sediments: reproducibility and comparability. Journal of Paleolimnology 25, 101–10. Hemer, K.A., Evans, J.A., Chenery, C.A. and Lamb, A.L. 2013 Evidence of medieval trade and migration between Wales and the Mediterranean sea region. JAS 40, 2352–9. Hencken, H.O. 1932 The archaeology of Cornwall and Sicily. Methuen, London. Hencken, H.O. 1938–9 Unpublished excavation notes for Lagore Crannog. NMI topographical files. Hencken, H.O. 1942 Ballinderry Crannog No. 2. PRIA 47C, 1–76. Hencken, H.O. 1950a Lagore Crannog: an Irish royal residence of the seventh to tenth centuries AD. PRIA 53C, 1–247. Hencken, H.O. 1950b Unpublished bone report on Lagore Crannog. NMI topographical files. Henderson, J. 1987 The Iron Age of ‘Loughey’ and Meare: some inferences from glass analysis. Antiquaries Journal 67 (1), 22–49. Herbert, M. 1996 Iona, Kells and Derry. Four Courts Press, Dublin. Herity, M. 1982 Irish decorated pottery. PRIA 82C, 247–404. Higham, N.J. 1989 Roman and native north of the 194

Tees: acculturation and its limitations. In J. Barrett, A.P. Fitzpatrick and L. Macinnes (eds), Barbarians and Romans in north-west Europe from the later Republic to late Antiquity, 153–75. BAR International Series 471. Archaeopress, Oxford. Hill, J.D. 1995 Ritual and rubbish in the Iron Age of Wessex: a study on the formation of a specific archaeological record. BAR British Series 242. Archaeopress, Oxford. Hingley, R. 1994 Britannia, origin myths and the British Empire. In S. Cottam, D. Dungworth, S. Scott and J. Taylor (eds), TRAC: the proceedings of the fourth annual Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference, Durham University, 11–23. Oxbow, Oxford. Hingley, R. 1997a Iron, ironworking and regeneration: a study of the symbolic meaning of metalworking in Iron Age Britain. In A. Gwilt and C. Haselgrove (eds), Reconstructing Iron Age societies, 9–15. Oxbow, Oxford. Hingley, R. 1997b Resistance and domination: social change in Roman Britain. In D.J. Mattingly (ed.), Dialogues in Roman imperialism: power discourse and discrepant experience in the Roman Empire. JRA Supplementary Series 23, 81–100. Portsmouth, Rhode Island. Hingley, R. 2005 Globalising Roman culture: unity, diversity and empire. Routledge, London and New York. Hingley, R. 2006 The deposition of iron objects in Britain during the later prehistoric and Roman periods: contextual analysis and the significance of iron. Britannia 37, 213–57. Hingley, R. 2010 Cultural diversity and unity: empire and Rome. In T. Hodos and S. Hales (eds), Material culture and social identities in the ancient world, 54–79. Cambridge University Press. Hoare, P.G. 1975 The pattern of glaciation in County Dublin. PRIA 75B, 207–24. Hodkinson, B. 1994 Excavations at Cormac’s Chapel, Cashel, 1992 and 1993: a preliminary statement. Tipperary Historical Journal 20, 167–74. Hodos, T. 2010 Local and global perspectives in the study of social and cultural identities. Routledge, London and New York. Hoffman, B. 2004 Tacitus, Agricola and the role of literature in the archaeology of the first century AD. In E. Sauer (ed.), Archaeology and ancient history—breaking down the boundaries, 151–67. Routledge, London and New York. Hoffman, B. 2013 The Roman invasion of Britain: archaeology versus history. Pen and Sword,

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:28 Page 195

Bibliography Barnsley. Hooker, J. 2001 The Lambay Island settlers— Brigantes or Dobunni? IRQUAS Insight 2. New Perspectives in Irish Studies (http://homepage.eircom.net/~archaeology/two /lambay.htm, accessed May 2014). Hull, G. 2006 N18 Ennis Bypass and N85 Western Relief Road, Site AR100, Manusmore, Co. Clare, Licence No. 04E0187, final archaeological excavation report. Unpublished report for Clare County Council. Hunter, F. 2001 Roman and native in Scotland: new approaches. JRA 14, 289–309. Hunter, F. 2010 Changing objects in changing worlds: dragonesque brooches and beaded torcs. In S. Worrell, G. Egan, J. Naylor, K. Leahy and M. Lewis (eds), A decade of discovery: proceedings of the Portable Antiquities Scheme Conference 2007, 91–108. BAR British Series 520. Archaeopress, Oxford. Hunter, F. and Keppie, L. 2012 A Roman frontier post and its people: Newstead 1911–2011. National Museums Scotland, Edinburgh. Hunter, F. and Painter, K. (eds) 2013 Late Roman silver: the Traprain treasure in context. Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, Edinburgh. Hyland, A. 1990 Equus: the horse in the Roman world. Yale University Press. Iacumen, P., Bocherens, H., Mariotti, A. and Longinelli, A. 1996 Oxygen isotope analyses of co-existing carbonate and phosphate in biogenic apatite: a way to monitor diagenetic alteration of bone and phosphate? Earth and Planetary Science Letters 142, 1–6. Irish Archaeological Consultancy Ltd 2012 Greater Dublin Drainage. Alternative sites assessment— Phase two sites assessment and route selection report, cultural heritage, App. 6. Unpublished report for Fingal County Council (http://greaterdublindrainage.gecoloco.com/wp -content/uploads/2012/04/Appendix-6text.pdf, accessed March 2013). Ivens, R.J. 1987 The Early Christian monastic enclosure at Tullylish, Co. Down. UJA 50, 55–121. James, S. 1999 The Atlantic Celts: ancient people or modern invention. British Museum Press, London. James, S. 2011 Rome and the sword: how weapons and warriors shaped Roman history. Thames and Hudson, London. James, S. and Rigby, V. 1997 Britain and the Celtic Iron Age. British Museum Press, London. Janiszewski, R. 2011 A fragment of a gold bracelet

from Newgrange, Co. Meath, and its late Roman context. JIA 20, 53–64. Johns, C. 1996 The jewellery of Roman Britain: classical and Celtic traditions. Routledge, London. Johns, C. 2006 An Iron Age sword and mirror cist burial from Bryhyr, Isle of Scilly. Cornish Archaeology 41 (42), 1–79. Johnston, E. 2013 Literacy and identity in early medieval Ireland. Boydell and Brewer, Woodbridge. Johnston, P. 2008 Analysis of the plant remains from Rosepark, Balrothery, Co. Dublin (99E0155). In J. Carroll, Archaeological excavations at Rosepark, Balrothery, Co. Dublin, App. V, 126–9. Environmental Publications, Dublin. Johnston, S.A. and Wailes, B. (eds) 2007 Dún Ailinne: excavations at an Irish royal site, 1968–1975. University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, Philadelphia. Johnston, S.A., Campana, D. and Crabtree, P. 2009 A geophysical survey at Dún Ailinne, County Kildare, Ireland. Journal of American Field Archaeology 34, 385–402. Jones, B. and Mattingly, D.J. 1990 An atlas of Roman Britain. Oxbow, Oxford. Jones, D. 1998 Long barrows and Neolithic elongated enclosures in Lincolnshire: an analysis of the air photographic evidence. PPS 64, 83–114. Jones, J.E. 2012 The maritime landscape of Roman Britain: water transport on the coasts and rivers of Britannia. BAR British Series 556. Archaeopress, Oxford. Jones, R. 2012 Roman camps in Britain. Amberley, Stroud. Jope, E.M. 1954 The Keshcarrigan bowl and a bronze mirror-handle from Ballymoney. UJA 17, 92–6. Jope, E.M. 1958 A heavy bronze ring of Italian type from Derry. UJA 21, 14–16. Jope, E.M. 1961–2 Iron Age brooches in Ireland, a summary. UJA 24–5, 25–38. Jørgen, I. and Friberg, R. 2002 Illerup Ådal: archaeology as a magic mirror. Archaeological Society Press, Jutland. Jørgensen, L., Storgaard, B. and Thomsen, L.G. (eds) 2003 The spoils of victory: the north in the shadow of the Roman Empire. Nationalmuseet, Copenhagen. Joy, J. 2010 Iron Age mirrors: a biographical approach. BAR British Series 518. Archaeopress, Oxford. Joy, J. 2012 Exploring status and identity in Iron 195

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:28 Page 196

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland Age Britain: reinterpreting mirror burials. In T. Moore and X.-L. Armada (eds), Atlantic Europe in the first millennium BC: crossing the divide, 468–88. Oxford University Press. Juggins, S. 2003 Program C2 data analysis. Version 1.4.2. University of Newcastle. Karl, R. 2004 Celtoscepticism a convenient excuse for ignoring non-archaeological evidence. In E. Sauer (ed.), Archaeology and ancient history: breaking down the barrier, 185–99. Routledge, London and New York. Kaul, F. 2003 The bog—gateway to another world. In L. Jørgensen, B. Stoorgard and L.G. Thomsen (eds), The spoils of victory: the north in the shadow of the Roman Empire, 18–44. Nationalmuseet, Copenhagen. Keeley, V.J. 1991 Archaeological excavation of a burial ground, Greenhills townland. JCKAS 17, 180–201. Keeley,V.[J.] 1999 Iron Age discoveries at Ballydavis. In P.G. Lane and W. Nolan (eds), Laois: history and society—interdisciplinary essays on the history of an Irish county, 25–34. Geography Publications, Dublin. Kelly, A. 2010 The discovery of Phocaean Red Slip Ware (PRSW) Form 3 and Bii ware (LR1 amphorae) at Collierstown in County Meath— an analysis within a broader framework. PRIA 110C, 35–88. Kelly, C. 2009 Attila the Hun, barbarian terror and the fall of the Roman Empire. Vintage Press, London. Kelly, E.P. 1993 Early Celtic art in Ireland. National Museum of Ireland/Country House Press, Dublin. Kelly, E.P. 2002 Antiquities from Irish holy wells and their wider context. AI 16 (2), 24–8. Kelly, F. 1988 A guide to early Irish law. Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies, Dublin. Kelly, F. 2000 Early Irish farming. Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies, Dublin. Kenny, C. 2012 Mummies and more: secrets of the crypt in the National Museum of Ireland. The Irish Times, 17 October 2012 (http://www. irishtimes.com/culture/art-and-design/ mummies-and-more-the-secrets-of-the-crypt1.553721, accessed 8 May 2014). Kenyon, R. 1987 The Claudian coins. In N. Crummy, Colchester Archaeology Report 4, 1971–79. Colchester Archaeological Trust and English Heritage (http://cat.essex.ac.uk/ summaries/CAR-0004.html, accessed May 2014). Keppie, L. 1998 The Roman inscriptions of Britain. 196

Britannia 29, 451–5. Kessler, D. and Temin, P. 2007 The organization of the grain trade in the early Roman Empire. Economic History Review 60, 313–32. Kilbride-Jones, H.E. 1980 Zoomorphic penannular brooches. Society of Antiquaries of London Research Report 39. Knowles, W.J. 1893–6 The third report on the prehistoric remains from the sandhills of the coast of Ireland. PRIA 3 (1889–1901), 650–63. Koch, J.T. 2006 Celtic culture: a historical encyclopedia (2 vols). ABC-CLIO, Santa Barbara. Koch, P.L., Tuross, N. and Fogel, M.L. 1997 The effects of sample treatment and diagenesis on the isotopic integrity of carbonate in biogenic hydroxylapatite. JAS 24, 417–29. Koptyoff, I. 1986 The cultural biography of things: commoditization as process. In A. Appadurai (ed.), The social life of things: commodities in cultural perspective, 64–91. Cambridge University Press. Körtüm, K. 1998 Zur Datierun der römischen Militäranlagen im obergermanischrätischen Limes gebiet, Chronologische Untersuchungen anhand der Münzfunde. Saalburg Jahrbuch 49, 5–65. Kurzmann, R. 2009 Irish sanctuaries and Roman sacrifices: evidence for cult connections between Iron Age Ireland and north-western Roman provinces. In A. Morillo (ed.), Limes XX: Proceedings of XXth International Congress on Roman Frontier Studies, 1631–43. Ediciones Polifemo, Madrid. Lacey, B., Cahill Wilson, J. and McGlade, S. (forthcoming) A possible context for Roman finds in Donegal. In T. Reeves-Smyth and P. Logue (eds), Beyond the horizon: a festschrift for Chris Lynn. Wordwell, Bray. Laing, L. 1987 Later Celtic art in Britain and Ireland. Shire, Princes Risborough. Laing, L. and Laing, J. 1992 The art of the Celts. Thames and Hudson, London. Lambert, M. 2010 Christians and pagans: the conversion of Britain from Alban to Bede. Yale University Press. Larsson, L. 2001 A building for ritual use at Uppåkra, southernmost Sweden. Antiquity 75, 679–80. Larsson, L. 2002 Uppåkra—research on a central place. Recent excavations and results. In B. Hårdh and L. Larsson (eds), Central places in the Migration and Merovingian periods, 19–30. Uppåkrastudier 6. Acta Archaeologica Lundensia 8:39. Almqvist and Wiksell International, Stockholm.

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:28 Page 197

Bibliography Larsson, L. 2003 The Uppåkra Project. Preconditions, performance and prospects. In L. Larsson and B. Hårdh (eds), Centrality–regionality. The social structure of southern Sweden during the Iron Age, 3–26. Uppåkrastudier 7. Acta Archaeologica Lundensia 8:40. Almqvist and Wiksell International, Stockholm. Larsson, L. and Lenntorp, K.M. 2004 The enigmatic house. In L. Larsson (ed.), Continuity for centuries. A ceremonial building and its context at Uppåkra, southern Sweden, 3–48. Uppåkrastudier 10. Acta Archaeologica Lundensia 8:48. Almqvist and Wiksell International, Stockholm. Lehane, J. 2008 Ballygarraun West: inhumation. In I. Bennett (ed.), Excavations 2006: summary accounts of archaeological excavations in Ireland, 181. Wordwell, Bray. Lennon, A.M. 2002 Cloongownagh: enclosure. In I. Bennett (ed.), Excavations 2000: summary accounts of archaeological excavations in Ireland, 290–1. Wordwell, Bray. Lennon, A.M. 2009 Derrinsallagh 4, Co. Laois. In I. Bennett (ed.), Excavations 2006: summary accounts of archaeological excavations in Ireland, 302. Wordwell, Bray. Lewis, S. 1837 Topographical dictionary of Ireland. S. Lewis and Co., London. (Available on-line at http://www.libraryireland.com/topog, accessed 24 April 2014.) Lilley, I.A. 2004 Diaspora and identity in archaeology: moving beyond the Black Atlantic. In L. Meskell and R.W. Preucel (eds), A companion to social archaeology, 287–312. Blackwell Publishing, Malden. Linnane, S.J. and Kinsella, J. 2009 M3 Clonee–North of Kells, Contract 2, Dunshaughlin–Navan, report on the archaeological excavation of Baronstown 1, Co. Meath, Ministerial Directions No. A008/017, E3070, final report (www.m3motorway.ie/Archaeology/Section2/ Baronstown1, accessed September 2011). Little, D.J., Boyle, G.M., Ryan, D. and Farrell, E.P. 2001 Intensive monitoring of an oak woodland in western Ireland: development of an Irish Ecological Monitoring Network. COFORD, Dublin. Lloyd Morgan, G. 1976 A note on some Celtic discs from Ireland and the province of Lower Germany. In ‘Colloquium on Hiberno-Roman Relations and Material Remains’. PRIA 76C, 217–22. Longinelli, A. 1984 Oxygen isotopes in mammal bone phosphate: a new tool for palaeo-

hydrological and palaeoclimatological research? Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 48, 385–90. Longley, D. 1998 Bryn Eryr: an enclosed settlement of the Iron Age on Anglesey. PPS 64, 225–73. Looijenga, J.H. 1997 Runes around the North Sea and on the continent, AD 150–700. University of Groningen. Lynn, C.J. 1983 Some ‘early’ ring-forts and crannogs. JIA 1, 47–58. Lynn, C.J. 1991–2 Excavations at the Dorsey: earthworks in Dorsy and Tullynavall, County Armagh, 1977. UJA 54–5, 61–77. Lynn, C.J. 2003a Ireland in the Iron Age: a basket case? AI 17 (2), 20–3. Lynn, C.J. 2003b Navan Fort: archaeology and myth. Wordwell, Bray. Lynn, C.J. and McDowell, J.A. 2011 Deer Park Farms: the excavation of a raised rath in the Glenarm Valley, Co. Antrim. Northern Ireland Archaeological Monographs 9. The Stationery Office, Norwich. Lynn, C.J., Penn, C., McCorry, M., Delaney, M. and Larmour, R. 1977 Trial excavations at the King’s Stables, Tray townland, Co. Armagh. UJA 40, 42–62. Maas, J. and Byrne, C. 1996 Fort discovery proves Romans invaded Ireland. The Sunday Times, 21 January 1996. Macalister, R.A.S. 1928–9 On some antiquities discovered on Lambay. PRIA 38C, 240–6. Macalister, R.A.S. and Praeger, R.L. 1928–9 Report on the excavation of Uisneach. PRIA 38C, 69–127. Macalister, R.A.S. and Praeger, R.L. 1929–31 The excavation of an ancient structure in the townland of Togherstown, Co. Westmeath. PRIA 39C, 54–83. McArthur, J.M., Howarth, R.J. and Bailey, T.R. 2001 Strontium isotope stratigraphy: LOWESS Version 3: best fit to the marine Sr isotope curve for 0–509 Ma and accompanying look-up table for deriving numerical age. Journal of Geology 109, 155–70. McCarthy, C. 2012 An Iron Age ring-ditch at Ballynakelly, Co. Dublin. In C. Corlett and M. Potterton (eds), Life and death in Iron Age Ireland in the light of recent archaeological excavations, 157–60. Wordwell, Bray. McClatchie, M. 2011 A long tradition of cereal cultivation. Seanda 6, 8–11. McConway, C. 2010 Successive early medieval enclosed settlements at Ninch, Co. Meath. In C. Corlett and M. Potterton (eds), Death and burial 197

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:28 Page 198

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland in early medieval Ireland in the light of recent archaeological excavations, 157–72. Wordwell, Bray. McCormick, F. 1995 Cows, ringforts and the origins of Early Christian Ireland. Emania 8, 33–7. McCormick, F. 2002 The animal bones from Tara. Discovery Programme Reports 6, 103–17. McCormick, F. 2007 The horse in early Ireland. Anthropozoologica 42 (1), 85–104. McDermott, C., Moore, C., Murray, C., Plunkett, G. and Stanley, M. 2009 A colossus of roads: the Iron Age archaeology of Ireland’s peatlands. In G. Cooney, K. Becker, J. Coles, M. Ryan and S. Sievers (eds), Relics of old decency: archaeological studies in later prehistory. Festschrift for Barry Raftery, 49–66. Wordwell, Dublin. McGarry, T. 2005 Identifying burials of the Irish Iron Age and transitional periods. Trowel 10, 2–18. McGarry, T. 2008 Some exotic evidence amidst Irish late prehistoric burials. In O.P. Davis, N.M. Sharples and K. Waddington (eds), Changing perspectives on the first millennium, 215–34. Oxbow, Oxford. McGarry, T. 2009 Irish late prehistoric burial ringditches. In G. Cooney, K. Becker, J. Coles, M. Ryan and S. Sievers (eds), Relics of old decency: archaeological studies in later prehistory. Festschrift for Barry Raftery, 413–23. Wordwell, Bray. McGarry, T. 2010 Late pagan and Christian burials in Ireland: some issues and potential explanations. In C. Corlett and M. Potterton (eds), Death and burial in early medieval Ireland in the light of recent archaeological excavations, 173–87. Wordwell, Bray. MacGregor, M. 1976 Early Celtic art in northern Britain: a study of decorative art from third century BC to third century AD. Leicester University Press. Mackreth, D.F. 2011 Brooches in Late Iron Age and Roman Britain (2 vols). Oxbow, Oxford. McLaughlin, R. 2010 Rome and the distant East: trade routes to the ancient lands of Arabia, India and China. Continuum Press, London and New York. McManus, D. 1983 A chronology of the Latin loanwords in Early Irish. Ériu 34, 21–71. McManus, D. 1992 A guide to ogam. Maynooth Monographs No. 4. An Sagart, Maynooth. McNeill, T.E. 1991–2 Excavations at Dunsilly, Co. Antrim. UJA 54–5, 78–112. McQuade, M. 2005 Archaeological excavation of a multi-period prehistoric settlement at 198

Waterunder, Mell, Co. Louth. CLAHJ 26 (1), 31–66. McQuade, M., Molloy, B. and Moriarty, C. (eds) 2009 In the shadow of the Galtees: archaeological excavations along the N8 Cashel to Mitchelstown road scheme. National Roads Authority Scheme Monographs No. 4. Wordwell, Dublin. Mac Shamhráin, A. 2004 Church and dynasty in Early Christian Brega: Lusk, Inis Pátraic and the case of Máel-Finnia, king and saint. In A. Mac Shamhráin (ed.), The island of St Patrick: church and ruling dynasties in Fingal and Meath, 400–1148, 125–39. Four Courts Press, Dublin. Mallory, J.P. 2000 Excavations of the Navan ditch. Emania 18, 21–35. Mallory, J.P. 2013 The origins of the Irish. Thames and Hudson, London. Manley, J. and Rudkin, D. 2005 A pre-AD 43 ditch at Fishbourne Roman Palace. Britannia 36, 55–99. Manning, C. 1986 Archaeological excavation of a succession of enclosures at Millockstown, Co. Louth. PRIA 86C, 135–81. Mason, D.J.P. 2012 Roman Chester: fortress at the edge of the world. The History Press, Stroud. Mattingly, D.J. 2004 Being Roman: expressing identity in a provincial setting. JRA 17, 5–25. Mattingly, D. 2007 An imperial possession: Britain in the Roman Empire. Penguin Books, London. Mattingly, D. 2010 Cultural crossovers: global and local identities in the Classical world. In T. Hodos and S. Hales (eds), Material culture and social identities in the ancient world, 283–97. Cambridge University Press. Mattingly, D.J. 2011 Imperialism, power and identity. Princeton University Press. Maxwell, G. 2008 Roman penetration of the north in the late first century AD. In M. Todd (ed.), A companion to Roman Britain, 75–91. Wiley, Chichester. Megaw, J.V.S. and Megaw, M.R. 1996 Ancient Celts and modern ethnicity. Antiquity 70, 175–81. Mitchell, F. and Ryan, M. 2003 Reading the Irish landscape. Town House, Dublin. Monk, M.A. and Sheehan, J. (eds) 1998 Early medieval Munster: archaeology, history and society. Cork University Press. Montgomery, J. and Grimes,V. 2012 Report on the isotope analysis of a burial from Ratoath, Co. Meath. In C. Corlett and M. Potterton (eds), Death and burial in early medieval Ireland in the light of recent archaeological excavations, 309–11. Wordwell, Bray.

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:28 Page 199

Bibliography Montgomery, J., Evans, J. and Chenery, C. 2006 Report of the lead, strontium and oxygen isotope analysis of the Iron Age burial from Rath, Ireland. Unpublished report for CRDS Ltd. Montgomery, J., Evans, J.A. and Cooper, R.E. 2007 Resolving archaeological populations with Srisotope mixing models. Applied Geochemistry 22 (7), 1502–14. Montgomery, J., Evans, J.A., Powlesland, D. and Roberts, C.A. 2005 Continuity or colonization in Anglo-Saxon England? Isotope evidence for mobility, subsistence practice and status at West Heslerton. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 126, 123–38. Montgomery, J., Grimes, V. and Evans, J. 2006 Report of the lead, strontium and oxygen isotope analysis of the Iron Age burial from Ratoath, Co. Meath, Ireland. Unpublished report for ArchTech Ltd. Moore, C. 2008 Old routes to new research: the Edercloon wetland excavations in County Longford. In J. O’Sullivan and M. Stanley (eds), Roads, rediscovery and research, 1–12. Archaeology and the National Roads Authority Monograph Series No. 5. National Roads Authority, Dublin. Mount, C. 1999 Excavation and environmental analysis of a Neolithic mound and Iron Age barrow cemetery at Rathdooney Beg, County Sligo. PPS 65, 337–71. Mount, C. 2012 Created and appropriated continuity at Rathdooney Beg, County Sligo. In C. Corlett and M. Potterton (eds), Life and death in Iron Age Ireland in the light of recent archaeological excavations, 189–98. Wordwell, Bray. Müldner, G., Chenery, C. and Eckardt, H. 2011 The ‘headless Romans’: multi-isotope investigations of an unusual burial ground from Roman Britain. JAS 38, 280–90. Mulvin, L. 2012 Roman material from Knowth. In G. Eogan (ed.), Excavations at Knowth, Vol. 5. The archaeology of Knowth in the first and second millennia AD, 390–1. Royal Irish Academy, Dublin. Murphy, D. 2011 Excavation of a multi-period settlement site at Colp West, Co. Meath. In C. Corlett and M. Potterton (eds), Settlement in early medieval Ireland in the light of recent archaeological excavations, 223–33. Wordwell, Bray. Murphy, E.M. and Whitehouse, N.J. (eds) 2007 Environmental archaeology in Ireland. Oxbow, Oxford. Mytum, H.C. 1992 The origins of Early Christian

Ireland. Routledge, London. Nash-Williams,V.E. 1950 The Early Christian monuments of Wales. University of Wales Press. National Soil Survey, An Foras Talúntais 1980 General soil map of Ireland (www.agresearch.teagasc.ie, accessed October 2011). Nevin, K. 2012 Raster images: a guide to good practice. Archaeology Data Service/Digital Antiquity, Guides to Good Practice (http://guides.archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/g2g p/RasterImg_Toc, accessed May 2014). Newenham, W.R. 1836–40 On a tumulus or barrow, near Rush, County of Dublin. PRIA 1, 247–9. Newman, C. 1989 Fowler’s Type F3 early medieval penannular brooches. Medieval Archaeology 33, 7–20. Newman, C. 1997 Tara: an archaeological survey. Discovery Programme Monographs 2. Discovery Programme/Royal Irish Academy, Dublin. Newman, C. 1998 Reflections on the making of a ‘royal site’ in early Ireland. World Archaeology 30 (1), 127–41. Newman, C. 2005 Re-composing the archaeological landscape of Tara. In E. Bhreathnach (ed.), The kingship and landscape of Tara, 361–410. Four Courts Press, Dublin. Newman, C. 2011 The sacral landscape of Tara: a preliminary explanation. In R. Schot, C. Newman and E. Bhreathnach (eds), Landscapes of cult and kingship, 22–43. Four Courts Press, Dublin. Newman, C. 2012 Foreword. In C. Corlett and M. Potterton (eds), Life and death in Iron Age Ireland in the light of recent archaeological excavations, viii. Wordwell, Bray. Newman, C. and Gavin, F. 2008 Notes on Insular silver in the Military Style. JIA 16, 1–10. Newman, C., O’Connell, M., Dillon, M. and Molloy, K. 2007 Interpretation of charcoal and pollen data relating to a late Iron Age ritual site in eastern Ireland: a holistic approach. Vegetative History and Archaeobotany 16, 349–65. Nicolaus Germanus (ed.) 1490 Ptolomaei Cosmographia . . . (trans. Jacopo d’Angelo). Petrus de Turre, Rome. [Held in the Royal Irish Academy, shelf mark SR/24/E/38.] Noonan, D. 2003 Muckridge 1, Co. Cork. In I. Bennett (ed.), Excavations 2001: summary accounts of archaeological excavations in Ireland, 53. Wordwell, Bray. 199

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:28 Page 200

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland O’Brien, E. 1990 Iron Age burial practices in Leinster: continuity and change. Emania 7, 37–42. O’Brien, E. 1993 Contacts between Ireland and Anglo-Saxon England in the seventh century. In W. Filmer-Sankey (ed.), Anglo-Saxon Studies in Archaeology and History 6, 93–7. O’Brien, E. 1999a Excavations of the multi-period site of Ballymacaward, Ballyshannon, Co. Donegal. Donegal Annual (Journal of the Donegal Historical Society) 51, 56–61. O’Brien, E. 1999b Late Roman Britain to AngloSaxon England: burial practices reviewed. BAR British Series 289. Oxbow, Oxford. O’Brien, E. 2003 Burial practices in Ireland, first to seventh centuries AD. In J. Downes and A. Ritchie (eds), Sea change: Orkney and northern Europe in the late Iron Age, AD 300–800, 62–72. The Pinkfoot Press, Balgavies. O’Brien, E. 2009a Pagan or Christian? Burial in Ireland during the fifth–eighth centuries AD. In N. Edwards (ed.), The archaeology of the early medieval Celtic churches, 135–54. Society for Medieval Archaeology Monograph 29. Maney Publishing, Leeds. O’Brien, E. 2009b A re-evaluation of the find-spot of, and a possible context for, the anthropoid hilted sword from Ballyshannon, Co. Donegal. In G. Cooney, K. Becker, J. Coles, M. Ryan and S. Sievers (eds), Relics of old decency: archaeological studies in later prehistory. Festschrift for Barry Raftery, 193–8. Wordwell, Bray. O’Brien, E. 2010 Foreword. In C. Corlett and M. Potterton (eds), Death and burial in early medieval Ireland in the light of recent archaeological excavations, ix–x. Wordwell, Dublin. O’Brien, E. 2012 Knowth secondary burials— proto-historic and historic period. In G. Eogan, Excavations at Knowth 5: the archaeology of Knowth in the first and second millennia AD, 61–71. Royal Irish Academy, Dublin. O’Brien, E. and Bhreathnach, E. 2011 Irish boundary ferta, their physical manifestation and historic context. In F. Edmonds and P. Russell (eds), TOME: studies in medieval Celtic history and law in honour of Thomas Charles-Edwards, 53–64. The Boydell Press, Suffolk. O’Brien, E. and Bhreathnach, E. 2013 Burial in early medieval Ireland: politics and religion. In J. Kelly and M.A. Lyons (eds), Death and dying in Ireland, Britain and Europe, 37–58. Irish Academic Press, Dublin. O’Brien, W. 1993 Altar tomb and the prehistory of Mizen. Mizen Journal 1, 19–26. 200

O’Brien, W. 1996 Bronze Age copper mining in Britain and Ireland. Shire, Princes Risborough. O’Brien, W. 2000 Lissyviggeen, Co. Kerry. In I. Bennett (ed.), Excavations 1998: summary accounts of archaeological excavations in Ireland, 94–5. Wordwell, Bray. O’Brien, W. 2004 Ross Island: mining, metal and society in early Ireland. Galway University Press. O’Brien, W. 2007 Miners and farmers: local settlement contexts for Bronze Age mining. In C. Burgess, P. Topping and F. Lynch (eds), Beyond Stonehenge, 20–30. Oxbow, Oxford. O’Brien, W. 2012 Stone circle or proto-cashel? An Iron Age enclosure in south-west Ireland. In C. Corlett and M. Potterton (eds), Life and death in Iron Age Ireland in the light of recent archaeological excavations, 199–212. Wordwell, Bray. O’Brien, W. 2013 Bronze Age copper mining in Europe. In A. Harding and H. Fokkens (eds), Oxford Handbook of the Bronze Age, 437–53. Oxford University Press. O’Brien, W. 2014 Prehistoric copper mining in Europe, 5500–500 BC. Oxford University Press. Ó Carragáin, T. 2009 Cemetery settlements and local churches in pre-Viking Ireland in light of comparisons with England and Wales. In M. Ryan and J. Graham-Campbell (eds), Irish/Anglo-Saxon relations before the Vikings: Proceedings of the British Academy 157, 239–61. Ó Carragáin, T. 2010a From family cemeteries to community cemeteries in Viking Age Ireland? In C. Corlett and M. Potterton (eds), Death and burial in early medieval Ireland in the light of recent archaeological excavations, 217–26. Wordwell, Bray. Ó Carragáin, T. 2010b Churches in early medieval Ireland.Yale University Press. O’Carroll, E. 2012 Quantifying woodland resource usage in the Irish midlands using archaeological and palaeoecological techniques. Unpublished Ph.D thesis, Trinity College, Dublin. O’Connell, A. 2009a M3 Clonee–north of Kells, Contract 2, Dunshaughlin–Navan, report on the archaeological excavation of Lismullin 1, Co. Meath, Ministerial Directions No. A008/021, E3074, September 2009, final report, vol. 1 (www.m3motorway.ie/Archaeology/Section2/ Lismullin1, accessed January 2012). O’Connell, A. 2009b Excavations at Church Road and the early monastic foundation at Lusk, Co. Dublin. In C. Baker (ed.), Axes, warriors and windmills: recent archaeological discoveries in north Fingal, 51–63. Fingal County Council, Dublin. O’Connell, A. 2013 Harvesting the stars: a pagan

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:28 Page 201

Bibliography temple at Lismullin, Co. Meath. Wordwell/National Roads Authority, Dublin. Ó Cróinín, D. 1992 Review of H. Mytum, The origins of Early Christian Ireland (1991). Linen Hall Review 9 (1), 23–5. O’Donnchadha, B. and Delaney, S. 2012 An Iron Age ring-ditch at Donaghmore, Co. Louth. In C. Corlett and M. Potterton (eds), Life and death in Iron Age Ireland in the light of recent excavations, 245–7. Wordwell, Bray. Ó Drisceoil, C. and Devine, E. 2012 Invisible people or invisible archaeology? Carrickmines Great, Co. Dublin, and the problem of Irish Iron Age settlement. In C. Corlett and M. Potterton (eds), Life and death in Iron Age Ireland in the light of recent excavations, 249–65. Wordwell, Bray. Ó Floinn, R. 1995 Sandhills, silver and shrines. In W. Nolan, L. Ronayne and M. Dunlevy (eds), Donegal: history and society, 85–148. Geography Publications, Dublin. Ó Floinn, R. 2000 Freestone Hill, Co. Kilkenny: a reassessment. In A.P. Smyth (ed.), Seanchas: studies in early and medieval Irish archaeology, history and literature in honour of Francis J. Byrne, 12–29. Four Courts Press, Dublin. Ó Floinn, R. 2001 Patrons and politics: art, artefact and methodology. In M. Redknapp, N. Edwards, S. Youngs, A. Lane and J. Knight (eds), Patterns and purpose in Insular art, 1–15. Oxbow, Oxford. Ó Floinn, R. 2009 Notes on some Iron Age finds from Ireland. In G. Cooney, K. Becker, J. Coles, M. Ryan and S. Sievers (eds), Relics of old decency: archaeological studies in later prehistory. Festschrift for Barry Raftery, 199–210. Wordwell, Bray. Ó Floinn, R. 2011 Lehinch, Co. Offaly. In M. Cahill and M. Sikora (eds), Breaking ground, finding graves: reports on the excavations of burials by the National Museum of Ireland, 1927–2006, vol. 2, 139. National Museum of Ireland Monograph Series 4. Wordwell, Dublin. O’Hara, R. 2009a M3 Clonee–North of Kells, Contract 2, Dunshaughlin–Navan, report on the archaeological excavation of Roestown 2, Co. Meath, Ministerial Directions No. A008/002, E3055, final report (www.m3motorway.ie/Archaeology/Section2/ Roestown2, accessed January 2013). O’Hara, R. 2009b Collierstown 1, a late Iron Age–early medieval enclosed cemetery. In M.B. Deevy and D. Murphy (eds), Places along the way: first findings on the M3, 83–100. NRA Scheme Monograph Series 5. Wordwell, Bray.

O’Hara, R. 2010 An Iron Age and early medieval cemetery at Collierstown 1, Co. Meath: interpreting the changing character of a burial ground. Early Medieval Archaeology Project (EMAP) Report 4.4 (http://www.ucd.ie/ archaeology/documentstore/allreports/emap_ report_4.4_print.pdf). Ó hÓgáin, D. 2002 The Celts: a history. The Boydell Press, Suffolk. O’Neill, B.H. St J. 1933 The Roman villa near Magor Farm, Camborne, Cornwall. Antiquaries Journal 12 (1), 71–2. O’Neill, T. 2009a M3 Clonee–north of Kells, Contract 2, Dunshaughlin–Navan, report on the archaeological excavation of Skreen 3, Co. Meath, Ministerial Directions No. A008/020, E3073, final report (www.m3motorway.ie/Archaeology/Section2/ Skreen3, accessed January 2012). O’Neill, T. 2009b M7 Portlaoise–Castletown/ Portlaoise–Cullahill Motorway Scheme, Contract 1, Gortnaclea–Oldtown, Phase 2 excavation, report on the archaeological excavation of Parknahown 2, Co. Laois, Ministerial Directions No. A015/086 E2196, final report. Unpublished report for Laois County Council. O’Rahilly, T.F. 1946 Early Irish history and mythology. Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies. Ó Riain, P. 2011 A dictionary of Irish saints. Four Courts Press, Dublin. Ó Ríordáin, B. and Rynne, E. 1961 A settlement site in the sandhills at Dooey, County Donegal. JRSAI 91, 58–64. Ó Ríordáin, S.P. 1942 The excavation of a large earthen ring-fort at Garranes, Co. Cork. PRIA 47C, 77–150. Ó Ríordáin, S.P. 1947 Roman material in Ireland. PRIA 51C, 35–82. Ó Ríordáin, S.P. 1949 Lough Gur excavations: Carraig Aille and the ‘Spectacles’. PRIA 52C, 35–82. O’Sullivan, A. 2001 Foragers, farmers and fishermen in a coastal landscape: an intertidal archaeological study of the Shannon estuary. Discovery Programme Monographs 5. Royal Irish Academy, Dublin. O’Sullivan, A. and Breen, C. 2007 Maritime Ireland: an archaeology of coastal communities. Tempus, Stroud. O’Sullivan, A. and McCormick, F. 2010 The Early Medieval Archaeology Project (EMAP): Project Report 2008–2010. Early Medieval Archaeology Project (EMAP) Report 4.1, University College 201

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:28 Page 202

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland Dublin (http://www.emap.ie/emap_ reports.html, accessed March 2013). O’Sullivan, A., McCormick, F., Kerr, T. and Harney, L. 2008 Early medieval Ireland: archaeological excavations 1930–2004. Early Medieval Archaeology Project (EMAP) Report 2.1, University College Dublin (http://www.ucd.ie/t4cms/emap_report_2_1_ complete.pdf, accessed June 2013). O’Sullivan, A., Sands, R. and Kelly, E.P. 2007 Coolure Demesne Crannog, Lough Derravaragh: an introduction to its archaeology and landscapes. Wordwell, Bray. O’Sullivan, J. 1998 Nationalists, archaeologists and the myth of the Golden Age. In M. Monk and J. Sheehan (eds), Early medieval Munster: archaeology, history and society, 178–88. Cork University Press. Oswald, A. 1997 A doorway on the past: practical and mystical concerns in the orientation of roundhouse entrances. In A. Gwilt and C. Haselgrove (eds), Reconstructing Iron Age societies: new approaches to the British Iron Age, 87–95. Oxbow, Oxford. Oswald, A., Barber, M. and Dyer, C. 1999 The creation of monuments: Neolithic causewayed enclosures of the British Isles. English Heritage, Swindon. Painter, K. 1972 A late Roman silver ingot from Kent. Antiquaries Journal 52, 84–92. Parker Pearson, M. 1993 The powerful dead: archaeological relationships between the living and the dead. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 3, 203–29. Parkes, M. 2012 Islands, coast and quarries: the geological heritage of Fingal. Fingal County Council, Dublin. Passmore, D.G. and Waddington, C. 2009 Managing archaeological landscapes in Northumberland. Till Tweed Studies, vol. 1. Oxbow, Oxford. Pérez-Cambrodí, R.J., Piñero, D.P., Cerviñ, A., Brautaset, R. and Murube del Castillo, J. 2013 Collyria seals in the Roman Empire. Acta Medico-historia Adriatica 11 (1), 89–100. Petts, D. 2003 Christianity in Roman Britain. Tempus, Stroud. Philpott, R.A. 1991 Burial practices in Roman Britain: a survey of grave furnishings and treatments AD 43 to AD 410. BAR British Series 219. Archaeopress, Oxford. Photos-Jones, E. and Hall, A.J. 2011 ‘Harvesting’ the ore: the use of iron seepages in the early bloomery furnaces in Ireland. In I. TurbantiMemmi (ed.), Proceedings of the 37th International 202

Symposium on Archaeometry, 13th–16th May 2008, Siena, Italy, 629–35. Springer, Berlin. Piccini, A. 1996 Filming through the mists of time: Celtic constructions and the documentary. Current Anthropology 37, 93–111. Pliny [1962] Natural histories (trans. D.E. Eichholz). Loeb Classical Library. Pollard, A.M., Ditchfield, P., Piva, E., Wallis, S., Falys, C. and Ford, S. 2012 Sprouting like cockle amongst the wheat: the St Brice’s Day massacre and the isotopic analysis of human bones from St John’s College, Oxford. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 31 (1), 83–102. Pollard, M.P., Pellegrini, M. and Lee-Thorp, J.A. 2011 Some observations on the conversion of dental enamel to determine human mobility. American Journal of Physical Anthropology 145, 499–504. Ponting, M., Evans, J.A. and Pashley, V. 2003 Fingerprinting of Roman mints using laserablation MC-ICP-MS lead isotope analysis. Archaeometry 45, 591–7. Quinnell, H. 1986 Cornwall during the Iron Age and Roman period. Cornish Journal of Archaeology 25, 111–34. Quinnell, H. 1993 A sense of identity: distinctive Cornish stone artefacts in the Roman and postRoman periods. Cornish Journal of Archaeology 32, 29–45. Quinnell, H. 2004 Trethurgy: excavations at Trethurgy Round, St Austell: community and status in Roman and post-Roman Cornwall. Cornwall County Council, Truro. Raftery, B. 1981 Iron Age burials in Ireland. In D. Ó Corráin (ed.), Irish antiquity: essays and studies presented to Professor M.J. O’Kelly, 173–204. Tower Books, Cork. Raftery, B. 1983 A catalogue of Irish Iron Age antiquities.Veröffentlichung des Vorgeschichtlichen Seminars Marburg, Sonderband 1. Marburg. Raftery, B. 1984 La Tène in Ireland: problems of origin and chronology. Veröffentlichung des Vorgeschichtlichen Seminars Marburg, Sonderband 2. Marburg. Raftery, B. 1989 Barbarians to the west. In J.C. Barrett, A.P. Fitzpatrick and L. Macinnes (eds), Barbarians and Romans in north-west Europe from the later Republic to late Antiquity, 117–52. BAR International Series 471. Archaeopress, Oxford. Raftery, B. 1994 Pagan Celtic Ireland: the enigma of the Irish Iron Age. Thames and Hudson, London. Raftery, B. 1995 Pre- and protohistoric Ireland:

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:28 Page 203

Bibliography problems of continuity and change. Emania 13, 5–9. Raftery, B. 1996a Drumanagh and Roman Ireland. AI 10 (1), 17–19. Raftery, B. 1996b Trackway excavations in the Mountdillon Bogs, Co. Longford. Irish Archaeological Wetland Unit Transactions 3. Crannóg Publications, Dublin. Raftery, B. 2000 A bit too far: Ireland’s Transylvanian link in the Later Iron Age. In A. Smyth (ed.), Seanchas: studies in early and medieval Irish archaeology, history and literature in honour of Francis J. Byrne, 1–12. Four Courts Press, Dublin. Raftery, J. 1944 The Turoe Stone and the Rath of Feerwore. JRSAI 74, 23–62. Rahtz, P. 1976 Irish settlements in Somerset. In ‘Colloquium on Hiberno-Roman Relations and Material Remains’. PRIA 76C, 223–30. Rance, P. 2001 Attacotti, Déisi and Magnus Maximus: the case for Irish federates in Late Roman Britain. Britannia 32, 243–70. Randolph-Quinney, P. 2007 An unusual burial at Ballygarraun West. Seanda 2, 30–1. Rankin, D. 1996 The Celts and the Classical world. Routledge, London and New York. Rathbone, S. 2009 M3 Clonee–North of Kells, Contract 2, Dunshaughlin–Navan, report on the archaeological excavation of Garretstown 2, Co. Meath, Ministerial Directions No. A008/008, E3061, January 2009, final report (www.m3motorway.ie/Archaeology/Section2/ garretstown2, accessed January 2012). Reece, R. 2002 The coinage of Roman Britain. The History Press, Stroud. Reiersen, H. 2009 The central place of the Avaldsnes area, SW Norway. An analysis of elites and central functions along Karmsund, 200 BC–AD 1000. Unpublished MA thesis, University of Bergen. Reilly, E. and Stefanini, B. 2010 Environmental Pilot Project: a feasibility study examining environmental evidence from the period 1500 BC to 400 AD in Ireland. Unpublished report for the Discovery Programme, Dublin. Reilly, S., Kinsella, J. and Ginn, V. 2008 M3 Clonee–North of Kells, Contract 5, Kells–north of Kells, report on the archaeological excavation of Calliaghstown 1, Co. Meath, Ministerial Directions No. A030/002, E3164, final report (www.m3motorway.ie/Archaeology/Section5/ Calliaghstown1, accessed January 2012). Reimer, P.J., Bard, E., Bayliss, A. et al. 2013 IntCal13 and Marine13 radiocarbon age calibration

curves, 0–50,000 years cal BP. Radiocarbon 55 (4), 1869–87. Revell, L. 2009 Roman imperialism and local identities. Cambridge University Press. Rieradevall, M. and Brooks, S.J. 2001 An identification guide to subfossil Tanypodinae larvae (Insecta: Diptera: Chironomidae) based on cephalic setation. Journal of Paleolimnology 25, 81–99. Rippon, S. 2008 Coastal trade in Roman Britain, the investigations of Crandon Bridge, Somerset, a Roman trans-shipment port. Britannia 39, 85–114. Roberts, N. 2002 The Holocene: an environmental history (2nd edn). Blackwell, Oxford. Roche, H. 2002 Excavations at Ráith na Ríg, Tara, Co. Meath, 1997. Discovery Programme Reports 6, 19–82. Rogers, A. 2011 Late Roman towns in Britain: rethinking change and decline. Cambridge University Press. Rogers, A. and Hingley, R. 2010 Edward Gibbon and Francis Haverfield—the traditions of imperial decline. In M. Bradley (ed.), Classics and imperialism in the British Empire, 189–209. Oxford University Press. Rohl, B. and Needham, S. 1998 The circulation of metal in the British Bronze Age: the application of lead isotope analysis. British Museum Occasional Paper No. 102. British Museum, London. Roymans, N. 2005 Ethnic identity and imperial power: the Batavians in the early Roman Empire. University of Amsterdam Press. Rynne, E. 1976 The La Tène and Roman finds from Lambay, County Dublin: a reassessment. In ‘Colloquium on Hiberno-Roman Relations and Material Remains’. PRIA 76C, 231–44. Rynne, E. 1983 Some early Iron Age sword hilts from Ireland and Scotland. In A. O’Connor and D.V. Clarke (eds), From the Stone Age to the ’Forty-five, 188–97. John Donald, Edinburgh. Sauer, E.W. (ed.) 2004 Archaeology and ancient history: breaking down the boundaries. Routledge, London. Scarre, C. 1995 Chronicle of the Roman emperors. Thames and Hudson, London. Schmidt, A. and Ernenwein, E. 2012 Guide to good practice: geophysical data in archaeology (2nd edn). Archaeology Data Service/Digital Antiquity, Guides to Good Practice (http://guides.archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/g2g p/Geophysics_Toc, accessed May 2014). Schot, R. 2006 Uisneach Midi a medón Érenn: a 203

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:28 Page 204

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland prehistoric cult centre and ‘royal site’ in Co. Westmeath. JIA 15, 39–71. Schot, R. 2008 Uisneach, Co. Westmeath: archaeology, history and legend (prehistory–c. AD 1100) (2 vols). Unpublished Ph.D thesis, National University of Ireland, Galway. Schot, R. 2011 From cult centre to royal centre: monuments, myths and other revelations at Uisneach. In R. Schot, C. Newman and E. Bhreathnach (eds), Landscapes of cult and kingship, 87–113. Four Courts Press, Dublin. Schot, R. and Dowling, G. 2008 Report on geophysical survey at Knockaulin (Dún Ailinne), Co. Kildare: Season 3, 2008. Licence no. 08R180. Unpublished report for the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. Schot, R., Newman, C. and Bhreathnach, E. (eds) 2011 Landscapes of cult and kingship. Four Courts Press, Dublin. Scott, B.G. 1990 Early Irish ironworking. Ulster Museum, Belfast. Schweissing, M.M. and Grupe, G. 2003 Tracing migration events in man and cattle by stable strontium isotope analysis of appositionally grown mineralized tissue. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 13 (1–2), 96–103. Schweitzer, H. 2005 Iron Age toe-rings from Rath, County Meath, on the N2 Finglas–Ashbourne Road scheme. In J. O’Sullivan and M. Stanley (eds), Recent archaeological discoveries on national road schemes 2004: proceedings of a seminar for the public, Dublin, September 2004, 93–8. Archaeology and the National Roads Authority Monograph No. 2. National Roads Authority, Dublin. Shajan, K.P., Cherian, P.J., Tomber, R. and Selvakumar, V. 2008 The external connections of early historic Pattanam: the ceramic evidence. Antiquity 82, 57–66. Shajan, K.P., Tomber, R., Selvakumar, V. and Cherian, P.J. 2004 Locating the ancient port of Muziris: fresh findings from Pattanam. JRA 17, 351–9. Shotter, D. 2004 Roman Britain (2nd edn). Lancaster Pamphlets in Ancient History. Routledge, London and New York. Sindbaek, S.M. 2009 Open access, nodal points and central places: maritime communication and locational principles for coastal sites in south Scandinavia, 400–1200. Estonian Journal of Archaeology 13 (2), 96–109. Soderberg, J. 2013 ‘Between Britain and Hispania’: Ireland in Roman Period Europe. In P. Wells (ed.), Rome beyond its frontiers: imports, attitudes 204

and practices. JRA Supplementary Series 94, 71–86. Portsmouth, Rhode Island. Southern, P. 2007 The Roman army: a social and institutional history. Oxford University Press. Staelen, Y.J.E. 1982 The Birdlip cemetery. Transactions of the Bristol and Gloucestershire Archaeological Society 100, 19–31. Stapleton, C.P., Freestone, I.C. and Bowman, S.G.E. 1999 Composition and origin of early mediaeval opaque red enamel from Britain and Ireland. JAS 26, 913–21. Stead, I.M. 1995 The metalwork. In K. Parfitt (ed.), Iron Age burials from Mill Hill, Deal, 58–110. British Museum Press, London. Stead, I. and Hill, J.D. 2006 The metalwork. In C. Johns, ‘An Iron Age sword and mirror cist burial from Bryhyr, Isles of Scilly. Cornish Archaeology 41–2, 23–40. Stevens, P. 2012 Burial and ritual in early medieval north Wexford: new evidence from Ask townland. In B. Kelly, N. Roycroft and M. Stanley (eds), Encounters between people: proceedings of a public seminar on archaeological discoveries on national road schemes, August 2011, 49–60. Archaeology and the National Roads Authority Monograph Series No. 9. National Roads Authority, Dublin. Stevenson, J. 1989 The origins of literacy in Ireland. PRIA 89C, 127–65. Stillman, C. 1994 Lambay, an ancient volcanic island in Ireland. Geology Today 10 (2), 62–7. Storgaard, B. 2003 Cosmopolitan aristocrats. In L. Jørgensen, B. Storgaard and L.G. Thomsen (eds), The spoils of victory: the north in the shadow of the Roman Empire, 112–19. Nationalmuseet, Copenhagen. Stout, G. and Stout, M. 2008 Excavation of a secular cemetery at Knowth, Site M, Co. Meath. Wordwell, Bray. Stout, M. 1997 The Irish ringfort. Four Courts Press, Dublin. Strang, A. 1997 Explaining Ptolemy’s Roman Britain. Britannia 29, 1–30. Stuiver, M. and Reimer, P.J. 1993 Extended 14C database and revised CALIB radiocarbon calibration program. Radiocarbon 35, 215–30. Swift, C. 1996 Pagan monuments and Christian legal centres in early Meath. Ríocht na Midhe 9 (2), 1–26. Swift, E. 2003 Roman dress accessories. Shire, Princes Risborough. Sylvester, R.J. and Toller, H. 2010 Roman roads in Wales and the Marches. In B.C. Burnham and

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:28 Page 205

Bibliography J.L. Davies (eds), Roman frontiers in Wales and the Marches, 91–8. Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Wales, Aberystwyth. Syme, R. 1983 Historia Augusta papers. Oxford University Press. Syme, R. 1989 The Augustan aristocracy. Oxford University Press. Tate, J. and Troalen, L. 2009 Investigating the Traprain Law Roman treasure. Report for Centre de Recherche et de Restauration de Musées de France and National Museums of Scotland (http://www.euartech.org/files/Report_Tate_Troalen.pdf, accessed May 2014). Taylor, K.J., Potito, A.P., Beilman, D.W., Ghilardi, B. and O’Connell, M. 2013 Palaeolimnological impacts of early prehistoric farming at Lough Dargan, County Sligo, Ireland. JAS 40, 3212–21. Thomas, C. 1981 Christianity in Roman Britain to AD 500. University of California Press. Thomas, C. 1994 And shall these mute stones speak? Post-Roman inscriptions in south-west Britain. University of Wales Press. Thomas, C. 1998 Early medieval Munster: thoughts upon its primary Christian phase. In M. Monk and J. Sheehan (eds), Early medieval Munster: archaeology, history and society, 9–16. Cork University Press. Thomas, S.A. 2010 What impact did the expansion of the Roman military have on the Cornish landscape? Unpublished MA thesis, University of Bristol. Thomas, W.G. and Walker, R.F. 1959 Excavations at Trelissey. Bulletin of the Board of Celtic Studies 18 (3), 295–303. Tierney, J. and Johnston, P. 2009 No corners! Prehistoric roundhouses on the N8 and N7 in counties Cork, Tipperary and Offaly. In M. Stanley, E. Danaher and J. Eogan (eds), Dining and dwelling: proceedings of a public seminar on archaeological discoveries on national road schemes, August 2008, 99–108. National Roads Authority, Dublin. Tierney, M. 1998 Theory and politics in early medieval archaeology. In M.A. Monk and J. Sheehan (eds), Early medieval Munster: archaeology, history and society, 190–9. Cork University Press. Tilly, C. 1994 A phenomenology of landscape: places, paths and monuments. Berg, Oxford. Timberlake, S. 1994 Archaeological and circumstantial evidence for early mining in

Wales. Bulletin of the Peak District Mines Historical Society 12, 133–43. Todd, M. 2007 Introduction. In M. Todd (ed.), A companion to Roman Britain, xvii–xx. Blackwell, London. Toner, G. 2000 Identifying Ptolemy’s Irish places and tribes. In D.N. Parsons and P. Sims-Williams (eds), Ptolemy: towards a linguistic atlas of the earliest Celtic place-names of Europe, 73–82. CMCS Publications, Aberystwyth. Toynbee, J.M.C. 1971 Death and burial in the Roman world. Thames and Hudson, London. Viner, S., Evans, J., Albarella, U. and Parker Pearson, M. 2010 Cattle mobility in prehistoric Britain: strontium isotope analysis of cattle teeth from Durrington Walls, Wiltshire, Britain. JAS 37 (11), 2812–20. Wacher, J. 1997 The towns of Roman Britain. Routledge, London. Waddell, J. 1998 The prehistoric archaeology of Ireland. Wordwell, Dublin. Waddell, J. 2005 Foundation myths: the beginnings of Irish archaeology. Wordwell, Bray. Waddell, J. 2010 The prehistoric archaeology of Ireland (revised edn). Wordwell, Dublin. Wainright, G.J., Simpson, G. and Lewis, J.M. 1971 Excavations at a fortified settlement at Walesland, Pembrokeshire. Britannia 2, 48–108. Walker, I.R. 2001 Midges: Chironomidae and related Diptera. In J.P. Smol, H.J.B. Birks and W.M. Last (eds), Tracking environmental change using lake sediments. Vol. 4. Zoological indicators, 43–66. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht. Wallace, A. 2010 Excavation of an early medieval cemetery at Ratoath, Co. Meath. In C. Corlett and M. Potterton (eds), Death and burial in early medieval Ireland in the light of recent archaeological excavations, 295–308. Wordwell, Bray. Wallace, P.F. and Ó Floinn, R. (eds) 2002 Treasures of the National Museum of Ireland. National Museum of Ireland, Dublin. Walsh, A. 1987 Excavating the Black Pig’s Dyke. Emania 3, 5–11. Walsh, F. 2012 Iron Age sanctuary enclosure, boundary ditch and kilns at Kilmainham, Co. Meath. In C. Corlett and M. Potterton (eds), Life and death in Iron Age Ireland in the light of recent archaeological excavations, 303–12. Wordwell, Bray. Warner, R.B. 1976 Some observations on the context and importation of exotic material in Ireland, from the first century BC to the second century AD. PRIA 76C, 267–92. 205

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:28 Page 206

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland Warner, R.B. 1982 The Broighter hoard: a reappraisal, and the iconography of the collar. In B.G. Scott (ed.), Studies on early Ireland: essays in honour of M.V. Duignan, 29–38. Association of Young Irish Archaeologists, Belfast. Warner, R.B. 1988 The archaeology of early historic kingship in Ireland. In S. Driscoll and M. Nieke (eds), Power and politics in early medieval Britain and Ireland, 47–68. Edinburgh University Press. Warner, R.B. 1995 Túathal Techtmar: a myth or ancient literary evidence for a Roman invasion? Emania 13, 23–32. Warner, R.B. 2000 Clogher: an archaeological window on early medieval Tyrone and midUlster. In C. Dillon and H.A. Jefferies (eds), Tyrone: history and society, 39–54. Geography Publications, Dublin. Warner, R.B. 2002 Beehive querns and Irish ‘La Tène’ artefacts: a statistical test of their cultural relatedness. JIA 11, 125–30. Warner, R.B. 2009 Clogher in late prehistory. In G. Cooney, K. Becker, J. Coles, M. Ryan and S. Sievers (eds), Relics of old decency: archaeological studies in later prehistory. Festschrift for Barry Raftery, 507–18. Wordwell, Bray. Warner, R.B. 2013 Observations on Tara, and its hinterland, during the late Iron Age. In M. O’Sullivan, C. Scarre and M. Doyle (eds), Tara— from the past to the future. Towards a new research agenda, 234–45. Wordwell, Bray. Warner, R.B., Mallory, J.P. and Baillie, M.G.L. 1990 Irish early Iron Age sites: a provisional map of absolute dated sites. Emania 7, 46–50. Warrior, V. 2006 Roman religion. Cambridge University Press. Waterman, D.M. 1965 The court cairn at Annaghmare, Co. Armagh. UJA 28, 3–46. Waterman, D.M. 1997 Excavations at Navan Fort 1961–71 (ed. C.J. Lynn). Northern Ireland Archaeological Monographs No. 3. The Stationery Office, Belfast. Watson, J.E., Brooks, S.J., Whitehouse, N.J., Reimer, P.J., Birks, H.J.B. and Turney, C. 2010 Chironomid-inferred Late-Glacial summer air temperatures from Lough Nadourcan, Co. Donegal, Ireland. Journal of Quaternary Science 25, 1200–10. Webb, R.S. and Webb, T. III 1988 Rates of sediment accumulation in pollen cores from small lakes and mires of eastern North America. Quaternary Research 30, 284–97. Weir, D.A. 1993 Dark Ages and the pollen record. 206

Emania 11, 21–30. Wells, P. 1996 Production within and beyond imperial boundaries: goods, exchange and power in Roman Europe. Journal of World Systems Research 2 (13), 1–26. Wells, P. 1999 The barbarians speak: how the conquered peoples helped shape Roman Europe. Princeton University Press. Wells, P. 2005 Creating an imperial frontier: archaeology of the formation of Rome’s Danube borderland. Journal of Archaeological Research 13 (1), 49–88. Wells, P. 2008 Barbarians to angels: the Dark Ages reconsidered. Norton Press, New York and London. Westropp, T.J. 1922 The promontory forts and adjoining remains in Leinster. Part 1. Co. Dublin. JRSAI 12 (1), 52–76. Wheeler, R.E.M. and Wheeler, T.V. 1932 Report on the excavations of the prehistoric, Roman and postRoman site in Lydney Park, Gloucestershire. Royal Society of Antiquaries Research Report Series. Oxford. Whimster, R. 1981 Burial practices in Iron Age Britain: a discussion and gazetteer of the evidence 700 BC to AD 43. BAR British Series 90, part 1. Archaeopress, Oxford. White, L.M. 2000 Architecture, the first five centuries. In P. Esler (ed.), The early Christian world (2 vols), 2–49. Routledge, London. Whitfield, N. 2007 A suggested function for the holy well? In A.J. Minnis and J. Roberts (eds), Text, image, interpretation: studies in Anglo-Saxon literature and its insular context in honour of Éamonn Ó Carragáin, 495–563. Brepols, Turnhout. Whitty, Y. 2012a An Iron Age ring-ditch complex at Holdenstown 1, Co. Kilkenny. In C. Corlett and M. Potterton (eds), Life and death in Iron Age Ireland in the light of recent archaeological excavations, 313–26. Wordwell, Bray. Whitty, Y. 2012b Iron Age ring-ditch at Commons of Lloyd, Kells, Co. Meath. In C. Corlett and M. Potterton (eds), Life and death in Iron Age Ireland in the light of recent archaeological excavations, 327–30. Wordwell, Bray. Wiederholm, T. 1983 Chironomidae of the Holarctic region: keys and diagnoses. Part I—Larvae. Entomologica Scandinavica 19 (Supplement), Lund. Wigg, A. 1999 Celts, Germans and Romans in the central German highlands. In J. Creighton and R.J.A. Wilson, Roman Germany: studies in cultural

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:28 Page 207

Bibliography interaction, 35–54. JRA Supplementary Series. Portsmouth, Rhode Island. Wigg-Wolf, D.G. 1997 Coin supply and the Roman army. In W. Groenman-van Waateringe, B.L. van Beck, W.J.H. Willems and S.L. Wynia (eds), Roman Frontier Studies 1995. Proceedings of the XVIth International Congress of Roman Frontier Studies, 281–8. Oxbow Monographs 91. Oxbow, Oxford. Williams, M. 2003 Growing metaphors: the agricultural cycle as metaphor in the later prehistoric period of Britain and north-western Europe. Journal of Social Archaeology 3 (2), 223–55. Williams, M. 2012 Smiths, pits and burials: the role of the smith in funerary rites in early medieval Ireland. Trowel 13, 39–55. Wilmot, G.F. 1938 Three burial sites at Carbury Hill, Co. Kildare. JRSAI 68, 130–42. Wilson, P. (ed.) 2003 The archaeology of Roman towns: studies in honour of John S. Wacher. Oxford University Press. Woodward, A. and Leach, P. 1993 The Uley Shrines: excavation of a ritual complex on West Hill, Uley, Gloucestershire, 1977–79. English Heritage, London. Woolliscroft, D.J. and Hoffman, B. 2010 Rome’s first frontier: the Flavian occupation of northern Scotland. Tempus, Stroud. Wren, J. 2010a N9/N10 Kilcullen to Waterford Scheme: Waterford to Knocktopher—Phase 2, archaeological resolution, Dunkitt to Sheepstown townlands, Co. Kilkenny. Final report. Ministerial Direction: A032/000. Registration No.: 2501. Sites AR 10–12, Ballykeoghan, Co. Waterford. Unpublished report for Kilkenny County Council. Wren, J. 2010b N9/N10 Kilcullen to Waterford Scheme: Waterford to Knocktopher—Phase 2, archaeological resolution, Dunkitt to Sheephouse townlands, Co. Kilkenny. Final report. Ministerial Direction: A032/000.

Registration No.: 2499. Site AR 03–5, Milltown, Co. Kilkenny. Unpublished report for Kilkenny County Council. Websites Discovery Programme: www.discoveryprogramme.ie, accessed May 2014. English Heritage website: www.englishheritage.org.uk, accessed May 2014. Hinton St Mary mosaic: http://www.britishmuseum.org/explore/ highlights/highlight_objects/pe_prb/t/the_ hinton_st_mary_mosaic.aspx, accessed May 2014. JobBridge: www.jobbridge.ie, accessed May 2014. Landed Estate Database: http://www.landedestates.ie, accessed September 2013. LIARI Facebook page: www.facebook.com/LateIronAgeAndRomanIre land, accessed May 2014. Library Ireland: http://www.libraryireland.com, accessed May 2014. M3 Motorway Archaeology website: www.M3motorway.ie, accessed May 2014. Mapping Death Database: www.mappingdeathdb.ie, accessed May 2014. NRA Database: http://archaeology.nra.ie/Home/, accessed May 2014. Pastscape, English Heritage: www.pastscape.org.uk, accessed May 2014. Placenames Database of Ireland: http://www.logainm.ie/, accessed May 2014. Portable Antiquities Scheme: www.finds.org.uk. Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland: http://canmore.rcahms.gov.uk, accessed May 2014. Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historic Monuments of Wales: www.coflein.gov.uk, accessed May 2014. Xenia Pauli-Jensen: https://natmus.academia.edu/XeniaPauliJensen, accessed May 2014.

207

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:28 Page 208

INDEX

Abdy, Richard, 57 n. 270 Aberffraw, Anglesey, 27, 54 n. 144, 178 Abonae, see Sea Mills Adams, Kurt, 111 n. 44 Africa, 11, 14, 46, 162; coast of, 131, 146–7 African Red Slip Ware (ARSW), 46, 146 Agricola, 16, 19, 21, 29, 52 n. 38, 52 n. 41, 55 n. 166, 94; see also Tacitus aitheach thuatha, see Attacotti, 35 Akeman Street, 53 n. 61 Alemanni, 35 Alexandria, Egypt, 19, 54 n. 120 Alnwick Castle, Northumberland, 51 n. 24 Amadu (Amatus), 182 Amatus, see Amadu Ammianus Marcellinus, 35, 45 Ancient History Encyclopedia, 9 n. 54 Anderson, Claire, 7 Anglesey, Wales, 19, 59 Anglicisation, 141 Anglo-Saxon period, 149 n. 111 Annals of the Four Masters, 21 Annona, 56 n. 206 Annonae, see Annona Annwyn, Hounds of, see Cwyn Annwyn Antrim (county), 176; coast, 130 Apollodorus of Damascus, 55–6 n. 201 Aquitaine, France, 24–5 Arcadius, 39 ArcGIS, 5 Archaeological Consultancy Services, 140–1 Archaeological Development Services Ltd (ADS Ltd), 139–40, 144–7 Ardnurcher Glebe, Co. Offaly, 124 Ardoch, Perthshire, 17 Ardsallagh, Co. Meath, 159, 171–2 n. 45 Arezzo, Italy, 52 n. 53 Ark of the Covenant, 21, 43; see also British Israelites Armagh (town), 164; Cathedral Hill, 164, 172–3 n. 93 Armorica, Gaul, 26 Arras tradition, 98 Arretine ware, 52 n. 53 Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC), 54 n. 130 208

Ask, Co. Wexford, 128, 166, 173 n. 123 Atacotti, see Attacotti Athlone, cos Roscommon and Westmeath, Fig. 6.1 Atlantic seaboard, 1 Attacotti, 35, 45 Attymon, Co. Galway, 37, Fig. 2.16 Augustus, principate of, 34, 51 n. 7 Avon River, England, 26–7 Bagendon, Gloucestershire, 51 n. 37 Baker, Simon, 52 n. 40 Balkans, the, 35 Ballina, Co. Mayo, Fig. 6.1 Ballinderry, Co. Offaly, 21, 56 n. 234 Ballinderry, Co. Westmeath, 38 Balline, Co. Limerick, 21, 28–9, 43, 49, 166, 177, Fig. 2.21, Fig. 2.25, Fig. 2.26 Ballinrees, Co. Derry, 43, 166, 177 Ballintoy, Co. Antrim, 41 Ballustree, Co. Dublin, 74, Fig. 3.7, Fig. 3.22, Fig. 3.23, Fig. 3.24 Ballybar Lower, Co. Carlow, 173 n. 145 Ballybogy, Co. Antrim, 96–8 Ballybunion, Co. Kerry, 24 Ballydavis, Co. Offaly, 168 Ballydrehid, Co. Tipperary, 70–1 n. 17, 155, Fig. 7.4 Ballyedmond, Co. Galway, 14 Ballygarraun West, Co. Galway, 137–8, 174 n. 147, Fig. 6.1, Fig. 6.4, Fig. 6.5, Fig. 6.6, Table 6.2 Ballyhavil, Co. Dublin, Fig. 3.24 Ballykea, Co. Dublin, 60, 62, Fig. 3.7, Fig. 3.24 Ballykeoghan, Co. Kilkenny, 155, 170 n. 12 Ballymacaward, Co. Donegal, 128, 138–9, Fig. 6.1, Fig. 6.4, Fig. 6.7, Table 6.2 Ballymoney, Co. Antrim, 14 Ballyness, Co. Donegal, 24, 38 Ballyshannon Harbour, Co. Donegal, 25, 138 Balriggan, Co. Dublin, 160, 172 n. 54 Balrothery, Co. Dublin, 159 Baltic, the, 23, 177 Banffy, Eszter, 183 n. 9 Bann, River, 43, 98 Bantry, Co. Cork, 39 Barbarian Conspiracy (conspiratio barbarica), 45

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:28 Page 209

Index Barbary macaque ape, 14, 162 Baronstown, Co. Meath, 160–1, 172 n. 62 Barrees Valley, Beara peninsula, Co. Cork, 155, 164 Barrow, River, 46 Barry, Philippa, 8, 9 n. 11, 148 n. 45 Bartington Grad601-2 fluxgate gradiometer, 5, 98–100 Bartlow Hills, Cambridgeshire, 130 Batavi/Batavian, 17, 52 n. 45 Bateson, J.D., 8, 13, 21, 39, 41, 43 Battersea shield, 95 Baysrath, Co. Kilkenny, 155, 157, 159, 168, 171 n. 38, 182, Fig. 7.5 Beara peninsula, Co. Cork, 164 Becker, Katharina, 3–4 Behan, Philip, 90 n. 21 Beilman, David, 125 n. 3 Belfast (city), 21, Fig. 6.1 Bendrey, Robin, 37, 56 n. 220 Betaghstown, see Bettystown Bettystown, Co. Meath, 139, 146, 166, 173 n. 126, Fig. 6.1, Fig. 6.3, Table 6.1, Table 6.2; Anchorage site, 139–40, 145, 147, Fig. 6.8, Fig. 6.9; Brookside site, 46, 131, 139, 147 Bevivino, Michael Ann, 1, 9 n. 11, 148 n. 1 Bhreathnach, Edel, 45–6, 179–80 Bii ware, 62, 140; see also Late Roman Amphora Birdlip, Gloucestershire, 14, 98 Black Burnished ware, 178 Black Pig’s Dyke, 162 Blackland, Co. Dublin, 60, 62, 75–6, 83–8, 180, Fig. 3.24, Fig. 3.33, Fig. 3.34, Fig. 3.35, Fig. 3.36, Fig. 3.37, Fig. 3.38, Fig. 3.40 Blackwater, River, 95, 111 n. 36 Bland, Roger, 35 Blundelstown, Co. Meath, 159, 171–2 n. 45 Bobbio, Italy, 54 n. 110 Bogorov plankton counting tray, 120 Bohermeen, Co. Meath, 166 Boho, Co. Monaghan, 95, 111 n. 36 Bóind, 44; see also Boyne, River Bord Gáis interconnector gas pipeline, 74–5 Boreal, 123 Boyerstown, Co. Meath, 90 Boyne, River, 14, 44, 59, 128, 171 n. 35; estuary, 4 Boyne–Orcadian passage tomb tradition, 108 Bray, Co. Wicklow, 28, 129, 173 n. 130; Bray Head, 92, 166 Brega, 62 Brigantes, 51 n. 9, 93, 110 Bristol Museum and Art Gallery, 111 n. 26 Bristol, University of, 7, 9 n. 1, 9 n. 34, 111 n. 26, 149 n. 56; Bristol Isotope Group, 133 Britannia (journal), 52 n. 44, 184 n. 31 Britannia (province), 19, 32, 52 n. 45

Britannos, see Britons British Israelites, 21, 57 n. 271 British Museum, 8, 43, 54 n. 130, 56 n. 229, 57 n. 270, 58 n. 299 Britons, 19, 34, 53 n. 74, 56 n. 204 Brittany, 26 Broighter, Co. Derry, hoard, 14 Bronze Age, 6–7, 89, 114, 119, 124, 128, 130, 138, 141, 144, 149 n. 115, 155, 157, 159–60, 165, 168–9, 170 n. 11, Fig. 7.4 Brook’s End Bay, Co. Dublin, 60, 83–4 Brosna, River, 113–14, 144 Brough, Cumbria, 94 Brown, Peter, 45 Bryhyr, Scilly Isles, 98 Bryn Eryr, Anglesey, 52 n. 58 Buckley, Laureen, 148 n. 45 Bunmahon River, 34 Bunting, Jane, 120, 126 n. 27 Bush Farm, Anglesey, 52 n. 58 Bushe-Fox, J.P., 54 n. 139 Byzantine, 46, 146 C2 version 1.4.2, 120–1 Cabinteely, Co. Dublin, 46, 146 Cadbury, Somerset, 146 Caerleon, Gwent, 54 n. 140 Caerwent, Monmouthshire, 44, 52–3 n. 60, 54 n. 140 Caherconnell, Co. Clare, 155 Caherlehillan, Co. Kerry, 146 Cahill, Mary, 130 Cahill Wilson, Jacqueline, 1, 7, 9 n. 8, 9 n. 54, 56 n. 202, 90 n. 11, 125 n. 2, 128, 130, 148 n. 42, 183 n. 11 CALIB 7.0.0, 119 Caligula, 54 n. 120 Calleva Atrebatum, see Silchester, Hampshire Calstock, Cornwall, 33–4 Cambridge, University of, Museums, 8 Camulodunum, see Colchester, Essex Cappydonnell Big, Co. Offaly, 168, 173 n. 136 Caracalla, Edict of (constitutio antoninianus), 17 Carausius, 42 Carbury Hill, Co. Kildare, 44, 57 n. 281, Table 6.1 Carew, Mairead, 20–1, 53 n. 85 Carlisle (Luguvalium), Cumbria, 52 n. 41 Carn Lugdach, see Uisneach, Co. Westmeath Carnfree, Co. Roscommon, 164 Carnhill, Co. Dublin, Fig. 3.7, Fig. 3.24 Carraig Aille, Co. Limerick, 21, 38, 42, 56 n. 228, 182 Carrara marble, 133 Carrawburgh, Northumberland, 58 n. 297 Carrickmines Great, Co. Dublin, 128, 174 n. 147 Carrowmore, Co. Sligo, 14, 51 n. 24 209

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:28 Page 210

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland Cartimandua, 51 n. 9 Carvossa, Cornwall, 33 Cashel, Co. Tipperary, 38–9, 146 Cassius Dio, 55 n. 198 Castlebar, Co. Mayo, Fig. 6.1 Catuvellauni, 26 Caugh Hill, Co. Derry, 14 Cavan (town), Fig. 6.1 Celt/Celtic, 12, 14, 17, 20–2, 57 n. 277; ‘Celto-Roman’, 55 n. 152; mythology, 44; origin, 53 n. 71; revisionism, 51 n. 14 ‘Celtiberia’, 184 n. 38; Celtiberian script, 181; see also Spain/Spanish Chancellorsland, Co. Tipperary, 160, 172 n. 52 Charles-Edwards, Thomas, 29, 35 Charon, 129 Charterhouse-on-Mendip, Somerset, 177, Fig. 2.5 Cherrywood, Co. Dublin, 46, 146 Chester (Deva Victrix), Cheshire, 17, 94, Fig. 2.4 China/Chinese, 23, 54 n. 123; Da Qin (‘treasure country’), 23; Han Dynasty, 23, 54 n. 123; Seres (Roman name for Chinese), 54 n. 123 Christ, see Jesus Christchurch Harbour, Dorset, 26 Christian/Christianity, 1, 22, 46–50, 58 n. 308, 58 n. 309, 128, 162, 175, 179, 181; burial in Britain, 148 n. 14; Christianisation, 22, 45, 128; Early Christian 3, 22; early Christian churches, 54 n. 110, 164; Eucharist, 49; mission/s, 46, 57 n. 289, 58 n. 309; pre-Christian, 164 Chysauster, Cornwall, 32, 52 n. 59, 55 n. 193 Claidh Dubh, Co. Cork, 172 n. 80 Clare Hill, Co. Westmeath, 125 n. 8 Claristown, Co. Meath, 28 Clarke, Angela, 125 n. 2 Clarke, David, 125 n. 2 Classical Review, 20 Classics (discipline), 53 n. 81 Classis Britannica (Roman navy), 42, 94 Claudius, 13, 15–16; Claudian invasion, 15–16, 19, 54 n. 139, 94, 110; Claudian military engagement, 146; post-Claudian period, 26; pre-Claudian, 15 Claudius Gothicus, 43 Claudius Ptolemaeus, see Ptolemy Clibborn, Edward, 129 Clogher, Co. Tyrone, 38, 146, 160, 183 n. 4, Fig. 2.17 Clonownmore, Co. Westmeath, Fig. 5.2 Clonsingle, Co. Westmeath, 125 n. 8 Clontarf, Co. Dublin, 94 Cloongownagh, Co. Roscommon, 155–6, 171 n. 23 Coimagnas, 182 Colchester (Camulodunum), Essex, 26, 51 n. 32, 52 n. 53, 111 n. 56; Culver Street, 178 210

Collierstown, Co. Meath, 46, 140–1, 146–7, 168, 173 n. 139, 174 n. 147, Fig. 6.1, Fig. 6.3, Fig. 6.10, Table 6.2 Collingwood, R.G., 52 n. 44, 184 n. 31 Colp West, Co. Meath, 46, 146, 155–6, 168, 170 n. 15 Colum, see Cuinnid mac Cathmoga Columban, 108 Comber, Michelle, 1 Commodus, 43 Commons of Lloyd, Co. Meath, 168, 174 n. 146 conspiratio barbarica, see Barbarian Conspiracy Constantine I (Constantine the Great), 35, 43–50, 58 n. 298 Constantine II, 35, 43 Constantius II, 38 constitutio antoninianus, see Caracalla, Edict of Continent/Continental, vi, viii, 3, 14, 38, 95, 111 n. 26, 129–30, 138, 163, 176 Cookstown, Co. Meath, 173–4 n. 146 Coolure Demesne, Lough Derravaragh, Co. Westmeath, 157 Cooney, Gabriel, 6, 22, 90 n. 1, 111 n. 62 Coplen, T.B., 133 Corbridge (Coria), Northumberland, 52 n. 41 Coria, see Corbridge Coriosolite coins, 54 n. 139 Cork (county), 24, 39, 44, 155, Fig. 6.1; Cork Harbour, 43 Corlea Road, Co. Longford, 162 Corlett, Christiaan, 4 Cornashee (Sgiath Gabhra), Co. Fermanagh, 164 Cornwall, 32–4, 52 n. 59, 177; Cornish rounds, 32 Cothi Valley, Wales, 34 Cotterellsbooly, Co. Kilkenny, 129 Count Theodosius, see Theodosius the Elder Coyle McClung, Lisa, 6 CPI International single element standard solution, 133 Craeb Uisnig, see Uisneach, Co. Westmeath Craig, Harmon, 133 Cramond, Edinburgh, 55 n. 188 Crandon Bridge, Somerset, 27 Crawford, O.G.S., 169 Creggan, Co. Derry, 41 Creighton, John, 15 Cruachan Aí Heritage Centre, Co. Roscommon, 8 Crummy, Nina, 38, 93 Cuinnid mac Cathmoga (St Mac Cuilinn), 62, 90 n. 15 Cultural Resource Development Services Ltd (CRDS Ltd), 112 n. 79 Cunliffe, Barry, 26 Cunomaglus, 44 Cupid, 14 Curle, Alexander, Fig. 2.13 Cuskinny, Co. Cork, 43–4, 177 Cwyn Annwyn (Hounds of Annwyn), 57 n. 277 Cybele and Attis, cult of, 47, 58 n. 297

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:28 Page 211

Index Dacia, 34, 37, 51 n. 9, 55–6 n. 201 Dalkey Island, Co. Dublin, 27–8, 46, 57 n. 290, 146 Damastown, Co. Dublin, 34, 62, 178 Danesfort, Co. Kilkenny, 168, 173 n. 143, 174 n. 146 Dangstetten, Germany, 95 Danube, River, 55–6 n. 201 Darcystown, Co. Dublin, 160, 172 n. 49 Dark, Ken, 44, 49 Davies, Hugh, 53 n. 61 Dawson, Elizabeth, 1 Decebalus, 51 n. 9 Decebalus II, 34 Dee Estuary, Wales, 94 Deer Park Farms, Co. Antrim, 156 Dellabrown, Co. Dublin, Fig. 3.24 Dempsey, Karen, 90 n. 21, 111 n. 66 Denmark, 2, 31, 35, 53 n. 90, 55 n. 182, 129, 179, Fig. 2.12; bogs, 178; islands, 177 Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht, 125 n. 2 dérivée des sigillées paléochrétiennes Atlantique (DSPA), 146 Derrinsallagh, Co. Laois, 157, 171 n. 36 Derry (city), Fig. 6.1 Derrykeighan, Co. Antrim, 41 Derrynaflan, Co. Tipperary, 146 Deva Victrix, see Chester, Cheshire Diamond, Patrick, 55 n. 159 Diana, 44 Din Lligwy, Anglesey, 52 n. 58 Dinas Powys, Wales, 46, 146 Diocletian, 42 Discovery Programme’s Strategic Plan (2014–2017), vii, ix, 8, 9 n. 49 Ditches, the (near Bagendon, Gloucestershire), 16 Domitian, 19, 39 Domus Aurea, Rome, 23 Donaghmore, Co. Louth, 166, 173 n. 119 Donegal (county), 25, 29, 57 n. 283, 139, 176 Dooey, Co. Donegal, 38, 56 n. 228 Doon, Co. Donegal, Fig. 2.27 Dorset, 47, 94; coast, 26, 51 n. 32 Dorsey, the, 162 Dowdstown, Co. Meath, 89–90 Dowling, Ger, 1, 9 n. 10, 125 n. 2, 184 n. 26 Down (county), 176 Doyle, Ian, 46, 177, 183 n. 7 Dressel type amphorae, 26 Drogheda, Co. Louth, 28, 55 n. 155, 171 n. 35 Droim Meánach (‘the middle ridge’), see Drumanagh Drumanagh (promontory), Co. Dublin, 4–8, 21–2, 25–8, 31–2, 34–5, 37, 39, 42, 54 n. 151, 55 n. 155, 56 n. 202, 56 n. 205, 56 n. 219, 59–90, 93, 97–8, 110, 146, 153, 159, 176–83, Fig. 2.8, Fig. 2.9, Fig. 2.19, Fig. 2.20, Fig. 3.24

Drumcliff, Co. Sligo, 166 Drumlattery, Co. Dublin, Fig. 3.24 Drummond, W.H., 92, 129 Dublin (county and city), 3, 6, 8, 21, 25–7, 41, 46, 59–90, 93, 98, 148 n. 77, 153, 159, 164–6, 176–7, 182, Fig. 6.1; coast, 7, 60, 62, 147, 176, 182; Dublin Bay, 28; offshore islands, 27–8, 91, 108 Dublin Garden Squares Day, 8 Dún Ailinne, Co. Kildare, 14, 38, 56 n. 237, 162–4, 172 n. 82; Flame/Rose/Mauve phases at, 51 n. 29, 163 Dún Aonghasa, Inis Mór, Co. Galway, 155 ‘Dún na mBreatán (The Fort of the Britons)’, see Dunabrattin, Co. Waterford, 56 n. 204 Dunabrattin, Co. Waterford, 34, 56 n. 204, 182 Dunadry, Co. Antrim, 130 Dunaidonas, 182 Dundalk, Co. Louth, Fig. 6.1 Dunfanaghy, Co. Donegal, 24, 38 Dunshaughlin, Co. Meath, 159 Dura Europos (modern-day Syria), 17 Durotriges 26, 54 n. 139 Durrington Walls, Wiltshire, 147 early historic, 3 early medieval period, vi, viii, 1, 3–4, 7, 12, 22, 29, 45, 50, 89–90, 114, 117, 124, 129, 131, 145–7, 153–4, 159–60, 164–5, 172 n. 55, 177–8, 181–3; burials/funerary rituals, 143, 168–9; transition, 146, 159 East Anglia, 142 East Lothian, 32 Eckardt, Hella, 38, 148 n. 2 Edercloon, Co. Longford, 162, 172 n. 74 Edinburgh, 32, 55 n. 188 Eelweir Hill, Lehinch, Co. Offaly, 144 Eggers, H.J., 31 Egypt, 11, 23, 34, 55 n. 199 Eildon Hill, Scottish Borders, 32, 55 n. 187; river valley below, 55 n. 187 Elliott, Ian, 6, 111 n. 70, 112 n. 79 Emania (journal), 125 n. 17 Emperor ‘Adrian’, see Hadrian England, 2, 20, 56 n. 202, 93–4, 142, 146, 176 English (language), 56 n. 204 Ennis, Co. Clare, Fig. 6.1 Entellan®, 120 ERDA Imagine LPS eATE processing software, 6 Erne, River, 25, 138 Eros, 14 Essex, 93–4 Etruscan, 14 Europe/European, 3, 9 n. 18, 11, 16–17, 22, 24, 30, 32, 46, 50, 51 n. 2, 52 n. 46, 92, 94, 97, 111 n. 13, 111 n. 33, 211

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:28 Page 212

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland 111 n. 40, 129–30, 139–40, 145–7, 170, 175–81; postRoman Europe, 2; pre-Roman Europe, 2, 21; Roman Europe, 2, 31, 146, 178 European Union, 9 n. 50 E-ware, 146 Excavations Bulletin, 4 Exeter, University of, 55 n. 197 Facebook, 8 Farta, Co. Galway, 141–2, 144, 146, Fig. 6.1, Fig. 6.4, Table 6.2 Faughan Hill, Co. Meath, 164–5, 182 Feddersen-Wierde (modern Netherlands), 24, 54 n. 132, Fig. 2.12 Feerwore, Rath of, Co. Galway, 141 Feigh Mountain, Co. Antrim, 43 Fenwick, Joe, vii, ix Fibiger, Linda, 111 n. 62, 129 Fingal County Council, 5 Finley, M.I., 24 Fishbourne, Sussex, 15, 51 n. 32 FitzPatrick, Elizabeth, 162 Flavian period, 38, 41, 93; forts and fortlets, 29 Flögeln, Germany, 31, Fig. 2.12 Flower Hill, Co. Antrim, 43, 175 Fore, Co. Westmeath, 14, 51 n. 27, 98, 128, 148 n. 11 Fort Hill, Co. Louth, 155, 160, 172 n. 53 Fosse Way, England, 53 n. 61 France, 17–18 Frankfurt, Germany, vi–ix Franks, the, 35 Fredengren, Christina, 171 n. 28 Freeman, Philip, 20, 53 n. 73, 108 Freestone Hill, Co. Kilkenny, 38, 43–4, 53 n. 105, 56 n. 228, 57 n. 267, 147, 153, 165, 182 Frewin Hill, Co. Westmeath, 113 Fulford, Michael, 51 n. 32 Funen, Denmark, 31, 35, 179–80, Fig. 2.12 Furness, Co. Kildare, 128 Gabhra River, 140 Gaius Julius Civilis, 52 n. 45 Galienus, 41 Gallia Belgica, 52 n. 45 Galway (county), 24, 37, 39, 142, Fig. 2.16; city, Fig. 6.1; coast, 39 Gansum, Terje, 169 Garranes, Co. Cork, 21, 24, 44, 46, 57 n. 290, 146, 157 Garretstown, Co. Meath, 159, 171 n. 42 Garristown, Co. Dublin, 60 Garryduff, Co. Cork, 46, 146 Gask Ridge Frontier, Perthshire, 29 Gaul/Gaulish, 15–18, 24–6, 35, 42, 46, 52 n. 53, 54 n. 110, 212

57 n. 267, 59, 93–6, 110, 146, 163, 165–6; GalloRoman, 12–13; Merovingian Gaul, 46; Roman Gaul, 94 Gavin, Fiona, 35, 39, 179 Geake, Helen, 111 n. 44 gens Lathron, see Latharna GeoArc Ltd, 62 Geoplot 3.0, 5 Geoscan FM256/FM36/CF6, 5, 98–100 Geoscan RM15, 5, 100 German/Germanic, vii, ix, 17, 30, 55 n. 170 Germania Inferior, 52 n. 45 Germania Magna, 31–2 Germany, 2, 8, 17–18, 20, 35, 52 n. 46, Fig. 2.12 Giant’s Ring, Ballynahatty, Co. Down, 41, 175 GIS, 4–5 Glebe South, Co. Dublin, 160, 168, 172 n. 49 Gleeson, Patrick, 51 n. 24 Glory, River, 157 Gloucestershire, 38, 44, 93–4 Goeblingen-Nospelt, Luxembourg, 95 Golden, Co. Tipperary, 14, 43, 57 n. 267, 166, 182 Goldhahn, Joakim, 169, 174 n. 156 Gortlaunaght, Co. Cavan, 155, 170 n. 11 Gosbecks, Essex, 15 Gosden, Chris, 9 n. 14, 54, n. 124 GPS survey datalogger, 5 Gracedieu, Co. Dublin, 62 Grane, Thomas, 111 n. 44, 183 n. 11 Great Orme, Wales, 7, 52 n. 58, 178, 181 Greece/Greek, 8; burial, 128; Graeco-Roman, 19; language, 18, 20, 48–9, 53 n. 73, 53 n. 81 Greenhills, Co. Kildare, 142, Fig. 6.1, Fig. 6.4, Fig. 6.12, Table 6.2 Grogan, Eoin, 43–4, 172 n. 69 GSM phone link, 5 Gudeman, Alfred, 20–1 Gudme, Funen, Denmark, 31, 55 n. 182, 179–80, 184 n. 26, Fig. 2.12 Gugliemi, Alexandra, 8, 53 n. 92, 54–5 n. 152, 183 n. 11 Gwyn ap Nudd, 57 n. 277; see also Nodens Hacketstown, Co. Dublin, Fig. 3.24 Hadrian, 18–19, 26, 92–3, 129; Hadrianic period, 27, 41 Hadrian’s Wall, 45, 52 n. 44, 56 n. 251, 130, 184 n. 31 Halpin, Andy, 111 n. 62 Hampshire, Fig. 2.19 Harvard Expeditions in Irish archaeology, 20–1 Harvard Mission, see Harvard Expeditions in Irish archaeology Harvard University, 20 Harvey, Anthony, 181 Hassall, Mark, 54 n. 136

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:28 Page 213

Index Haughey’s Fort, Co. Armagh, 124; see also Navan Fort, Co. Armagh Haverfield, Francis, 20–1 Hawaii, University of, 121 Heather, Peter, 183 Hedeager, Lotte, 31 Hedeliskaer, Denmark, 178 Hemer, K.A., 146–7 Hen Gastell, Gwynedd, 146 Hencken, Hugh O’Neill, 20–1, 32, 54–5 n. 152, 56 n. 251 Hengistbury Head, Dorset, 15, 26, 51 n. 32, 54 n. 139, 59, 177, Fig. 2.9 Hercules, 14 Heritage Council, 9 n. 21, 9 n. 50, 131 Hertfordshire, 93–4 Hibernia, 20 Hiberno-Roman, 21 Hill of Lloyd, Co. Meath, 9 n. 54, 164–5, 182 Himlingøje, Denmark, 129, Fig. 2.12 Hinton St Mary, Dorset, 47; mosaic, 58 n. 299 Hispania, 16, 34 Historia Augusta, 20 Hjortspring, Denmark, 28, 178, Fig. 2.12 Hoby, Denmark, 129, Fig. 2.12 Hoffman, Birgitta, 55 n. 166, 56 n. 210 Holborough, Kent, 130 Holmpatrick, Co. Dublin, Fig. 3.24 Holocene, 119, 123; Early Holocene, 122–4; preHolocene, 119, 121 Honorius, 43 Hooton, Earnest, 20–1 Howth Head, Co. Dublin, 27, 93 Hoxne, Suffolk, treasure hoard, 38 Hull, University of, 126 n. 27 Huns, 35 Hunter, Fraser, 57 n. 264, 96–7, 175 Hyland, Ann, 56 n. 217, 56 n. 221 Iacumin, Paula, 133 Icklingham, Suffolk, 49–50 Illerup Ådal, Denmark, 31, 54–5 n. 152, Fig. 2.11, Fig. 2.12; Illerup type, 28, 178 Illyricum, 35 In Finnflescach, see Uisneach, Co. Westmeath India, 8, 23 Inny, River, 113–14 Inveresk, East Lothian, 55 n. 188 Iona, Inner Hebrides, 108 ‘Ireland and the Roman World’, 22; see also Newman, Conor, and NUI Galway ‘Ireland in a Roman world’ (LIARI conference), vii, ix, 2 Ireland’s Eye, Co. Dublin, 27, 93 Irish Free State, 20, 22

Irish Geophysical and Archaeological Surveys (IGAS), 112 n. 79 Irish Isotopes Research Group (IIRG), 7, 9 n. 11, 9 n. 46, 133 Irish National Grid (NGR), 5 Irish National Strategic Archaeological Research (INSTAR) scheme, 2008–10, 3–4, 9 n. 21; see also Heritage Council and Mapping Death Project Irish Sea, 16, 19, 27, 60, 98, 108, 139, 175, 177 Irish Times, 51 n. 6 Iron Gates, the, 55–6 n. 201 Isings types, 129–30 Issa, 149 n. 108 Italy, 18, 26, 35 Iuverna, see Iuvernia Iuvernae, see Iuvernia Iuvernia, 20, 53 n. 74 Ivens, R.J., 173 n. 94 Iverni Project, 46, 146; see also University College Cork (UCC) and NUI Galway James, Simon, 12, 17 Jedburgh, Scotland, 17 Jesus Christ, 47–9, 58 n. 298 JobBridge National Internship Scheme, 8, 9 n. 11 Johnston, Elva, 181, 183 n. 22 Jones, Barri, 55 n. 200, 57 n. 282 Jope, E.M., 11, 14, 51 n. 21, 92, 111 n. 56 Journal of Roman Archaeology (JRA), 52 n. 44, 184 n. 31 Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland (JRSAI), 21 Joy, Jody, 98 Julius Caesar, 13, 52 n. 46; Commentaries on the Gallic War, 19 Julius Frontinus, 26–7 Juvenal, 20, 53 n. 74 Kells, Co. Meath, 9 n. 54, 165, Fig. 7.8 Kelly, Amanda, 46, 62, 177 Kelly, Christopher, 56 n. 208 Kelly, Eamonn P., 26, 56 n. 219, 62, 139, 184 n. 29 Kelly, Emma, Fig. 5.4 Kellybrook, Co. Westmeath, Fig. 5.2 Kent, 47 Kenure Park, Co. Dublin, 90 n. 26 Kerala, India, 23 Keshcarrigan, Co. Leitrim, bowl, 14, 52 n. 51, 98, 111 n. 56, Fig. 2.2 Kessel B type, Kessel-Lith, the Netherlands, 95 Kilbey, Co. Westmeath, 125 n. 8 Kilbride-Jones, H.E., 56 n. 251 Kildare (county), 42 Kilkenny (county), 153, 157, 176, 182, Fig. 6.1 213

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:28 Page 214

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland Kilkenny Archaeology, 182, 184 n. 41 Killalane, Co. Tipperary, 161, 172 n. 65, Fig. 7.6 Killarechurch, Co. Westmeath, Fig. 5.2 Killarney, Co. Kerry, Fig. 6.1 Killoran, Co. Tipperary, 155–6 Kilmahuddrick, Co. Dublin, 168 Kilmainham, Co. Meath, 165, 168, 173 n. 101, 173 n. 102, Fig. 7.8 Kilmessan, Co. Meath, 179 Kilmoylan, Co. Waterford, 34–5, 178 Kilree, Co. Kilkenny, 46, 146, 182 Kiltierney, Co. Fermanagh, 168 King’s Stables, Co. Armagh, 124; see also Navan Fort, Co. Armagh Kings River, 129, 157 Knockanacuig/Lohercannan, Co. Kerry, 157 Knockast, Co. Westmeath, 113 Knockaulin, see Dún Ailinne, Co. Kildare Knockbrack, Co. Dublin, 60, 164–5, 182 Knowth, Co. Meath, 28, 39, 139, 142–4, 148 n. 14, 166, 168, 173 n. 125, 175–6, 180, 182, Fig. 6.1, Fig. 6.3, Fig. 6.13, Table 6.1, Table 6.2 Körtüm, Klaus, 30 La Tène, 14, 25, 31, 51 n. 11, 53 n. 62, 55 n. 152, 92, 111 n. 40, 162, 166, 170 Lagore Crannog, Co. Meath, 21, 28, 38, 54 n. 151, 55 n. 152, 56 n. 228, 56 n. 234, 146, 157, 178, 182, 183 n. 11, Fig. 2.10, Fig. 2.11 Laing, Lloyd, 111 n. 13; ‘Dark Age art’, 111 n. 13 Lalistown, Co. Westmeath, Fig. 5.2 Lambay, Co. Dublin, 4, 8–9, 26–8, 38, 46, 55 n. 156, 57 n. 290, 60, 62, 91–112, 129, 147, 159, 166, 176–7, 180, Fig. 3.2, Fig. 3.3; Chapel West Field, 100–2; Garden Fort, see Lambay: Gouge Point; Gouge Point, 98, 100, 106–8, 110, 112 n. 74, Fig. 4.14, Fig. 4.17, Fig. 4.18; Harbour, 129; Knockbane, 98, 176; Lambay Castle, 110; Lambay Estate Company, 110 n. 4, 112 n. 79; Little Mason’s field, 110; porphyry, 91; Quarry Field, 102, 104; Scotch Point, 98, 100, 102, 104–6, 108–10, 111 n. 70, Fig. 4.14, Fig. 4.15, Fig. 4.16; South Point, 100–2, 108, 110, Fig. 4.7, Fig. 4.8, Fig. 4.9, Fig. 4.10; Talbot’s Bay, 100 Lane, Co. Dublin, 60–2, 75, 82–3, 88, Fig. 3.24, Fig. 3.31; ‘Smuggler’s Cave’, 60–2, Fig. 3.4 Langeland, island of, Denmark, 177 Langton Down brooch, 38, 92, 94, Fig. 4.2 Larne, Co. Antrim, 139 Late Antiquity, 3, 22, 24, 27, 45, 53 n. 81 Late Glacial, 122–4 ‘Late Iron Age Lull’ (LIAL), 6, 153, 170 n. 3 Late Roman Amphora, 146; Late Roman Amphorae 1 (LRA1), 46, 62, 140, 146; Late Roman Amphorae 2 214

(LRA2), 146 Latharna, 139 Latin, 6–7, 20, 50, 53 n. 73, 53 n. 81, 176, 181–2, Fig. 2.6; Latinised, 35 Launceston, Cornwall, 33 Leeds, E.T., 94 Legio II Augusta, 16, 27 Legio IX Hispania, 16 Legio XVI Gemina, 16 Legio XX Valeria Victrix, 16 Lehinch, Co. Offaly, 142, 144, Fig. 6.1, Fig. 6.4, Table 6.2 Leicester, University of, 54 n. 130 Leinster, 60, 128, 153; Leinstermen, 35 Leitrim (county), 25 Letterkenny, Co. Donegal, Fig. 6.1 Lewis, Samuel, 129 Libius Severus, 57 n. 263 Licinius, 47 Liffey, River, 59, 128; estuary, 4; plain, 60 Limavady, Co. Derry, 14 Limerick (county), Fig. 2.21; town, Fig. 6.1 limes, 9 n. 18, 23, 29–31, 50, 51 n. 2, 55 n. 170, 95, 177, 180, Fig. 2.12; limesvorsland, 31 Lincolnshire, 93–4 LinkedIn, 8 Lismullin, Co. Meath, 159, 171 n. 43 Lisnacaheragh ringfort, see Garranes, Co. Cork Littledean, Gloucestershire, 44, 57 n. 282; Littledean Hall, 57 n. 282 Livingstone piston corer, 117 Lloyd Morgan, Glenys, 94 Loch Lugborta, see Uisneach, Co. Westmeath Loch Sionnaigh, ‘Lake of the Fox’, see Loughshinny, Co. Dublin Lockardstown, Co. Westmeath, Fig. 5.2 Londinium (London), 26 London, 26, 43 Longbury Bank, Wales, 146 Longinelli, Antonio, 133; Longinelli equation, 134, 149 n. 64 Lough Gur, Co. Limerick, 21, 38 Lough Lene, Co. Westmeath, 14 Lough Owel, Co. Westmeath, 113 Loughey, Co. Down, 38, 56 n. 237 Loughnashade, Co. Armagh, 116, 124; horns, 162 Loughshinny, Co. Dublin, 5, 7–8, 59–90, 159, 177–8, Fig. 2.8, Fig. 3.4, Fig. 3.7, Fig. 3.24, Fig. 3.32; Loughshinny Formation, 7; Mine Road, 60–2, 75–6, 90 n. 9; village, 59; see also Drumanagh (promontory), Co. Dublin Lowpark, Co. Mayo, 160, 172 n. 58 Lug, 116, 57 n. 283; see also Uisneach, Co. Westmeath Luguvalium, see Carlisle

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:28 Page 215

Index Lullingstone, Kent, England, 47–8, 58 n. 300, Fig. 2.24 Lundeborg, Denmark, 31–2, 55 n. 182, 177, 179–80, Fig. 2.12 Lunestown House, Co. Westmeath, Fig. 5.2 Lusk, Co. Dublin, 62 Lydney Park, Gloucestershire, 38, 44, 57 n. 277, 57 n. 279, 111 n. 22; Lydney-type bracelet, 183 n. 4 Lyles Hill, Co. Antrim, 157, 171 n. 34 Lynn, Chris, 156, 179 Macalister, R.A.S., 92, 95–6, 114 McCarthy, Martina, 62 McCormick, Finbar, 37, 149 n. 89 McGarry, Tiernan, 3–4, 166 McGinley, Seamus, 6 McGlade, Steven, 9 n. 11, 90 n. 21 Macgregor, Morna, 96–7, 111 n. 48 McGregor, Neil, 58 n. 299 McGuinness, Kevin, 90 n. 21 Mackreth, D.F., 93–4 McLaughlin, Raoul, 149 n. 108 McManus, Damien, 181, 184 n. 34 Maghera, Co. Derry, 41 Magheracar, Co. Donegal, 162–3, 172 n. 79 Magnentius, 28, 116 Magor Villa, Cornwall, 55 n. 194 Maguire, Rena, 35–7 Mallahow, Co. Dublin, 83 Mallory, James, 16 Mallow, Co. Cork, Fig. 6.1 Maltese, 149 n. 108 Manning, Conleth, 172 n. 55 Mapping Death Project (INSTAR), 3–4, 7, 9 n. 43, 131, 135, 141–2, 144, 166, 173 n. 112; database, 4, 131 Maqiddeccedas, 182 Margaret Gowen and Co. Ltd, Fig. 7.4 Marianus, 182 Marinus, 182 Marinus of Tyre, 19 Mars, 14, 51 n. 24 Mars-Nodens, 44; see also Nodens, Nuadu, Nechtan and Neptune Martial, 149 n. 108 Matidia, 43 Mattingly, David, 24 Maximian, 42 Maxwell, Gordon, 55 n. 169 Meath (county), 3, 44, 46, 59, 93, 134–5, 137–45, 153, 159, 164–6, 176, 182, Fig. 6.3, Fig. 6.4, Table 6.1; coast, 62 medieval period, 35, 87–8, 100, 114, 117, 146, 172 n. 53, 181 Medieval Rural Settlement Project, Discovery

Programme, 9 n. 52 Mediterranean, 14, 26–8, 146–7, 179 Melrose, Scotland, 32 Menapian, 42 Mendips, England, 26 Meols, Wirral, England, 27 Mercúir, see Mercury Mercury, 57 n. 283, 181; see also Caugh Hill, Co. Derry Merovingian period, 46, 55 n. 182 Merrion Square Open Day, 8 Mesolithic period, 108 Mesopotamia, 11 Mexican, 56 n. 217 Migration Period, 55 n. 182, 177 Mill Hill, Kent, crown, 111 n. 34 Millockstown, Co. Louth, 155, 160, 172 n. 55 Milltown, Co. Kilkenny, 157, 171 n. 36 Milvian Bridge, Battle of the, 58 n. 298 Mithras, 58 n. 297; cult of, 47, 57–8 n. 297 Moanduff, Co. Carlow, 160, 172 n. 58 Moel Hiraddug, Wales, 94 Molloy, Karen, 125 n. 2 Mona, see Anglesey Monaghan (town), Fig. 6.1 Monaghan, Nigel, 111 n. 62, 149 n. 87 Monaghantown River, 125 n. 8 Monasterevin discs, 92 Mooghaun, Co. Clare, 1, 155, 157 Moore, Tom, 51 n. 37 Mortonhall, Edinburgh, scabbard, 95 Motic® BA210, 120–1 Motic® SMZ Series, 120 Mount, Charles, 130 Movius, Hallam, 20–1 Moyle Big, Co. Carlow, 169, 174 n. 158 Moynagh Lough, Co. Meath, 156 Muckridge, Co. Cork, 155–6, 171 n. 18 Müldner, Gundula, 134 Mullaghmore sandstone formation, 138 Mullingar, Co. Westmeath, 113, 125 n. 8, Fig. 6.1 Munster, 153, 162 Mušov, Czech Republic, 129 Muziris (probably modern Pattanam, outside Kerala, India), 23 Mweelra, Co. Westmeath, Fig. 5.2 Mytum, Harold, 179 Nanstallon, Cornwall, 33–4 National Monuments Service (NMS), 125 n. 2 National Museum of Ireland (NMI), 5, 7, 9 n. 47, 14, 26, 28, 34–5, 51 n. 24, 55 n. 129, 56 n. 202, 62, 91–2, 95, 111 n. 62, 125 n. 2, 130–1, 141–2, 144, 181, Fig. 2.16; Carruthers collection, 130; Documentation Plan, 9 n. 215

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:28 Page 216

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland 47; Inventory Project, 9 n. 47; Irish Antiquities Division, 9 n. 47, 98; Natural History Museum, 98, 148 n. 87 National Museum of Wales, 8 National Museums Northern Ireland (NMNI), 7; see also Ulster Museum National Roads Authority (NRA), 142; M2 Finglas–Ashbourne Motorway Scheme, Fig. 7.9; M3 Clonee–North of Kells Motorway Scheme, Fig. 6.10; M3 Clonee–North of Kells Motorway Scheme, Fig. 7.8; M6 Galway to Ballinasloe Motorway Scheme, Fig. 6.5, Fig. 6.6; M7 Nenagh to Limerick Motorway Scheme, Fig. 7.6; M9 Waterford to Knocktopher Motorway Scheme, Fig. 7.5; monograph series, 4; N8 Cashel to Mitchelstown Road Improvement Scheme, Fig. 7.4 Navan, Co. Meath, 117 Navan Fort, Co. Armagh, 14, 116, 153, 162–6 Nechtan, 44; see also Nodens, Nuadu and Neptune Nene Valley colour-coated ware, 18 Neolithic, 91, 108, 114, 130, 171 n. 35; in Britain, 87; Middle Neolithic, 100 Neptune, 44; see also Nodens, Nuadu and Nechtan Nero, 23, 34 Netherlands, the, 8 Nettleton Scrub, Wiltshire, 44, Fig. 2.22 New Forest, Hampshire, 28 Newgrange, Co. Meath, 24, 35, 37, 39, 43–4, 53 n. 105, 57 n. 267, 149 n. 115, 153, 166, 168, 175, 177, 180, 182, Fig. 2.22 Newman, Conor, vii, ix, 2, 22, 60, 161, 164, 179 Newstead, Scottish Borders, 56 n. 221, 95 ‘Niall’, 180 Nijmegen, the Netherlands, 97–8 Nikon Eclipse 80i microscope, 119–20 Ninch, Co. Meath, 46, 140, 144–7, Fig. 6.1, Fig. 6.3, Table 6.2; Ninch 2, 144, 147, Fig. 6.15; Ninch 3, 142, 144–5, 147 NIST SRM987, 133 Nodens, 44, 147; see also Gwyn ap Nudd, Mars-Nodens, Nuadu, Nechtan and Neptune Nore, River, 41, 46, 129, 157, 166, 173 n. 110, 182 Norfolk, 93–4 Norrie’s Law hoard, 176 North Munster Project, Discovery Programme, 1 Notitia Dignitatum, 35, 45, 56 n. 210; Comes Litoris Saxonici per Britanniam, Fig. 2.15 Nuadu, 44; see also Nodens, Nechtan and Neptune NUI Galway, vi, viii, 6, 22, 46, 146, 180; Palaeoenvironmental Research Unit, School of Geography and Archaeology, 113 O’Brien, Elizabeth, 1, 7, 9 n. 9, 9 n. 43, 25, 97, 128, 131, 216

138–9, 142, 166 O’Brien, William, 9 n. 42, 164 O’Callaghan family, 26, 90 n. 25 O’Carroll, Ellen, 124 Ó Carragáin, Tomás, 50, 166 Ó Drisceoil, Cóilín, vii, ix, 57 n. 255, 173 n. 110, 184 n. 41 Ó Floinn, Raghnall, 7, 53 n. 105, 57 n. 268, 179 O’Flynn, Laura, 3 Ó Néill, John, 3 Ó Riain, Pádraig, 90 n. 15 Ó Ríordáin, Seán P., 21, 46, 57 n. 265 O’Sullivan, Aidan, 183 n. 11 O’Sullivan, Jerry, 142 Oestigaard, Terje, 169, 174 n. 56 Oracadus, see Orkney Islands Ordnance Survey of Ireland (OSI), 5, 76; map/s, 79, 83, 90 n. 9, 90 n. 22 Orkney Islands, Scotland, 53 n. 74 Oxford, University of, Research Laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art, 133, 149 n. 56 pagan, 1, 22, 47, Fig. 2.27 Painter, Kenneth, 57 n. 264, 57 n. 265 Palladius, 181 Palmer Estate, 64, 90 n. 26; Palmer, Sir Roger, 90 n. 23; see also Kenure Park, Co. Dublin Panonnia, 37, 39 Parknahown, Co. Laois, 89 Parys Mountain, Wales, 7, 181 Patching, Sussex, 57 n. 263 Patrick (saint), 22, 181 Pattanam, India, 23 Pauli-Jensen, Xenia, 54–5 n. 152, 55 n. 180, 56 n. 216, 111 n. 44, 183 n. 11 Pennymuir, Scottish Borders, 17 Penrith, Cumbria, 52 n. 59 Petrie Crown, 95 Philemon, 19 Phocaean Red Slip Ware (PRSW), 46, 140, 146, 182 Phrygian, 58 n. 297 Picts, 35, 45 Piercetown, Co. Dublin, Fig. 3.24 Pike, Alistair, 6–7, 9 n. 43, 131, 183 n. 13 Placenames Database of Ireland, 56 n. 204 Platin, Co. Meath, 166 Pliny, 108 Polden Hill, Somerset, 38–9, 94, Fig. 4.2 Pompeii, Italy, 129 Popeshall, Co. Dublin, 60, 60–2, 75–9, 88, Fig. 3.24, Fig. 3.26, Fig. 3.27, Fig. 3.40; Popeshall hill, 60, 76, 79, 82, 88–9, 110, 176, Fig. 3.2, Fig. 3.3, Fig. 3.25 Porchester, Hampshire, 45

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:28 Page 217

Index Porcupine Bank, off Co. Sligo, 24 Port Rechrainn, see Portrane, Co. Dublin Portable Antiquities Scheme (PAS), 52 n. 51, 96, 111 n. 46, 111 n. 49; Finds Liaison Officers, 111 n. 46 Portrane, Co. Dublin, 91; see also Lambay, Co. Dublin Portugal, 46, 131 post-medieval, 87–8, 117 Potito, Aaron, 6 Potterton, Michael, 4 Praeger, Robert Lloyd, 114 Preboreal, 123 Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy (PRIA), 21, 92 Ptolemy, 19–20, 53 n. 70, 53 n. 71, 108, Fig. 2.6; Geographia, Fig. 2.6, 19, 90 n. 1 Publius, 149 n. 108 Pulborough, Sussex, 52 n. 53 Pumsaint-Dolaucothi, Carmarthenshire, 34, 55 n. 200 Putland, Mr, 129 Queen’s University, Belfast, 35–7, 149 n. 89; 14CHRONO Centre for Climate, the Environment and Chronology, 119 Quintus Petillius Cerialis, 29, 52 n. 45 Raffin (Fort), Co. Meath, 164–5, 172 n. 90, 172 n. 91 Raftery, Barry, 4, 9 n. 13, 11, 14, 19, 21, 51 n. 4, 51 n. 11, 51 n. 21, 59, 94–5, 90 n. 11, 92, 111 n. 56, 130, 162, 170; Pagan Celtic Ireland, 21; Raftery types, 26, 37, 39, Fig. 2.16 Rance, Philip, 35 Randalstown, Co. Meath, 28, 166 Rassman, Knut, vii, ix Rath, Co. Meath, 130, 141, 166, Fig. 7.9 Rathcroghan, Co. Roscommon, 162 Rathdooney Beg, Co. Sligo, 130 Rathfarsan, Co. Westmeath, Fig. 5.2 Rathgall, Co. Wicklow, 157, 171 n. 32, 177 Rathgurreen, Co. Galway, 39 Rathlin Island, Co. Antrim, 112 n. 77 Rathnew, Co. Westmeath, 117, Fig. 5.2 Rathra, Co. Roscommon, 164 Ratoath, Co. Meath, 141, 168, 173 n. 144, Fig. 7.10 Raynestown, Co. Meath, 88 Reading, University of, 51 n. 32, 56 n. 220, 148 n. 2 Real-time Kinematic (RTK) GPS, 5 Rechra, see Portrane, Co. Dublin, and Lambay, Co. Dublin Restormel, Cornwall, 33–4 Rhine/Rhenish, 18, 31, 177; limes, 9 n. 18, 23, 29 Richborough, Kent, 21–2, 43, 130, Fig. 2.21 Rijswiijk, the Netherlands, 31 Roestown, Co. Meath, 89–90 Rogers, Adam, 44 Roman Diaspora Project, 148 n. 2; see also Reading,

University of Roman inscriptions of Britain (RIB), 52 n. 44, 184 n. 31, Fig. 2.26 Romanisation, 13, 20 Römisch-Germanische Kommission, Deutsches Archäologisches Institut (RGK/DAI), Frankfurt am Main, Germany, vi–ix, 111 n. 26, 182, 183 n. 9 Roscommon (county), 14, 155 Rosepark, Co. Dublin, 155, 159–60, 168, 172 n. 46 Rossnaree, Co. Meath, 130, Table 6.1 Rougham, Suffolk, 130 Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland (RCAHMS), 52 n. 47 Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Wales (RCAHMW), 57 n. 282 Royal Irish Academy (RIA), 141; Wilde collection, 92 Rush Demesne, Co. Dublin, Fig. 3.7, Fig. 3.24 Rush, Co. Dublin (townland), 59, 62, 74, Fig. 3.7, Fig. 3.20, Fig. 3.21, Fig. 3.24 Rynne, Etienne, 92–3, 95–6 Sabrina, 44; see also River Severn Sagittarius, 182 St Mac Cuilinn, see Cuinnid mac Cathmoga St Patrick’s, Dublin, dean of, 92 Saintfield, Co. Down, 14, 166 Sallymount, Co. Limerick, 160–1, 172 n. 51 Samian ware, 17–18, 22, 28–9, 39, 52 n. 53, 54 n. 110, 159, 177–8; Dressel, 37 178 Saxon/s, 45, 96, 147 Scandinavia, 9 n. 18, 31, 55 n. 182, 140, 147, 169, 179 Schot, Roseanne, vii, ix, 6, 90 n. 1, 111 n. 66, 114, 125 n. 8, 179 Schweitzer, Holger, 130 Scotia, 20 Scotland, 2, 12, 16–17, 19, 29, 32, 49, 51 n. 13, 52 n. 47, 55 n. 169, 55 n. 189, 96–7, 111 n. 13, 139, 175, 181–2 Scotti, 35, 45, 53 n. 74 Sea Mills (Abonae), Bristol, 26–7 Severn, River, 44; Severn Bore, 44; Severn Estuary, 96–7 Severn Valley region, 129, 173 n. 129 Severn Valley ware, 28, 62, 177 Severus Alexander, 41 Sextus Julius Frontinus, 29, 54 n. 140 Shakenoak, Oxfordshire, 38 Shannon, River, 14 Shaw, Robert, 9 n. 1 Shenick Island, Co. Dublin, 62, 93 Síd Nechtain, see Carbury Hill, Co. Kildare Sikora, Maeve, 130 Síl Lughdeach, 57 n. 283 Silchester (Calleva Atrebatum), Hampshire, 15, 51 n. 32, 94, 181–2 217

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:28 Page 218

Late Iron Age and ‘Roman’ Ireland Silures, 54 n. 140 Sims-Williams, Patrick, 53 n. 71 Sindbaek, Søren, 177 Six Hills, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, 130 Skerries, Co. Dublin, 27, 59, 62, 93 Skreen, Co. Meath, 60, 159, 171 n. 45 Slaney, River, 41 Sligo (county), 24–5; town, Fig. 6.1 Sol, 58 n. 298; cult of Sol Invictus, 47 Somerset, Co. Galway, 37 Somerset, England, 27 Sotheby’s, 26 Southampton, University of, 9 n. 35, 9 n. 43 Spain/Spanish, 8, 18, 56 n. 217, 181, 184 n. 38 Spetisbury Rings, Dorset, 14, 128 Standard Mean Ocean Water, 133 Standish, Christopher, 6–7, 9 n. 1, 9 n. 43, 51 n. 1, 131, 183 n. 13 Stanegate, 17–18, 52 n. 41 Stefanini, Bettina, 125 n. 2 Stevenson, Jane, 181 Stonehenge, Wiltshire, 147 Stoneyford, Co. Kilkenny, 38, 41, 129–30, 157, 166, 173 n. 130, 182 Streamstown, Co. Westmeath, 125 n. 8 Strokestown, Co. Roscommon, 38 Stuijts, Ingelise, 6–7, 28 Styx, River, 129 Suebi, 52 n. 46 Suetonius, 55 n. 198 Suir, River, 46 Sunday Times, 21–2 Symmachus, 20, 53 n. 74, 147 Syria, 17 Tacitus, 16, 18–19, 52 n. 38, 52 n. 46, 55 n. 166; Agricola, 52 n. 46 Tairired na dDésse (‘the wanderings or expulsion of the Déisi’), 35 Tamil, 23; Sangam literature, 23, 54 n. 121; Yavanna (Romans), 23 Tara (Hill of), Co. Meath, vii, ix, 1, 21–2, 31–2, 43, 46, 55 n. 184, 57 n. 271, 60, 117, 130, 140–1, 148 n. 14, 153, 159, 162–5, 168, 173 n. 126, 174 n. 150, 179–80, 184 n. 26, Fig. 7.7; Ráith na Ríg, 37, 44, 163–4, 168–9, Fig. 7.7; Rath of the Synods, 4, 21, 24, 28, 31–2, 39, 43–4, 55 n. 157, 141, 147, 148 n. 42, 153, 157, 159, 162–5, 168, 172 n. 85, 177, 182, Fig. 7.7, Table 6.1; region, 165 Tara Project, Discovery Programme, 1 Tara Research Project, vii, ix; see also NUI Galway Tarnavie, Perthshire, ring, 95 Teltown, Co. Meath, 164 218

Templeogue, Co. Dublin, 41 Thames areas, London, 26 Thebaudeau, Benjamin, 90 n. 21 Theodosius the Elder, 45 Thermo Fisher Scientific Element 2 magnetic-sector, 133 Thermo Fisher Scientific Triton thermal-ionisation multicollector mass spectrometer, 133 Thomas, Siân, 111 n. 66 Thomastown, Co. Dublin, 62, 75, 79–82, 88–90, Fig. 3.7, Fig. 3.24, Fig. 3.28, Fig. 3.29, Fig. 3.30 Tilley, Christopher, 2 Tintagel, Cornwall, 46, 146 Tipperary (county), 51 n. 24, 153 Titus, 26 Tlachtga, Co. Meath, 164 Tobernaslath, Co. Westmeath, 117, Fig. 5.2 Togherstown, Co. Westmeath, 117, Fig. 5.2 Toleration, Edict of, 47 Trajan, 11, 26, 30, 34, 41, 43, 51 n. 9, 55–6 n. 201, 92–3, 129; marketplace and forum in Rome, 34 Tralee, Co. Kerry, Fig. 6.1 Transition Year, 8 Transylvania, Romania, 37 Traprain Law, East Lothian, 32, 38, 55 n. 189, 57 n. 264, 177, Fig. 2.13 Trethurgy, Cornwall, 32, 52 n. 59, 55 n. 193 Trier, Germany, 35 Trimble 5800 series instrument, 5 Trimontium, 55 n. 187; see also Eildon Hill, Scottish Borders, and Newstead, Scottish Borders Trinity College Dublin (TCD), vii, ix, 2, 8 Trinovantes, 26 Tuam, Co. Galway, Fig. 6.1 Túathal Teachtmar, 21 Tullamore, Co. Offaly, Fig. 6.1 Tullylish, Co. Down, 173 n. 94 Tulsk, Co. Roscommon, 9 n. 52 Turkey, 58 n. 297 Turoe Stone, 141 Twinn, Peter, 111 n. 44 Twitter, 8 Uí Néill, 114 Uisneach, Co. Westmeath, vi, viii, 6, 113–26, 153, 164, 180, Fig. 5.2; Cat Stone, 114, 123, Fig. 5.2; landscape, 6; Lough Lugh, vi, viii, 6, 113–26, Fig. 5.2; St Patrick’s Bed, Fig. 5.2, Fig. 5.3; St Patrick’s Well, Fig. 5.2, 117 Uley, Gloucestershire, 38, 44 Ulster Museum, 7, 43 UNESCO, 9 n. 50 United Kingdom, 7, 9 n. 46 United States of America/American, 2, 8, 20 University College Cork (UCC), 9 n. 42, 46, 146

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:28 Page 219

Index University College Dublin (UCD), 8, 53 n. 90, 54–5 n. 152; School of Archaeology, 6 Uppåkra, Scania, Sweden, 31, 55 n. 182 Ushnagh Hill, see Uisneach, Co. Westmeath Usipetes, 52 n. 46; see also Usipi Usipi, 17, 52 n. 46; see also Usipetes Valens, 41 Valentinian, 175 Valentinian II, 41 Valerie J. Keeley Ltd, 137–8, 142 Valloby, Denmark, 129, Fig. 2.12 vaquero tradition, 56 n. 217 Varpelev, Denmark, 129, Fig. 2.12 Vechten, the Netherlands, 94 Venus 14, 51 n. 24 Venutius, 51 n. 9 Vespasian, 26, 43, 54 n. 120 Via Sagularis, 17 Victorian, 20, 53 n. 80 Viking, 108, 112 n. 77 Vimose, Funen, Denmark, 31, 35 Vindolanda, Northumberland, 17, 23, 52 n. 41, 182 Viroconium, see Wroxeter Vitalius, 182 Voss, Hans-Ulrich, vii, ix VPDB international standard, 133 VRSnow correction service, 5

Wales 18, 27, 32, 34, 35, 52 n. 48, 52 n. 59, 53 n. 61, 54 n. 140, 55 n. 190, 94, 146, 177–8, 180–2 Walesby, Lincolnshire, 49–50 Wanborough, Wiltshire, 38 Warner, Richard, 19, 21–2, 39, 56 n. 232, 130 Wash, the, England, 96–7 Waterford (county), 46, 176; town, Fig. 6.1 Waterunder, Co. Louth, 157, 171 n. 35 Well of Segais, see Carbury Hill, Co. Kildare Wells, Peter, 31, 45, 51 n. 2, 55 n. 172 Western Stone Forts Project, Discovery Programme, 1 Westmeath (county), 182 Wetterau, Germany, 55 n. 173 Wexford (county), 46; town, Fig. 6.1 Wheeler, Sir Mortimer, 57 n. 279, 111 n. 22 Wheeler, Lady Tessa, 57 n. 279 Whitfield, Niamh, 49 Whittaker, C.R., 55 n. 163 Whittaker, Jane, 90 n. 21 Wigg-Wolf, David, 41–2 Wiltshire, 44, 96–7 Windmill Hill, Co. Meath, 60 Witham, Essex, 49–50 Woolliscroft, D.J., 29 Worcestershire, Fig. 2.19 Wright, R.P., 52 n. 44, 184 n. 31 Wroxeter (Viroconium), 181–2 Yorkshire, 51 n. 21, 98, 139

Waddell, John, 22 Walbrook, London, 58 n. 297

Zugmantel, Germany, 95

219

9-DPR8(biblio)_Layout 1 16/10/2014 16:28 Page 220