Neolithic and Bronze Age Landscapes of North Mayo: Report 2011

Neolithic and Bronze Age
Landscapes of North Mayo:
Report 2011
Edited by
Seamas Caulfield, Gretta Byrne, Noel Dunne
and Graeme Warren
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
www.ucd.ie/archaeology/nbnm2011
INSTAR2

Neolithic and Bronze Age Landscapes
of North Mayo: 2011 Report
Seamas Caulfield, Gretta Byrne, Noel Dunne and
Graeme Warren (eds)
And reports from
Meriel McClatchie, Emmett O’Keeffe and Helen Roche
Not for public circulation
December 2011
i

Table of Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................... 1
Work Packages One and Two ................................................................................................................. 2
Work Package Three ............................................................................................................................... 3
Part One: Specialist Reports
Creating Digital Archaeological Landscapes: An archaeological GIS for the
NBNM project, by Emmett O’Keeffe. ............................................................. 5
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 5
Aims ........................................................................................................................................................ 5
Datasets .................................................................................................................................................. 6
Results ..................................................................................................................................................... 7
Outputs ................................................................................................................................................. 12
Radiocarbon Dating ..................................................................................... 13
Charcoal analysis from Neolithic and Bronze Age landscapes of North Mayo,
by Lorna O’Donnell ...................................................................................... 21
Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 21
Sampling strategy.................................................................................................................................. 21
Methodology ......................................................................................................................................... 21
Results ................................................................................................................................................... 23
Glenulra enclosure E24 Middle Neolithic ............................................................................................. 24
Glenulra Scatter 92E140 Middle Neolithic ............................................................................................ 25
Céide Visitor Centre (E494) Late Neolithic/Early Bronze Age ............................................................... 26
Belderg Beg E109 Early/Middle Bronze Age ......................................................................................... 28
Rathlackan E580 Early/Middle Neolithic to Early Bronze Age. ............................................................. 36
ii

Discussion.............................................................................................................................................. 41
Summary ............................................................................................................................................... 46
Acknowledgements:.............................................................................................................................. 46
References ............................................................................................................................................ 47
Analysis of non-wood plant macro-remains, by Meriel McClatchie .............. 84
Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 84
Methodology ......................................................................................................................................... 84
Plant macro-remains recorded ............................................................................................................. 84
Discussion.............................................................................................................................................. 89
Recommendation for retention/deaccessioning .................................................................................. 92
Conclusions ........................................................................................................................................... 92
References ............................................................................................................................................ 93
Part Two: Draft Chapters
Soils and Geology, by Graeme Warren ......................................................... 97
Geology ................................................................................................................................................. 97
Deglaciation and sea level change ...................................................................................................... 100
Sea level .................................................................................................... 101
River processes ................................................................................................................................... 102
Soils ..................................................................................................................................................... 102
References .......................................................................................................................................... 105
History of Archaeological and Related Research in North Mayo, by Seamas
Caulfield .................................................................................................... 106
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 106
Archaeological Research ..................................................................................................................... 107
The Belderrig Valley Research: Belderg Beg Excavations. .................................................................. 110
iii

Scientific Research associated with the Archaeological Projects. ...................................................... 112
The North Mayo Research and the Public .......................................................................................... 113
New Research and Researchers .......................................................................................................... 115
Bibliography ........................................................................................................................................ 116
Probed Surveys: Erris, Céide Fields and Belderg More, by Seamas Caulfield
.................................................................................................................. 117
Traditional Turf Cutting in North Mayo .............................................................................................. 117
The Erris Survey................................................................................................................................... 118
The Céide Fields Survey ...................................................................................................................... 119
Belderrig Valley: The Belderg More Survey ....................................................................................... 121
Survey on the Glenamoy – Bartnatra Peninsula, by Noel Dunne ................ 123
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 123
Study Area ........................................................................................................................................... 123
Megalithic tombs, cists and stone circles ........................................................................................... 126
Prehistoric boundaries ........................................................................................................................ 130
Prehistoric settlements ....................................................................................................................... 137
Overall prehistoric settlement areas and voids .................................................................................. 139
Bibliography ........................................................................................................................................ 142
Survey from Ballinglen to Rathfran Bay, by Gretta Byrne ........................... 143
Research Outline and Methodology ................................................................................................... 143
Field Walls ........................................................................................................................................... 144
Associated Structures ......................................................................................................................... 149
Discussion............................................................................................................................................ 151
References .......................................................................................................................................... 154
iv

Acknowledgments
This report is the product of many years of work, from many different people, far too numerous to
name here. The projects summarised by the NBNM project here, over the years, have received
funding from many different sources – indeed, the projects summarised offer in many senses a
history of Irish archaeology and the availability of funding, from emergency labour schemes through
to varied research grants. Where specific funding has been provided for particular projects these are
discussed in text. The contribution of volunteer labour, especially that of students, to the success of
the projects over the long term should also be noted.
The Neolithic and Bronze Age Landscapes of North Mayo project has been supported by INSTAR and
INSTAR2 in 2009-2011, following a pilot in 2008 supported by the Heritage Council’s unpublished
excavations scheme. We are extremely grateful for this support, without which it would not have
been possible to develop the project and to be as close to final publication of this material as we
now are.
v

Introduction
This report reviews the work carried out as part of the Neolithic and Bronze Age Landscapes of North
Mayo (NBNM) project in 2011. The NBNM project will bring to final publication critically important
aspects of the Neolithic and Bronze Age archaeology of North County Mayo, specifically Caulfield’s
survey and excavation in Belderrig; survey/excavation by varied parties at ‘Céide Fields’; Byrne’s
survey and excavation at Rathlackan and Dunne’s survey work in Pollatomas.
The buried landscapes of the Céide Fields are iconic for Irish archaeology, of international
significance and were included on the Irish tentative list of World Heritage Sites. According to this
designation the Céide Fields and associated landscapes have ‘outstanding universal value’:
“The significance of the Céide Fields lies in the fact that along with their associated megalithic
monuments and dwelling structures they provide a unique farmed landscape from Neolithic times.
Not only are they "an outstanding example" but they are the outstanding example of human
settlement, land‐use and interaction with environment in Neolithic times. The first adoption of
farming occurred at different times throughout the world. Nowhere else is there such extensive
physical remains of a Neolithic farmed landscape surviving from this significant period in prehistory.”
(http://whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/5524/: original emphasis)
The current project extends the success of the Céide Fields work in outreach and attempts to
remedy the lack of full academic publication of this material, which is recognized as of international
significance. Our initial proposed model for the project has been a three year project resulting in:
- an academic monograph detailing the results of survey, excavation and further specialist work
carried out in the region
- a book targeted at the general public outlining the nature, significance and future of these
archaeological landscapes
Two phases of work with INSTAR funding have been completed to date following a preliminary
phase in 2008, supported by the Heritage Council’s unpublished excavations grant; in 2009 registers
for artefacts and samples and stratigraphic reports were generated. In 2010 specialist analyses of
artefacts and assessments of environmental data were undertaken, along with some illustration of
artefacts and C14 dating. Digitising of extant plans was undertaken and a robust spatial framework
provided for same. In 2011 we made a minor modification to our proposed timeline, recognising the
considerable complexity of some of the sites. We proposed to complete substantial components of
the final volume, including full reports on the excavations at and near the main part of the Céide
Fields complex – the area immediately surrounding the Céide Fields Visitor Centre (‘Céide Hil). In
2012 we will complete the reports for Belderg Beg and Rathlackan and finalise synthesis and
interpretation. We are providing two reports for INSTAR. This document collates all draft texts and
reports produced this year – it is not intended for public consumption. It is accompanied by a
substantial report on the excavations at Céide Hill which can be published on line.
1

Fe
br
ua
ry
M
arc
h
April May June July
Aug
ust
Sept Oct Nov Dec
Work Package One: staffing
Student volunteers ‐digitising/processing, fieldsurvey
registering grants/contracts
Research assistant: provision of illustrations, distribution
maps (Four Months, PT)
Work Package Two: eco‐fact anaylsis
Specialist reports
C 14 dating
Work Package Three: final chapters
Survey: Céide Fields and Belderrig
Survey: Rathalackan and area
Survey: Pollatomas and area
Behy
Glenulra Enclosure
Céide Fields Visitor Centre
Glenula Scatter
Soils, Geology etc.
History of Research
Draft of popular text
Work Package Three: dissemination
Ongoing
Work Package Four: reporting for INSTAR
Reporting requirements
Figure 1: Indicative work plan for NBNM2011 as presented in initial proposal
Work Packages One and Two
Five main bodies of work have been carried out in order to support the final production of texts:
charcoal analysis (Dr Lorna O’Donnell), non-wood plant macrofossils analysis (Dr Meriel McClatchie),
GIS work (Emmett O’Keeffe), the provision of radiocarbon dates and, finally, artefact illustration. Full
reports on the first four of these are included here, with illustrations used in the reports as
appropriate.
- Charcoal Analysis, by Lorna O’Donnell
- Plant remains, by Meriel McClatchie
- GIS and Spatial Archive, by Emmett O’Keeffe
2

- A summary of the radiocarbon dating programme, by Graeme Warren
Work Package Three
Substantial drafts of final chapters have been produced for all the areas noted above. Some sections
are final and will be made publically available, others will require editing in the context of the final
volume as a whole and we would not wish these to be public at this stage. We include all of these
drafts here. This includes:
- A background to soils and geology, by Graeme Warren
- A History of Research in North Mayo, by Seamas Caulfield
- Survey work at Céide Fields and Belderrig, by Seamas Caulfield
- Survey work at the Glenamoy – Bartnatra Peninsula, by Noel Dunne
- Survey work at Ballinglen to Palmerstown River, by Gretta Byrne
- Excavations at Behy Court tomb 1963-4 and 1969, by Sean Ó Nualláin, Madeline Murray,
and Graeme Warren
- Excavations at Glenulra Enclosure 1970-1972, by Seamas Caulfield and Graeme Warren
- Excavations associated with the construction of the Céide Fields Visitor Centre 1989-1993,
by Gretta Byrne, Noel Dunne and Graeme Warren
- Excavations at the Glenulra Scatter, by Gretta Byrne: this now incorporated into the Visitor
Centre report.
Where a chapter is not ready for publication at this stage a paragraph at the start of the chapter
summarises the work required for completion. The four excavation reports are not included here;
these have been combined with a further text providing an outline model of chronology for the
Céide Hill sub-system. This is ready to be made available to the public as the first synthetic
publication of the results of 40 years of archaeological excavations on Céide Hill.
Caulfield and Downes continue to work on a draft of popular text. Many of the sections outlined
above, especially those by Caulfield, will be used in the more popular account of A Landscape
Fossilised.
3

Part One:
reports on specialist work
4

Creating Digital Archaeological Landscapes: An
archaeological GIS for the NBNM project.
Emmett O’Keeffe, UCD School of Archaeology
Introduction
This report outlines the construction of a GIS for digitally managing and analysing the spatial
component of the NBNM archive. The report introduces the aims and methodology of the GIS
component before outlining the main foci and outcomes of work.
Aims
The general aim of the GIS component of the NBNM project is to digitise the paper archive of four
decades of research on the prehistoric landscapes of North Mayo. This paper archive includes large
and small-scale plans of sub-peat and extant fieldwall survey, plans of excavation cuttings from a
number of excavations of prehistoric sites and detailed mid- and post-ex plans from a number of
excavations. The GIS portion of the NBNM project has focused on the digitisation of the paper
archive; the georectification of all relevant plans; the digitisation of the majority of these plans; the
integration of these with other relevant landscape datasets and the production of outputs.
The paper archive consists of 347 drawings, of these, 288 were scanned as part of Phase 1 with the
remainder being scanned as part of phase 2. These drawings are from a variety of sources such as
original primary drawings, excavation reports and MA theses (Byrne 1986, Dunne 1985). These
drawings vary in source type and consist mainly of: pencil drawings on permatrace, inked drawings
on permatrace, pencil drawings on paper, digitally printed or photocopied drawings. The original size
of these drawings can vary quite considerably from extremely large sheets of permatrace
representing landscape-scale plans of sub-peat fieldwalls to A4 sized plans of numerous excavation
trenches from a variety of archaeological sites.
A methodology was devised to include all relevant drawings within one integrated GIS to allow a series of
analytical and representative options in the future.
The scanning methodology established during phase 1 of the GIS project has been continued. All
image scans are monochrome lineart or greyscale, decisions on the most suitable selection were
made on a case by case basis to produce the clearest images possible from the original paper
archive. A standard scanning resolution of 400 dpi was used and was increased for 80 images when
deemed necessary. All images were saved as .tiff format. Scanned images are organized into folders
by date of scanning and all images follow the nomenclature ‘Scan_###_sitename.tif’, for example,
‘Scan_025_Rathlackan.tif’.
One of the key goals of this project has been the georeferencing of plans of both regional fieldwall
surveys and excavations. Georeferencing an image ties that image into a spatial framework so that it
can be accurately plotted within a framework such as the Irish National Grid. A series of images,
representing the key foci for this project have been georectified. These vary from regional sub-peat
fieldwall plans to plans of individual excavation trenches. This georectification forms the basis for all
digitising work undertaken. Due to the diverse generation methods of the paper archive and the
variation between different projects and different spatial scales a number of methods have been
used to georectify images relating to different geographic foci.
5

Figure 1: student volunteers played a very significant role in digitising plans from
excavations
A tiered file structure is used for all data within the project (Figure 2). This tiered file structure for
archaeological data follows the path: NBNM GIS > Archaeological_data > Regional_landscape_name
> and is then divided into subfolders containing data relating to spatial information and digitised
shapefiles. Each digitised shapefile is contained within a folder relating to the specific scanned image
and the spatial location of that image, for example the particular excavation trench of a particular
archaeological site. The exception to this being the images and shapefiles of fieldwalls which are
contained within the folder path: Archaeological_data > Regional_survey >. As an example the
digitised shapefile for a mid-excavation plan (scanned as image 022) of cutting B at Rathlackan
would be NBNM GIS > Archaeological_data > Rathlackan_Ballinglen_landscape > shapefiles >
cutting_b > mid_ex > scan_022. This file structure is replicated within the organsiation of the GIS
layers.
Datasets
Key datasets have been constructed on the basis of the paper archive. These datasets are composed
mostly of shapefiles outlining features evident on both survey and excavation plans. Where features
(fieldwalls, excavation trenches, structural stones, spreads etc.) have been digitised each category of
feature has normally been given its own shapefile per digitised scan. Where necessary created
shapefiles have been given a variety of additional attributes (for instance where stones on an
excavation plan relate to different construction features) to allow more nuanced querying and
display of data. In addition a number of databases of small scale have been constructed to aid in
displaying key sites and features at a variety of spatial scales and to aid in spatially defining key
georectification anchors.
6

Figure 2: Data Model for NBNM GIS
Results
Regional Survey
All surveyed and identified sub-peat prehistoric fieldwalls have been georectified and digitised. The
original paper archive contains a wide range of paper plans at a variety of scales for different parts of
the sub-peat field systems of north Mayo. A variety of methods have been used in this programme
of georectification including the undertaking of recent high-grade GPS survey, the relation of
features (such as the boundaries of modern settlement as represented on the paper plans with) with
georectified aerial photographs and site visits. The level of spatial accuracy of the fieldwall
georectification varies across the region and in places, such as around the Céide Fields visitor’s
centre it is accurate to within 3 metres. However, the level of accuracy may drop in places (such as
around Ballyknock Hill) to approximately 10-15 metres due to the georectification method for
fieldwalls in these areas.
A series of structures identified as part of Gretta Byrnes survey of eastern north Mayo have been
georectified and digitised using co-ordinates derived from 1:2,500 OS maps. These structures have
then been overlaid on regional fieldwall maps and their accuracy demonstrated. However, due to
variation in the spatial accuracy of the north Mayo fieldwalls a statement of error in the region of 5-
10 metres is estimated for these structures.
7

Figure 3: survey work at Céide Fields, identifying key wall junctions to be probed and reidentified
in advance of GPS survey.
Behy Court Tomb
Plans of Behy court tomb which outline: the overall post-excavation extent of the tomb; and some
architectural detail of the chambers, the location of identified archaeological features and positions
of profile lines have been georectified on the basis of co-ordinates derived from recent high-grade
GPS survey. Given the method of georectification of these plans their spatial accuracy is of a high
degree (

Figure 4: example of outputs at Céide Fields Visitor Centre: all excavation trenches from
39 years of excavation: red –Behy (1963-1964, 1969); yellow - Glenulra Enclosure
(1970-1972); blue excavations in advance of the visitor centre (1989-1992)
Excavation plans were available in the archive for fifteen individual trenches, some demonstrating
different phases of excavation, and all of these have been digitised.
Belderg Beg
Trench locations for a series of excavation seasons at Belderg Beg have been georectified using a
combination of composite base plans, aerial photographs, high-grade GPS survey and site visits. The
majority of excavation trench locations have been positively identified during fieldwork and
accurately mapped (

Figure 5: Belderg Beg, Area F: example of GIS
Glenulra Enclosure
A composite base plan from a series of survey episodes (most recently by the UCD School of
Archaeology MA class) representing the major archaeological features of Glenulra enclosure has
been georectified and digitised. This georectification was undertaken using a composite of paper
base plans and recent high-grade GPS survey. Cross-checking with aerial photographs and multiple
episodes of GPS survey demonstrates a high-level of spatial accuracy (

Rathlackan
As a result of a lack of GPS survey points for the excavations at Rathlackan the base-plan for the site
has been georeferenced using values derived from the OSI online mapping service and translated
from ITM to NGR values. Following subsequent cross-checking against 1 metre resolution aerial
photographs an error of 5-10 metres must be taken into account for the Rathlackan excavation base
plan. A total of forty-four excavation plans from twelve separate cuttings have been georectified and
the vast majority of these have been digitised. As the base plan was used to georectify each of the
plans for the individual excavation cuttings the error of 5-10 metres is systematic and all plans are
internally consistent. The error could be corrected easily in the future by using high-grade survey.
Additional Datasets
A series of additional datasets derived from a number of contexts (SMR, EPA, GSI etc.) have been
incorporated into the GIS. This data has been simplified and displayed at a variety of scales to allow
outputs of value to the NBNM project. Figure X shows the relationship of fieldwalls, megalithic
monuments as recorded in the SMR and land use. This clearly demonstrates that fieldwalls do not
survive in areas of modern cultivation (green) although monuments do. The presence of both
fieldwalls and monuments in areas of bog (brown) suggests that walls and megaliths should be
found together and this implies that fieldwalls once covered the land suitable for cultivation as well.
In passing it should be noted that the SMR locations are not accurate for many monuments and that,
regardless of the errors noted above for the fieldwalls, they are more accurately located than most
of the SMR sites.
Figure 7: Land use and the survival of different aspects of the Neoltihic and Bronze Age
Landscapes of North Mayo
11

Landscape Modelling
Aerial photographs (1 metre resolution) and map-derived elevation data (50 metre resolution)
provided by Mayo County Council have been used as background display and analysis data within
the GIS. These datasets have also been used to created draped 3D digital landscape models of North
Mayo to which various aspects of the archaeological record have been added (such as the sub-peat
field systems). The elevation data has also been used to generate a series of coarse resolution
landscape models of viewsheds, aspects, slopes etc.
Figure 8: 3D view of Ballyknock ( on left) and main Céide Fields Complex,
looking South South West. 2x vertical exaggeration.
Outputs
A series of 2D plans moving in scale from the entire extent of the north Mayo sub-peat field systems
to individual excavation trenches have been produced. A series of short movies examining aspects of
the north Mayo sub-peat fieldwalls have been produced from the 3D landscape models.
The key output of this part of the NBNM project is the GIS itself which forms the basis for future data
management and output production. The GIS including all digitised data and outputs is currently 54
gigabytes and represents a significant archive for past research on the prehistoric archaeology of
north Mayo and a basis for future endeavours.
12

Radiocarbon Dating
A further tranche of radiocarbon dates were obtained in 2011. These are reported below, alongside
all archaeological C14 dates for the sites. Full discussion will take place in the appropriate final
reports.
13

Céide Visitor Centre
Cal Date (2 sigma)
Error
C14
Context
Species
Sample No
Feature No
Cutting
Lab Number
GrN-20032 19 - Plough mark 2390 40 750 - 380 cal BC
UB-18598 25 F.56 39 Betula sp. Charcoal layer site of Building 3672 30 2139 - 1957 cal BC
UCD-0268 25 F.56 37 bulk charcoal Charcoal layer site of Building 3660 50 2200 - 1890 cal BC
UCD-0271 25 F.56 38 bulk charcoal Charcoal layer site of Building 3800 50 2460 - 2040 cal BC
UCD-0272 10 B 35B bulk charcoal Hearth 3835 50 2470 - 2140 cal BC
UCD-0267 10 B 35A bulk charcoal Hearth 3840 50 2470 - 2140 cal BC
UB-18597 10B 35 Corylus avellana hearth (? Charcoal spread?) 3815 31 2434 - 2131 cal
UBA-16460 C F.3 3 Betula -charcoal Charcoal spread 3774 34 2296 - 2126 cal BC
UB-18596 H F.11 18 Betula sp. burnt organic layer 3722 31 2203- 2030 cal BC
UCD-0269 H F.9 21 bulk charcoal Charcoal spread 3600 50 2140 - 1770 cal BC
UCD-0270 H F.9 11 bulk charcoal Charcoal spread 3650 50 2200 - 1890 cal BC
UBA-16675 H F.9 16 Betula -charcoal Charcoal spread 3852 27 2459 - 2207 cal BC
UB-18595 H F.13 13 Ilex aquifolium fill of shallow trench 3791 28 2332-2137 cal BC
UBA-16461 H F.15 S.19 Maloideae -charcoal fill of ash pit, sealed by F9 4111 48 2873 - 2501 cal BC
14

RATHLACKAN
Lab Number
F no
S. No
Context
Beta-48102 F.6 Hearth of house 4110 60 2880-2490 cal BC
Beta-63836 F.6 Hearth of house 4040 60 2870-2450 cal BC
Material Dated
C14
Error
Cal Range
(95.4%)
Beta-76590 F.103 Slit in top of socket in SW end
Chamber 3
4130 80 2900-2490 cal BC
Beta-76586 F.30 With secondary pottery in
Chamber 3
3630 80 2210-1750 cal BC
Beta-76584 F.31 With secondary pottery in
Chamber 3
3640 80 2300-1750 cal BC
Beta-76585 F.44 Deposit in N end of CH 3
above basal stones
4090 70 2880-2480 cal BC
Beta-76588 F.58 Spread in Ch3 4640 80 3650-3100 cal BC
UBA-16467 F.95 S.69 Layer in Ch.3 corylus ‐charcoal 4674 25 3617 - 3370 cal BC
UBA-16466 F.87 S.67 Layer in Ch.3 corylus ‐charcoal 4685 26 3625 - 3371 cal BC
Corylus
UBA-18600 F.65 S.71 layer in Ch. 2
avellana
4655 43 3625 - 3356 cal BC
UBA-16463
Fill of pit in Chamber 3 corylus –
F.66 S.50
charcoal
3655 28 2134 - 1945 cal BC
Beta-76589 F.66 Fill of pit in Chamber 3 4390 240 3700-2300 cal BC
UBA-18599 F.66 S.64 Fill of pit in Chamber 3 Salix sp. 4121 31 2867 - 2579 cal BC
UBA-16462 F.21 S.14 Spread on court surface corylus – shell 4559 25 3483-3110 cal BC
Beta-76583 F.21 Spread on court surface 4110 90 2890-2470 cal BC
Beta-76587 F.21 Spread on court surface 4520 80 3500-2900 cal BC
UBA-16465 F.78 S.73 Stakehole in court corylus ‐shell 4641 25 3514 - 3361 cal BC
15

Cal Range
(95.4%)
Error
C14
Material
Dated
Context
S. No
F no
Lab Number
Beta-76591 F.68 Deposit surrounding hearth in
court
UBA-16464
black layer surrounding
F.68 S.61 hearth stone in court
UBA-16677
Thin layer of material under
F. 107 S.75 hearth in court
corylus ‐shell
corylus –
charcoal
4570 90 3650-3000 cal BC
4600 27 3498 - 3141 cal BC
4449 26 3333 - 3014 cal BC
16

GLENULRA ENCLOSURE
Notes
Cal BC (95.4% prob.)
Error
BP uncal
Description
Material
Sample
Cutting
Lab Code
SI-1464
bulk
charcoal 4460 115 3510 - 2880 cal BC
possibly
C.127
UBA-16676
F4
betula -
charcoal charcoal spread/hearth 4616 24 3498 - 3352 cal BC
possibly
C.127
17

BELDERG BEG
Cal BC
(95.4%
prob.)
Error
BP uncal
Description
Material
Sample
Cutting
Lab Code
AREA A
UBA-18594 A1 alnus charcoal from exterior EN vessel 3604 32 2110 - 1885 cal
BC
UBA-18591 A1 s.002 Betula charcoal adhering to quern stone 3753 28 2281 - 2040 cal
BC
SI – 1475 A2 bulk charcoal Charcoal associated with a flint scatter at in Area A2 2905 75 1370 - 900 cal BC
UBA‐16672 A2 S.096 horn (bovid) horn artefact 3482 42 1908 - 1691 cal BC
UBA‐16673 A2 S.097 horn (bovid) horn 2567 24 804 - 594 cal BC
QL-1689 A1 tree root, site A1 1630 30 340 - 540 cal AD
QL-1690 A1 charcoal site A1 3800 30 2350 - 2130 cal BC
AREA B: house
SI – 1474 B1 bulk charcoal Charcoal within the roundhouse associated with artefacts 2295 75 750 - 100 cal BC
UBA‐16670 B1 S.242 corylus – charcoal Charcoal sample from wall trench of Phase 1 round house: possible structural
wattle (C.109)
3077 25 1415 - 1271 cal BC
UBA‐16669 B1 S.201 Salix ‐charcoal Charcoal sample from wall trench of Phase 1 round house: possible structural
wattle (C.109)
3117 23 1441 - 1316 cal BC
SI – 1473 B1 Burnt block of wood from post hole of porch of phase 2/3 roundhouse. 3170 85 1640 - 1210 cal BC
18

Lab Code
Cutting
Sample
Material
AREA B: cultivation and
charcoal
GU-11268 B (?) basal peat Sample BB1: basal peat 2450 35 760 - 400 cal BC
GU-11269 B (?) basal peat Sample BB2: basal peat 2730 40 980 - 800 cal BC
UBA‐16671 B2A S.253 corylus – charcoal Charcoal sample, predates ard cultivation 3707 45 2272 - 1959 cal BC
Description
BP uncal
Error
Cal BC
(95.4%
prob.)
UBA-18593
UBA-18592
B2P
West
B2T
East
AREA C: fence posts
UBA‐16674 C1 S.294 quercus ‐wooden
fence post
s.322 betula 3536 29 1948 - 1769 cal
BC
s.235 salix sp. 3621 27 2114 - 1898 cal
BC
From pointed oak stake/post along line of the wall built on the peat 3546 46 2018 - 1750 cal BC
SI- 1472 C1 quercus ‐wooden
fence post
SI - 1471 C1 quercus ‐wooden
fence post
QL-1688 C1 quercus ‐wooden
fence post
From pointed oak stake/post along line of the wall built on the peat 3210 85 1690 - 1290 cal BC
From pointed oak stake/post along line of the wall built on the peat 3220 85 1700 - 1300 cal BC
From pointed oak stake/post along line of the wall built on the peat 3300 30 1670-1500 cal BC
19

TREES
Cal BC (95.4% prob.)
Error
BP uncal
Description
Material
Cutting
Lab Code
UBA‐16468 Belderg Beg pinus ‐wood tree 4437 25 3327 - 2934 cal BC
SI-1470 Belderg Beg pinus ‐wood tree 4220 95 3080 - 2490 cal BC
UBA‐16469 Geevraun pinus ‐wood tree 4026 24 2618 - 2474 cal BC
UCD-C47 Geevraun pinus ‐wood tree 4210 60 2920 - 2610 cal BC
UBA‐16470 Belderg More pinus ‐wood tree 4531 30 3361 - 3103 cal BC
UCD-C49 Belderg More pinus ‐wood tree 4580 60 3520 - 3090 cal BC
20

Charcoal analysis from Neolithic and Bronze Age
landscapes of North Mayo,
Lorna O’Donnell
Introduction
Charcoal is the product of chemical reactions that occur when wood is heated (i.e. thermal
decomposition) (Smart and Hoffman 1988, 172). It is frequently found on Irish archaeological
sites, in general in greater quantities than plant remains. Its uses in environmental
archaeology range from being a suitable material for radiocarbon dating, to an
environmental indicator.
This report describes the analysis of wood and charcoal samples from five sites in the Céide
fields complex Co. Mayo, excavated by Prof. Seamas Caulfield, Ms Gretta Byrne and Mr. Noel
Dunne.
During the excavations, bulk samples were taken for future environmental work. Current
funding under the INSTAR grant scheme by the Heritage Council has allowed for processing
and analysis of these samples. Previously, some charcoal analysis was undertaken by Mr.
Donal Synott from the National Botanic Gardens, Glasnevin. In 2010, the author was asked
to assess samples from five of the sites; Glenulra enclosure (E24) (Caulfield et al 2009a),
Glenulra Scatter (92E140) (Byrne et al 2009a), Céide Visitor Centre (E494) (Byrne et al
2009b), Belderg Beg (E109) (Caulfield et al 2009b) and Rathlackan (E580) (Byrne et al 2009c)
(O’Donnell 2010). Following this assessment and further sample processing, 82 samples
were selected for full analysis from the five sites.
The aims of the work are as follows:
• Assess suitable short lived material for radiocarbon dating
• Examine any wood selection strategies on the sites
• Compare woodland flora over time, incorporating other environmental data
Sampling strategy
The sampling strategy on site consisted mainly of targeted sampling of charcoal rich
deposits.
Methodology
Processing
Soil samples were processed in 2009-2010 by means of flotation. Mechanical flotation tanks
were used. This involved the agitation of the soil sample in a water filled tank lined with a
1mm nylon mesh. This releases the lighter environmental material (flot) such as seeds and
charcoal from the soil matrix. This lighter fraction is collected in a sieve of 300μm mesh size.
Once dry, the retent was sorted using a stack of sieves with a mesh size of 4mm, 2mm and
1mm. Charcoal larger than 2mm in size was sorted out of the retent and the flot, all seeds
21

are extracted and any finds (bone, pottery, flint and other such archaeological material) are
also sorted from the retent. All material retrieved from residue-sorting was recorded.
Charcoal identification
Each piece of charcoal was examined and orientated first under low magnification (10x-40x).
They were then broken to reveal their transverse, tangential and longitudinal surfaces.
Pieces were mounted in plasticine, and examined under a metallurgical microscope with
dark ground light and magnifications generally of 20x and 40x.
Wood identification
Each wood piece was identified by a first selection under a binocular microscope at a
magnification of 10x-40x. This was used to discern features such as ring growth or insect
channels. Samples one cell thick was taken with a razor blade from the transverse, radial and
tangential planes of the wood. Analysis of thin sections was completed under a transmitted
light microscope, at magnifications of 10x, 20x and 40x.
Each taxon or species will have anatomical characteristics that are particular to them, and
these are identified by comparing their relevant characteristics to keys (Schweingruber 1978;
Hather 2000 and Wheeler et al 1989) and a reference collection supplied by the National
Botanical Gardens of Ireland, Glasnevin.
Details of charcoal recording
The general age group of each taxa per sample was recorded, and the growth rates were
classified as slow, medium, fast or mixed. Any ring widths were measured using electronic
calipers. The ring curvature of the pieces was also noted – for example weakly curved annual
rings suggest the use of trunks or larger branches, while strongly curved annual rings
indicate the burning of smaller branches or trees (Figure. 1). Tyloses in vessels in species
such as oak can denote the presence of heartwood. These occur when adjacent parenchyma
cells penetrate the vessel walls (via the pitting) effectively blocking the vessels (Gale 2003,
37). Insect infestation is usually denoted by round holes, and is considered to be caused by
burrowing insects. Their presence normally suggests the use of decayed degraded wood,
which may have been gathered from the woodland floor or may have been stockpiled. Short
lived twigs with strongly curved annual rings were selected for radiocarbon dating.
Figure. 1 Ring curvature. Weakly curved rings indicate the use of trunks or large
branches. (Marguerie and Hunot 2007, p.1421).
22

Results
Overall charcoal
83 samples from five sites were fully analysed. 4196 charcoal fragments were identified,
including thirteen wood taxa. The main trees present are birch (Betula sp.), oak (Quercus
sp.), hazel (Corylus avellana) and alder (Alnus sp.). Other wood taxa include ash (Fraxinus
sp.), ivy (Hedera helix), holly (Ilex aquifolium), pomaceous fruitwood (Maloideae), pine (Pinus
sp.), willow (Salix sp.) yew (Taxus baccata), elm (Ulmus sp.) and alder/hazel (Alnus/Corylus)
(Figure 2, Table 1). Oak and willow were also identified from waterlogged wood samples
from Belderg Beg.
Pinus
0.1%
Maloideae
1.6%
Ilex
2.7%
Quercus
23.7%
Hedera
0.1%
Corylus/Alnus
0.0%
Salix
Taxus
0.0%
Ulmus
0.1%
7.4% Alnus
Alnus
15.5%
Betula
Corylus
22.7%
Fraxinus
0.3%
Betula
25.8%
Corylus
Corylus/Alnus
Fraxinus
Hedera
Ilex
Maloideae
Pinus
Quercus
Salix
Taxus
Ulmus
Figure 2 Total charcoal results from the five sites: N=4196 fragments
Alnus 650
Betula 1082
Corylus 954
Corylus/Alnus 1
Fraxinus 13
Hedera 3
Ilex 114
23

Maloideae 66
Pinus 3
Quercus 994
Salix 309
Taxus 1
Ulmus 6
Table 1 Total charcoal fragments from the five sites
Glenulra enclosure E24 Middle Neolithic
Charcoal was examined from S004, the fill of a hearth (contextual information taken from
the sample bag). Birch, oak, pine and yew were identified from this sample (Figure 3). Ring
counts range between two and four. Annual rings on the birch are strongly curved, indicating
branches. In contrast, both the oak and pine annual rings are weakly curved, suggesting they
were derived from larger branches or trunks. The presence of tyloses coupled with the
weakly curved annual rings in the oak suggests that heartwood was burnt. Growth rates are
medium (Table 2).
3%
55%
39%
Betula
Pinus
Quercus
Taxus
3%
Figure 3 Total charcoal from E24 : N= 33 fragments
24

Glenulra Scatter 92E140 Middle Neolithic
Charcoal was recorded from two contexts from this site, a charcoal rich spread (F6) (S005)
and a stakehole (F8) (S009) (Table 3). Five wood taxa were identified, the main tree present
is hazel.
Mainly hazel along with low levels of willow, pomaceous fruitwood, oak, and birch were
identified from the charcoal spread (F6). The level of charcoal within the posthole fill (F8) is
low. Two pieces of hazel and one fragment of pomaceous fruitwood were recorded from
here. The low level of charcoal within the posthole indicates that it was not burnt in situ but
more likely the post decayed or was removed. Charcoal present could be the results of on
site domestic burning.
Annual ring counts range between two and ten from Glenulra. All of the pieces are of
medium growth and have strongly curved annual rings, indicating that branches or twigs
were burnt.
5%
2%
5%
2%
Betula
Corylus
Maloideae
Quercus
Salix
86%
Figure 4 Charcoal identifications from 92E140: N=41fragments
25

Céide Visitor Centre (E494) Late Neolithic/Early Bronze Age
Charcoal was examined from nine contexts from this site (Table 4). Seven wood taxa in total
were identified including oak, birch, hazel/alder, pomaceous fruitwood, willow, hazel and
holly. The main tree present is birch (Figure 5).
3%
3%
9%
2%
0%
16%
67%
Betula
Corylus
Corylus/Alnus
Ilex
Maloideae
Quercus
Salix
Figure 5 Total charcoal identifications from E494 : N=462 fragments
Birch, hazel and willow were recorded from Cutting C F3 (S003). In comparison, mainly birch
with holly, pomaceous fruitwood, oak and willow were identified from Cutting H, F9 (S016) a
comparable charcoal layer.
From Cutting 10B (S035), a hearth, mainly hazel along with willow and oak were identified.
Previous work by Donal Synott of the Botanical Gardens in Glasnevin has also identified
these taxa, along with holly and alder.
Primarily birch, hazel and holly were recorded from Cutting H ‘Trench’ F13 (S013), while
birch, pomaceous fruitwood and willow were noted from Cutting H ‘Trench’ F14 (S022).
Two fills were examined from Cutting H, F19, an ash pit. F15 (S019) is the upper fill and it
contains birch, hazel, pomaceous fruitwood, hazel/alder, oak and willow. Below this, F16
(S029) an ashy layer was excavated, no charcoal was recorded in this sample. Birch, holly,
pomaceous fruitwood, oak and willow were identified from Cutting H ‘Trench’ F20 (S026).
26

Oak and birch were recorded from Cutting H, F24C (S028), the fill of a stakehole. The low
level of charcoal indicates that the post was not burnt in situ.
From Cutting 25, F56 (S039), a charcoal layer, birch, hazel, pomaceous fruitwood, oak and
willow were identified.
Annual ring counts range from 1 to 26 from the Céide visitor centre site. All of the fragments
have strongly curved annual rings suggesting the burning of branches or twigs with the
exception of oak from F9, F24C and F10B which has weakly curved rings. Growth is medium
in most cases, with the exception of birch from 24C which has a faster rate of growth. In the
author’s experience, willow and birch often have faster rates of annual growth than other
frequently identified Irish taxa such as hazel and alder.
fragment count
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
CTG C
F3
CTG
10B
CTG H
F9
CTG H
F13
CTG H
F14
CTG H
F15
CTG H
F20
CTG H
F24C
CTG H
F56
Salix
Quercus
Maloideae
Ilex
Corylus/Alnus
Corylus
Betula
Charcoal
rich soil
Trench Charcoal
rich soil
Trench Trench Ash pit Trench Posthole Charcoal
layer
Figure 6 Charcoal from different contexts E494: N=462
Most of the samples are derived from Cutting H, with the exception of F3 (Cutting C) F56
(Cutting 25) and Cutting 10B. The results are very homogenous, birch dominates all the
contexts with the exception of Cutting 10B which contains mainly hazel (Figure 6). Hazel is
also important in F24C, although this must be interpreted with caution, as only six fragments
in total were identified from the context. When the results are phased through time period,
it is clear that hazel and willow both play a larger role in the Early Bronze Age identifications
than during the Later Neolithic (Figure 7). F24C is dated tentatively to the Early Bronze Age
through association, the high levels of birch are comparable to both the Later Neolithic
samples (F15) and the Early Bronze Age ones (F3, 9, 13, 14 and 20).
27

fragment count
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
L Neo
EBA
Salix
Quercus
Maloideae
Ilex
Corylus/Alnus
Corylus
Betula
Figure 7 Phased identifications from E494 : N= 367 (L Neo = 47, EBA = 320).
Belderg Beg E109 Early/Middle Bronze Age
Charcoal was analysed from 48 samples from Belderg Beg (Table 5). A further thirteen
samples were assessed but not selected for analysis (Table 6). Ten wood taxa were identified
from the site; the results are dominated by oak, birch, alder and hazel (Figure 8).
0.0%
5.6%
26.6%
1.2%
2.5%
17.3%
0.1%
0.4%
21.9%
24.4%
Alnus
Betula
Corylus
Fraxinus
Hedera
Ilex
Maloideae
Pinus
Quercus
Salix
Figure 8 Total charcoal identifications E109 : N= 2933
28

35
30
no of samples
25
20
15
10
5
0
Alnus
Betula
Corylus
Fraxinus
Hedera
Ilex
Maloideae
Pinus
Quercus
Salix
Figure 9 No of samples each taxa occurred in
Birch was identified in 30 samples along with alder. Oak was noted in 29, while hazel was
recorded in 27 samples. These four main taxa were clearly frequently used across the site.
Willow was noted in 19, while holly was identified in 17. The rest of the taxa were identified
in 8 or less samples (Figure 9).
From Glenulra enclosure (E24), Glenulra Scatter (92E140), Céide Visitor Centre (E494) and
Rathlackan (E580) a sub-sample of 100 fragments was identified from each sample, following
recommendations from British sites (Keepax 1988, 200). Recent research from the author
has indicated that in prehistoric Irish sites, given our more limited floristic diversity than
Britain, it is suitable to analyse 80 fragments per sample (O’Donnell 2011, 56). Saturation
curves of when new taxa occurred were examined from Belderg Beg. From S319, the last
new species identified was holly at fragment 27 (Figure 10a). In comparison, the last new
species recorded from S324 was hazel and fragment 40 (Figure 10b). From S332, holly was
the last new species recorded at fragment 14 (Figure 10c). Based on these cumulative
frequency curves and previous research, it was aimed to identify 80 fragments from each
sample from Belderg Beg. The reason that this methodology was not applied to the other
sites is because they have a low number of samples and in the case of Rathlackan a low level
of charcoal generally. Therefore if present a sub-sample of 100 fragments was analysed from
these samples or if this number of fragments was not present, all identifiable pieces were
identified.
29

new taxa occurrence
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
fragment count
Figure 10a Saturation curve S319
5
new taxa occurrence
4
3
2
1
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
fragment count
Figure 10b Saturation curve S324
5
new taxa occurrence
4
3
2
1
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
fragment count
Figure 10c Saturation curve S332
30

Area A
A long length of Neolithic field wall and some associated features were identified from here,
which was located in the very centre of the site. The charcoal spreads, cattle horn, and a
range of other deposits seem to primarily date to the Early Bronze Age but include Iron Age
dates.
A small alder branch was located adhering to pot (find no). Some birch charcoal was
identified adhering to a quern (S. 002). A mixture of mainly oak, with hazel, birch and ivy was
noted from a shallow area near a pit (S. 019). Underlying a brown habitation layer, oak only
was identified from S. 022, which may indicate some structural remains. Mainly oak, hazel
and birch, along with pine and alder were identified from a charcoal spread (S. 035).
A charcoal spread in trench 1 contained birch, hazel, ivy and oak (S.027). A further charcoal
spread from this area contained mainly alder and birch (S.040).
A hazel branch was analysed which was found in association with a horn (S096). 25
fragments were identified, the ring width pattern indicate that these are all from the one
branch. Nine annual rings were counted on this roundwood. A high level of insect holes was
present indicating that the branch was quite degraded and insect ridden before it was burnt
(Plate 1).This may represent a hazel handle element which was fixed to the horn.
Plate 1 Insect holes from charcoal S096
31

Area B
Area B is located at the north east corner of the site and included the remains of a
substantial roundhouse (Caulfield et al 2009b, 10). The house may have three phases,
although clearly identifying which structural features date to which phase is problematic.
A variety of wood taxa including birch, hazel, ash, holly, pomaceous fruitwood, oak and
willow were identified from S. 200, taken from a pit under flat stones. Alder, birch, hazel and
willow were all noted from S. 205, which was sampled under small stones around the sill
stone. Alder, hazel, oak and willow were identified from a sample amongst stones (S234). A
charcoal spread in trench B2A contained alder, birch, hazel, oak and willow (S.253).
100%
fragment count
80%
60%
40%
20%
Salix
Quercus
Maloideae
Ilex
Corylus
Betula
Alnus
0%
201 213 226 238 241 242 255 254
Figure 11 Charcoal samples from constructional elements at E109 : N=457
Charcoal was identified from seven samples taken from the wall trench (Figure 11). Hazel is
the principal species in four of the samples (238, 241, 242, 254) indicating that it may be the
remains of wattle burnt in situ. In contrast, other samples from the wall trench (S201 and
S213) are composed of a mixture of pomaceous fruitwood and willow which could also
represent in situ wattle burning. A sample from a further foundation trench (S226) is also
dominated by hazel, while alder only was identified from posthole S255. This may be the
remains of an alder post burnt in situ.
In comparison to S255, a sample of burnt timbers (S236) was identified as alder only,
suggesting it may have been used in construction also.
Well preserved roundwoods were observed in S242. It was possible in one instance to
measure the ring widths on a hazel roundwood which is 22mm in diameter (Plate 2). This
32

piece was 17 years old when cut, bark still remains. Ring width measurements indicate that
the roundwood had medium to fast rate of growth for the first few years of its life,
particularly in rings 2-6 (from the pith outwards, yellow arrow). Subsequently, growth
declines (Figure 12a). The fastest rate of growth is 2.2mm per annum in Year 2. It may be
that the tree was in a stand of other hazel trees of similar age, which then had to compete
for light and nutrients as the shoots grew together.
Plate 2 Hazel roundwood from S242 E109
33

Growth of hazel S242
2.5
2
growth (mm)
1.5
1
0.5
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
years
Figure 12A
Oak and willow were identified from under the stone setting of a central flag (S246), while
oak only was identified beneath central flagging (S247). A sample of flint was noted to
contain burnt wood, which was identified as alder, birch, ash, holly, oak and willow (S252). A
sample of burnt wood was taken from the entrance trench (to the roundhouse?) oak only
was identified from this, indicating some sort of a structural element (S272). A sample from
between the upper and lower level of paving stones contained mainly alder, along with
pomaceous fruitwood and willow (S900).
fragment count
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
S319 B2P
S320 B2P
Figure 13 Charcoal from midden contexts B2P & B2T
Two discrete midden deposits were excavated at Belderg Beg, B2P and B2T. Both have been
independently dated to the Early Bronze Age. Charcoal was identified from sixteen contexts
34
S321 B2P
S322 B2P
S323 B2P
S324 BTP
S325 B2P
S326 B2P
S327 B2P
S328 B2P
S329 B2P
S330 B2P
S331 B2P
S332 B2P
S901 B2P
S902 B2P
S235 B2T
S256 B2T
S258 B2T
S257 B2T
S277 B2T
Salix
Quercus
Maloideae
Ilex
Fraxinus
Corylus
Betula
Alnus

elating to midden B2P and from five contexts relating to middle B2T. Figure 13
demonstrates that almost all of the B2P contexts have a very homogenous mix of birch and
alder (with the exception of S328). This is quite different from the samples from B2T, which
mainly contain oak and hazel. The charcoal data does not indicate that B2P and B2T are the
same deposit.
Annual ring counts range from 2-33 in the Belderg beg samples. Ring curvature is a mixture
between strongly and weakly curved, indicating the burning of a range of sized material.
Growth is medium to mixed.
Wood results
Twenty wooden posts were examined from Belderg Beg which had been preserved through
waterlogging. Subsequent drying of the wood made it difficult to record any detail except
the wood taxa. Fifteen of these were identified as oak, including samples 293, 295, 296 and
297 from Cutting C (Table 7). It is likely that these timbers represent fence posts and possibly
building material. Oak is a strong and durable material, therefore it is unsurprising that it
was selected for building at Belderg Beg. One willow post was also identified (S1151).
fragment count
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
EBA
MBA
Salix
Quercus
Pinus
Maloideae
Ilex
Hedera
Fraxinus
Corylus
Betula
Alnus
Figure 14 Phased charcoal identifications from Belderg Beg : N= 2928 fragments
(EBA 1904, MBA 1024).
When the charcoal data from the Early and the Middle Bronze Age are compared from
Belderg Beg, the levels of birch are higher during the Early Bronze Age. 705 fragments of
birch were identified from the Early Bronze Age, while only 9 were identified from Middle
Bronze Age samples. This is influenced by the high birch levels from the midden layer B2P.
Alder and oak are common during the two time periods. Both hazel and willow are more
35

important during the Middle Bronze Age than the preceding period. Willow increases
importance during the Middle Bronze Age.
Samples 19, 22, 27, 35 and 40 from cutting A1 are not directly dated to the Early Bronze Age,
rather they are dated by association. These were included in the overall counts for Figure 14.
When these samples are removed from the Early Bronze Age counts and compared with the
directly Early Bronze Age charcoal samples, some differences are evident. This is mainly
demonstrated by the higher levels of oak and lower birch counts in the associated contexts
(Figure 15).
fragment count
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
EBA dated through association
EBA directly dated
Salix
Quercus
Pinus
Maloideae
Ilex
Hedera
Fraxinus
Corylus
Betula
Alnus
Figure 15 Charcoal from Early Bronze Age contexts only
Rathlackan E580 Early/Middle Neolithic to Early Bronze Age.
Charcoal was identified from twenty four samples from Rathlackan (Table 8). A further
eleven samples were assessed and not selected for analysis (Table 9). Overall the level of
charcoal is low. Nine wood taxa were identified, including hazel, holly, pomaceous
fruitwood, pine, oak, willow, elm, alder and birch. The results are dominated by hazel, oak
and willow (Figure 16).
36

1% 6%
Corylus
1%
14%
25%
0%
2%
4%
47%
Ilex
Maloideae
Pinus
Quercus
Salix
Ulmus
Alnus
Betula
Figure 16 Total charcoal identifications from E580 : N= 727
25
sample occurrance
20
15
10
5
0
Corylus Ilex Maloideae Pinus Quercus Salix Ulmus Alnus Betula
Figure 17 Sample occurrence E580
As well as representing the highest fragment counts, hazel was identified in most (21 of the
24) samples from the site. Oak was the next most frequently recorded (13 samples) along
with birch (12 samples), willow (11 samples) and pomaceous fruitwood (8 samples) (Figure
17). Other taxa were identified in 4 or less samples.
The discussion follows the stratigraphic report (Byrne et al 2009c).
37

Features within the court Cutting C
Samples were assessed from three main types of features within the court, layers, a pit fill
and stakehole fills. Samples from five layers were examined (F21 S014, f64 S048, F68 S061,
F97 S060, and F107 S075 (Figure 18).
fragment count
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
F21 F64 F68 F97 F107
Salix
Quercus
Maloideae
Corylus
Betula
Figure 18 Charcoal from layers within the court
A low level of charcoal was observed within F21 and F107. Hazel was identified from both
samples, while willow was noted in F21 and pomaceous fruitwood in F107.
In contrast F64, F68 and F97 are more charcoal rich. These three layers were all found in an
area very close to the centre of the court (Byrne et al 2009c, 12). The uppermost was F64, a
small dark charcoal rich deposit. This was underlain by a flat hearth stone (F71). F68 was a
large spread of burnt black soil which surrounded the hearthstone. F71, a thin layer of grey
black sandy silt underlay the hearthstone. The results from F64 and F68 are quite similar,
both are dominated by hazel. Willow and birch were identified from both features also. Oak
was also identified from F64, and pomaceous fruitwood from F68. Oak only was identified
from F97. These fragments were generally weakly curved, with tyloses indicating the burning
of heartwood. The presence of only oak from F97 may indicate that it was the remains of a
structural oak plank or some form of wooden foundation which may have burnt in situ.
One fragment of willow and two of hazel were recorded from a pit fill, F93 (S063).
Forty stakeholes were located within the court. Charcoal was identified from three of these
(F40 S031, F41 S032 and F78 S073) (Figure 19). The main wood taxa identified from these
contexts are hazel. The low level of charcoal present, however, makes it unlikely that these
38

posts burnt in situ. Rather the post could have decayed or been removed and subsequently
infilled with charcoal from on site burning processes.
100%
90%
80%
fragment count
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
Quercus
Maloideae
Corylus
Betula
Alnus
20%
10%
0%
F40 F41 F78
Figure 19 Charcoal from stakeholes within the court
The Rear chamber Cutting F
Charcoal was identified from eight layers within the rear chamber (F30 S036, F31 S022 and
S038, F33 S034, F49 S042, F58 S045, F63 S047, F87 S066 and S067, F95 S069 (Figure 20). The
main taxa within this chamber are hazel, birch, oak and willow.
Charcoal from layers within the rear chamber
fragment count
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
F30 EBA F31 EBA F44 LN F49
E/MN
F58
E/MN
F63
E/MN
F87
E/MN
F95
E/MN
Ulmus
Salix
Quercus
Pinus
Maloideae
Ilex
Corylus
Betula
Alnus
Figure 20 Charcoal from layers within the rear chamber
39

The Middle Chamber Cutting H
Charcoal was examined from a layer of brown organic material with pottery inclusions from
the Middle Chamber, F65. A low level of oak only was identified from this context.
Rathlackan enclosure
Immediately to the east of the enclosure wall, a spread of charcoal rich material F27 was
excavated. Mainly hazel followed by willow, with some birch and oak were identified from
here.
The court walls
One sample (S059) was examined from F56, a curvilinear slot trench which appears to have
held the edging side of a kerb (Byrne et al 2009c, 11). A low level of charcoal was identified
from here (only six fragments) including oak, birch, hazel and alder.
Square building foundation (Cutting B).
A dense charcoal spread was located within the centre of the structure. Charcoal from this is
composed mainly of hazel roundwoods, with pith and bark still attached. Up to 20 annual
rings were counted on the pieces. A low level of birch was also identified from this context.
This is primary evidence of burning on the site, and indicates that hazel branches were
preferred for this function.
100%
fragment count
80%
60%
40%
20%
Ilex
Ulmus
Salix
Quercus
Maloideae
Corylus
Betula
Alnus
0%
E/MN MN LN EBA
Figure 21 Phased charcoal identifications E580: N=352 (E/MN 91, MN 31, LN 126,
EBA 104)
40

When the charcoal is examined through different time periods, it is clear that hazel
dominates the Neolithic samples, while the picture of woodlands during the Early Bronze
Age is quite different, being dominated by willow and elm (Figure 21).
Annual ring counts range from 1 to 20 in the Rathlackan material. Growth is medium, with
instances also of fast and slow growth. The fragments are mainly strongly curved, with some
weakly curved annual rings indicating the use of larger branches or trunks.
Discussion
It is generally assumed that fuel and wood will be gathered from as close to the site as
possible (Shackleton and Prins 1992) and therefore archaeological charcoal can reflect the
surrounding environment. There are of course problems with this principle, such as
particular species may have been selected over others and there are issues with charcoal
fragmentation. Yet, for the purposes of environmental reconstruction, charcoal can be used
to provide a floristic background to archaeological sites, particularly when integrated with
other environmental data. It is impossible to know, however, how close to or far away from
a site wood was gathered.
fragment count
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
E24 921E40 E494 E109 E580
Ulmus
Taxus
Salix
Quercus
Pinus
Maloideae
Ilex
Hedera
Fraxinus
Corylus/Alnus
Corylus
Betula
Alnus
Figure 22 Comparison of charcoal data from all sites: N= 4195
The Middle Neolithic Glenulra scatter (92E140) and Neolithic/Early Bronze Age Rathlackan
(E580) sites are similar in the high levels of hazel (Figure 22). More oak is evident in
Rathlackan than Glenulra, however. In contrast, both the Middle Neolithic Glenulra scatter
(E24) and the Late Neolithic/Early Bronze Age Céide visitor centre (E494) are dominated by
birch. The levels of oak are low within the Céide visitor centre while they are important in
the Glenulra enclosure. The highest number of fragments was identified from Belderg Beg
41

(E109). This is the only site on which alder is an important taxa and probably underlines the
wetland nature of the area. Birch, oak and hazel were also important from this site. The
roundhouse at Belderg Beg was made from oak posts, preserved by waterlogging (Caulfield
et al 2009b). Possible hazel, willow and pomaceous burnt wattle was also identified from
Belderg Beg.
Hazel was burnt in varying degrees on all sites with the exception of Glenulra. It will
frequently be found growing in association with oak. It is a medium sized, deciduous tree,
and can reach a height of 15m. It will grow on a wide range of soils, including limestone,
mildly acid soils and clays (Lipscombe and Stokes 2008, 102). Hazelnut shells dominated the
plant remains assemblage from Rathlackan, in comparison to the high levels of hazel wood
burnt on the site. No plant remains were evident in the samples from Glenulra scatter, which
had similar high percentages of hazel charcoal to Rathlackan (Mc Clatchie 2010). The tree
can re-generate rapidly and thus can be an indicator for secondary woodland expansion
(O’Connell and Molloy 2001, 104).
It is likely that local oak woodlands did grow in the vicinity, possibly on the upland slopes,
although continued presence of light dependent wood taxa does not indicate closed canopy
oak woodlands. It has the most importance on Glenulra, Rathlackan and Belderg Beg, indeed
it was used for building at the latter site. There are two native Irish oaks, and they cannot be
separated by wood anatomy. The two species will grow in quite different habitats. The
pedunculate oak (Quercus robur) will usually grow on heavy, lowland soils, where it will also
tolerate flooding. In contrast, the sessile oak (Quercus petraea) will grow on less fertile,
acidic soils. Oaks can reach a height of 40 metres and live for 1,000 years or more (Hickie
2002, 60). Pedunculate oak grows up to 25m high and can attain a girth of 9m. Sessile oak
can grow up to 40m high, and can reach a girth of 13m. Both trees can live up to 500 years
(Stuijts 2005, 142).
The importance of birch in the overall charcoal assemblage (25.8%) and its role in all sites
(except the Glenulra scatter) is interesting and unusual from a charcoal perspective. A
considerable impact on birch is evident at approximately 3890+-60BP, the switch from birch
to grasses may be indicative of increased pastoral farming (Molloy and O’Connell 1995, 220-
221). It is not possible to separate silver birch (Betula pendula) and downy birch (Betula
pubescens) through wood anatomy. Silver birch prefers dry conditions and will grow well on
light, dry soils (Lipscombe and Stokes 2008, 140), in contrast, however, the downy birch
prefers wetter conditions and will grow on poorly drained soils (Lipscombe and Stokes 2008,
178). It is likely that birch grew on shallow peat and in areas that were peat free (O’Connell
and Molloy 2001, 101) the species identified represents downy birch.
Two of the main wetland indicators from archaeological charcoal are willow and alder.
Willow was frequently identified at Rathlackan, Belderg Beg and Ceide. It was also identified
42

at Glenulra scatter. Alder was identified only at Belderg Beg, where it was important and at
Rathlackan where it was less so (22% and 1% respectively). Both these trees indicate the
presence of streams, mire or carr woodland. Ireland’s native tree is the black or grey alder
(Alnus glutinosa). It can often be seen growing on mire sufaces, alongside rivers, lakes, in
marshes or in fens. A consistent and abundant supply of moisture is essential for its
germination and early growth. The tree can grow up to 25m, and can attain a maximum girth
of up to 1m. The tree can reach ages of between eighty and one hundred years (Stuijts 2005,
139). Willows are not naturally a woodland species, although shrubby growth may occur
under light woodland cover. All willows favour wet conditions, and it may be a pioneer
species on wet soils (Orme and Coles 1985, 10).
A hint of scrub is noted from all of the sites with the exception of Glenulra (E24) with the
identification of pomaceous fruitwood (Maloideae). The Maloideae group, a sub family of
the Rosaceae includes crab apple, wild pear, rowan/whitebeam and hawthorn. It is
extremely difficult to separate these through wood anatomy. Crab apple (Malus sylvestris)
tends to be found on woodland edges (Hickie 2002, 55). Wild pear (Pyrus pyraster) is mostly
found as an isolated tree (Stuijts 2005). Rowan (Sorbus aucuparia) is a tough colonizer which
can tolerate peaty soils and exposed conditions. It needs plenty of light to thrive (Hickie
2002, 65). Whitebeam (Sorbus aria) grows up to 20m high and has a preference for
limestone soils (Orme and Coles 1985, 11). Hawthorn (Crataegus monogyna) can thrive in all
but the most acid of soils (Gale and Cutler 2000). As wild pear is not a native Irish species, it
is likely that the charcoal represents other types encompassed in the Maloideae group. A
possible endocarp (core) fragment of (crab-apple) was identified from C. 93 in Rathlackan
(Mc Clatchie 2010, 2), which may indicate that the Maloideae charcoal identified from that
site represents apple wood.
Pine was noted on Glenulra, Belderg Beg and Rathlackan. It prefers light, sandy soils, and
does not like sea winds or high rainfall. However, it can tolerate these conditions and
therefore grow on marginal land (Hickie 2002, 66). A comprehensive programme of
radiocarbon dating has been undertaken on bog pines from the Céide fields (Caulfield 1998).
A pine horizon developed in the area over 100 years, centered on 4150 BP (4700 cal. B.P.)
(Molloy and O’Connell 1995). In general, pine grew on the bog basin before the Neolithic
period but appears to have either no longer grown by the Neolithic period or to have been
present in very low amounts (O’Connell and Molloy 2001, 104-105). This is probably why
only three fragments were identified from the whole charcoal assemblage, still it does
demonstrate the trees presence (albeit sparse) into the Bronze Age.
Some other canopy trees identified from the charcoal assemblage include holly, yew and
elm. Holly was identified at the Ceide Visitor Centre, Belderg Beg and Rathlackan. Both yew
and elm were identified on one site only, Glenulra and Rathlackan respectively. Holly is a
hardy tree and can be found on higher, exposed ground or growing underneath taller forest
43

trees forming understorey (Hickie 2002, 59). Yew is an evergreen conifer that grows up to 20
metres. Older trees often divide into several distinct trunks. It prefers well-drained and
sheltered sites (Hickie 2002, 78).Elm trees will grow well on rich, alluvial soils and do prefer
riverine habitats (Gale and Cutler 2000, 264).
The low levels of ash are interesting from both the pollen and charcoal results. Ash trees
prefer moist, well drained and fertile soils (Lipscombe and Stokes 2008, 188). Given the
mineral soils in Belderg Beg are sandy and poor (Verrill and Tipping 2010, 1018) the soil may
not have been suitable in the area for its growth.
Charcoal identifications indicate different woodland types were being utilised, most likely
close to the sites. Canopy woodland is evident with oak, elm and holly. It is unlikely that this
woodland was closed canopy in nature, as light dependant shrub species such as pomaceous
fruitwood, hazel and birch were frequently identified. Nearby streams, rivers or bogland
could have supported wet or carr woodland and were most likely composed of alder and
willow.
fragment count
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
E/MN MN LN EBA MBA
Ulmus
Taxus
Salix
Quercus
Pinus
Maloideae
Ilex
Hedera
Fraxinus
Corylus/Alnus
Corylus
Betula
Alnus
Figure 23 Phased charcoal identifications from all sites
N= 3721 (E/MN 91, MN 105, LN 173, EBA 2328, MBA 1024)
Charcoal from the combined Céide sites provides the opportunity to examine woodland use
in Mayo from the Mesolithic period to the Middle Bronze Age. When the results are
compared by time period (Figure 23), hazel is very important during the Neolithic period.
Oak and birch were also frequently used during these times. Oak and hazel are often the
dominant species from Irish Neolithic sites, for example from an Early Neolithic hut site at
Sonnagh II, Co. Mayo (E3344) (O’Carroll forthcoming). As time progresses through the
Middle Neolithic to the Early Bronze Age, birch was increasingly burnt as fuel and must have
44

een freely available in the area. This is actually reflected in a dip in birch values at the start
of the Early Bronze Age (Molloy and O’Connell 1995). Hazel is more important during the
Middle Bronze Age than the preceding Early Bronze Age period. High values for alder are
only evident during the Early and Middle Bronze Age. When compared to charcoal data from
the nearby Mesolithic/Neolithic site of Belderrig, the results are comparable in the high
levels of oak and hazel (Figure 24). In contrast, birch was not important at Belderrig, while
the levels of pomaceous fruitwood are higher at Belderrig than at the Céide complex.
fragment count
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
1 (LM) 2a (LM/EN)) 2b (LM/EN) 3 (MN/LN)
Taxus
Salix
Quercus
Prunus spinosa
Prunus avium
Prunus
Pinus
Maloideae
Ilex
Fraxinus
Corylus
Betula
Alnus
Figure 24 Charcoal results from Belderrig (04E0893): N=540
Neolithic landscape
Evidently the field systems were cleared for use during the Neolithic, but both the pollen and
charcoal data suggest that a mosaic of different woodlands grew in the local vicinity. The
lack of clear dominance of oak charcoal, along with light demanding taxa such as hazel and
birch in both the pollen and charcoal all indicate that these woodlands were not closed
canopy in nature (Verrill and Tipping 2010, 1017).
Tree pollen from the Neolithic period in Belderg is dominated by Alnus, which is likely to
have grown on the mire surface (Verrill and Tipping 2010, 1015). The pollen indicates that
down slope of the archaeological site at Belderg Beg (E109) a shallow marsh developed
during the Neolithic, with a complex mosaic of vegetation growing around it, including
grassland, woodland and heath taxa (Verrill and Tipping 2010, 1017). This contrasts with the
charcoal results, from which only very low levels of alder were identified from the Neolithic
period. Wetland willow does have a consistent presence during the Neolithic period,
however.
45

During the later Neolithic period the bog surface became considerably wetter (c. 4970 cal
BP) (Verrill and Tipping 2010, 1017). While charcoal data for most likely wetland downy birch
increases steadily through the Neolithic period, an increase in wetland alder is not noted in
the charcoal identifications until the Early Bronze Age, where it remains an important part of
the charcoal assemblage.
Towards the end of the Neolithic, pollen data indicates that the bog basin became quite dry,
with an expansion of pine (4767-4707 cal. BP.) (O’Connell and Molloy 2001, 108). This is not
reflected in the charcoal identifications, only one fragment of pine were identified from one
sample dating to the Neolithic.
By the Early Bronze Age, birch, alder, oak and to a lesser extent hazel are the most important
woodland taxa in the charcoal record. Hazel becomes considerably more important during
the Middle Bronze Age, possibly indicating a further opening out of the landscape.
Summary
Charcoal was fully identified from 83 samples from the Céide field complex in Mayo.
Thirteen wood taxa were identified. A low number of waterlogged structural wood samples
were also identified. The results are dominated by birch, oak, hazel and alder. This mixture
of canopy and light demanding trees indicate that the woodlands which most likely fringed
the cleared fields were not closed canopy in nature. Furthermore, the wood taxa identified
indicate different types of woodland were being exploited, including wetland, scrub and
taller canopy woodlands. This site (coupled with Belderrig 04E0893) is unique in that it
provides a well dated sequence of charcoal samples dating from the Mesolithic to the Early
Bronze Age in Mayo.
Acknowledgements:
Thanks to Dr. Graeme Warren, Prof. Seamas Caulfield, Gretta Byrne and Noel Dunne for
assistance on this project. Thanks to Dr. Ingelise Stuijts for confirming some of the charcoal
identifications from the sites.
46

References
Byrne, G., Warren, G., Walsh, P., Mc Ilreavy, D. and Rathbone, S., 2009a. Archaeological
excavations at ‘Glenulra Scatter’ (92E140) Stratigraphic report. Unpublished report for the
Heritage Council.
Byrne, G., Dunne, N., Caulfield, S., Warren, G., Walsh, P., Mc Ilreavy, D. and Rathbone, S.,
2009b. Archaeological excavations in association with the Céide Visitor Centre (E494)
Stratigraphic report. Unpublished report for the Heritage Council.
Byrne, G., Warren, G., Rathbone, S, Mc Ilreavy, D. and Walsh, P., 2009c. Archaeological
excavations at Rathlacken (E580) Stratigraphic report. Unpublished report for the Heritage
Council.
Caulfield, S. 1998. Proceedings of the 16th International 14C Conference, edited by W. G.
Mook and J. van der Plicht Radiocarbon, Vol. 40, No. 2, P. 629-640
Caulfield, S., Warren, G., Rathbone, S., Mc Ilreavy, D., and Walsh, P. 2009a. Archaeological
excavations at the Glenulra enclosure (E24) Stratigraphic report. Unpublished report for the
Heritage Council.
Caulfield, S., Downes, M., Dunne, N., Warren, G., Rathbone, S., Mc Ilreavy, D and Walsh, P.
2009b. Archaeological excavations at Belderg Beg (E109) Stratigraphic report. Unpublished
report for the Heritage Council.
Gale, R. 2003. Wood based industrial fuels and their environmental impact in lowland
Britain. In P. Murphy and P.E.J. Wiltshire (eds) The Environmental Archaeology of Industry.
Oxbow books: Oxford 30-47.
Gale, R., & Cutler, D., 2000. Plants in Archaeology. Identification of vegetative plant
materials used in Europe and the southern Mediterranean to c. 1500. West Yorkshire:
Westbury Publishing.
Hather, J.G., 2000. The Identification of the Northern European Woods. A guide for
archaeologists and conservators. London: Archetype Publications Ltd.
Hickie, D., 2002. Native trees and forests of Ireland. Dublin: Gill & Macmillan Ltd
Lipscombe, M. and Stokes, J. 2008. Trees and how to grow them. London: Think books.
47

Marguerie, D. and Hunot, J.Y. 2007. Charcoal analysis and dendrology: data from
archaeological sites in north-western France. Journal of Archaeological Science 34 1417-
1433.
Mc Clatchie, M., 2010. Neolithic and Bronze Age landscapes of North Mayo. Analysis of nonwood
plant macro-remains. Interim report. Unpublished report for University College
Dublin.
Molloy, K. and O'Connell, M., 1995. Palaeoecological investigations towards the reconstruction
of environment and land-use changes during prehistory at Ceide Fields, western Ireland.
Probleme der Küstenforschung im südlichen Nordseegebiet 23, 187-225.
O’Carroll, E. forthcoming. Charcoal and wood analysis along the N5 Charleston Bypass.
O’Connell, M. and Molloy, K. 2001. Farming and woodland dynamics in Ireland during the
Neolithic. Biology and Environment: Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy Vol. 101B, No 1-2,
99-128.
O’Donnell, L. 2011a. People and woodlands: an investigation of charcoal remains as
indicators of cultural selection and local environment in Bronze Age Ireland. PhD submitted
to University College Dublin.
O’Donnell, L., 2011b. Charcoal analysis from Belderrig (04E0853). Unpublished report for
University College Dublin.
Orme, B.J. and Coles, J.M., 1985. Prehistoric woodworking from the Somerset levels: 2 : Species
selection and prehistoric woodlands. Somerset Levels papers, 11, 7-24
Schweingruber, F.H., 1978. Microscopic wood anatomy. Birmensdorf: Swiss Federal Institute
for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research.
Shackleton, C.M. and Prins, F. 1992. Charcoal analysis and the “Principle of Least Effort”- a
conceptual model. Journal of Archaeological Science 19, 631-7.
Smart, T. and Hoffman, E.S. 1988 Environmental interpretation of archaeological charcoal In
C.A. Hastorf and V.S. Popper (ed) Current Paleoethnobotany. Chicago and London: University
of Chicago Press pp. 165-205.
Stuijts, I. 2005 Wood and charcoal identification. In M. Gowen, J. Ó Neill and M. Philips
(eds) The Lisheen Mine Archaeological Project 1996-8, 137-186. Wordwell, Dublin.
48

Verrill, L. and Tipping, R. 2010. Use and abandonment of a Neolithic field system at Belderrig,
Co. Mayo, Ireland: Evidence for economic marginality. 20: The Holocene p 1011-1021.
Warren, G. 2008. Fieldwork in Belderrig, Co. Mayo, 2004-2008. Unpublished report for
University College Dublin.
Wheeler, E.A, Bass, P. & Gasson, P.E. 1989. IAWA list of microscopic features for hardwood
identification. IAWA Bulletin nos. 10 (3): 219-332.: Leiden: Rijksherbarium.
49

Table 2
Charcoal identifications from Glenulra Enclosure (E24)
Sample
Feature
type
Date
Identification
Fragment
count
Weight
(g)
Size
(mm)
Growth
Ring
count
Ring
curvature
Insect
holes
Tyloses
4 Hearth
Middle
Neolithic
Betula sp.
Roth/Ehrh
(birch)
13 0.16 2-4 Medium 2-3
strongly
curved
No
No
4 Hearth
Middle
Neolithic
Quercus sp.
L./Liebl (oak)
18 0.2 2-4 Medium 1-2
weakly
curved
No
Yes
4 Hearth
Middle
Neolithic
Pinus sp. L.
(pine)
1 0.07 3 Medium 4
weakly
curved
No
No
4 Hearth
Middle
Neolithic
c.f. Taxus sp.
L. (yew)
1 0.01
1
Medium
1
too small to
determine
No
No
50

Table 3
Charcoal identifications from Glenulra (92E140)
Sample
No
Feature
No
Feature
type
Date
Identification
Fragment
count
Weight
(g)
Size
(mm)
Growth
Ring
count
Ring
curvature
Insect
holes
Tyloses
Comment
5 6
Charcoal
rich
spread
Middle
Neolithic
Corylus
avellana L.
(hazel)
33 0.74 4-6 Medium 3-10
Strongly
curved
No
No
5 6
Charcoal
rich
spread
Middle
Neolithic
Salix sp. L.
(willow)
1 0.02 3 Medium 3
Strongly
curved
No
No
5 6
Charcoal
rich
spread
Middle
Neolithic
Maloideae
sp.
(pomaceous
fruitwood)
1 0.03 3 Medium 3
Strongly
curved
No
No
5 6
Charcoal
rich
spread
Middle
Neolithic
Quercus sp.
L./Liebl (oak)
2 0.01 3 Medium 4
Strongly
curved
No
No
5 6
Charcoal
rich
spread
Middle
Neolithic
Betula sp.
Roth/Ehrh
(birch)
1 0.02 3 Medium 3
Strongly
curved
No
No
9 8 Stakehole
Middle
Neolithic
Corylus
avellana L.
(hazel)
2 0.01 3 Medium 2-3
Strongly
curved
No
No
9 8 Stakehole
Middle
Neolithic
Maloideae
sp.
(pomaceous
fruitwood)
1 0.02 5 Medium 4
Strongly
curved
No
No
51

Table 4
Charcoal identifications from Ceide fields (E494)
Sample Date Ctg Context Description Identification
Fragment
count
Weight
(g)
Size
(mm)
Growth
Ring
count
Ring
curvature
Insect
holes
Tyloses
Comment
3 EBA
C
3
Charcoal
rich soil
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch) 20 0.38 3-6 medium 2-6
strongly
curved
No
No
3 EBA
C
3
Charcoal
rich soil
Corylus avellana L. (hazel)
1 0.01 2 medium 2
strongly
curved
No
No
3 EBA
C
3
Charcoal
rich soil
Salix sp. L. (willow)
3 0.04 2-4 medium 1-2
strongly
curved
No
No
13 EBA H 13 Trench
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch)
11 0.64 2-7 medium 2-8
strongly
curved
No
No
13 EBA H 13 Trench Corylus avellana L. (hazel) 1 0.03 2 medium 4
strongly
curved
No
No
13 EBA H 13 Trench
Ilex aquifolium L. (holly)
1 0.07 4 medium 8
strongly
curved
No
No
16 EBA
H
9
Charcoal
rich soil
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch) 60 1.69 2-10 medium 2-8
strongly
curved
No
No
16 EBA
H
9
Charcoal
rich soil
Ilex aquifolium L. (holly) 5 0.18 2-4 medium 2-8
strongly
curved
No
No
16 EBA
H
9
Charcoal
rich soil
Maloideae sp. (pomaceous
fruitwood)
2 0.01 2-4 medium 3
strongly
curved
No
No
16 EBA
H
9
Charcoal
rich soil
Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak)
1 0.01 3 medium 3
weakly
curved
No
No
16 EBA
H
9
Charcoal
rich soil
Salix sp. L. (willow)
1 0.06 2 medium 2
strongly
curved
No
No
52

Sample Date Ctg Context Description Identification
Fragment
count
Weight
(g)
Size
(mm)
Growth
Ring
count
Ring
curvature
Insect
holes
Tyloses
Comment
19 L. Neo
H
15
Ash pit Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch) 5 0.15 3-5 medium 4-13
strongly
curved
No
No
19 L. Neo
H
15
Ash pit Corylus/Alnus (hazel/alder) 1 0.02 2 medium 3
strongly
curved
No
No
19 L. Neo
H
15
Ash pit
Maloideae sp. (pomaceous
fruitwood)
2 0.1 5 medium 4
strongly
curved
No
No
22 EBA H 14 Trench
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch)
13 0.94 2-8 medium 3-16
strongly
curved
No
No
22 EBA H 14 Trench
Maloideae sp. (pomaceous
fruitwood) 1 0.12 2 3
too small to
record
No
No
22 EBA H 14 Trench Salix sp. L. (willow) 4 0.21 3 medium 3
strongly
curved
No
No
25 L. Neo H 15 Ash pit
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch)
32 2.29 3-10 medium 2-10
strongly
curved
No
No
25 L. Neo H 15 Ash pit Corylus avellana L. (hazel) 1 0.01 2 medium 2
strongly
curved
No
No
25 L. Neo H 15 Ash pit
Maloideae sp. (pomaceous
fruitwood) 5 0.16 2-6 medium 4-7
strongly
curved
No
No
25 L. Neo H 15 Ash pit Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak) 1 0.04 2 medium 4
strongly
curved
No
No
25 L. Neo H 15 Ash pit Salix sp. L. (willow) 1 0.01 2 3
too small to
record
No
No
26 EBA H 20 Trench
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch)
73 3.11 2-10 medium 2-16
strongly
curved
No
No
53

Sample Date Ctg Context Description Identification
Fragment
count
Weight
(g)
Size
(mm)
Growth
Ring
count
Ring
curvature
Insect
holes
Tyloses
Comment
26 EBA H 20 Trench
Ilex aquifolium L. (holly)
5 0.27 4-10 medium 3-6
strongly
curved
No
No
26 EBA H 20 Trench
Maloideae sp. (pomaceous
fruitwood) 1 0.15 4 medium 3
strongly
curved
No
No
26 EBA H 20 Trench Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak) 1 0.15 5 medium 12
strongly
curved
No
No
Twig
26 EBA H 20 Trench Salix sp. L. (willow) 20 1.18 10-15 medium 13-17
strongly
curved
No
No
28 EBA?
H 24c Stakehole Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch) 4 0.04 2-3 fast 1-2
strongly
curved
No
No
28 EBA?
H 24c Stakehole
Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak)
2 0.02 2-3 medium 1-3
weakly
curved
No
No
35 EBA 10B
Hearth
Corylus avellana L. (hazel) 71 7.03 6-14 medium 7-20
strongly
curved
No
No
35 EBA 10B
Hearth
Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak) 9-11 medium 10-24
weakly
curved No Yes
35 EBA 10B
Hearth
Salix sp. L. (willow) 5-10 medium 5-15
strongly
curved
No
No
39 EBA/mixed 25 56
Charcoal
layer
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch)
91 5.05 5-10 variable 5-26
strongly
curved
No
No
39 EBA/mixed 25 56
Charcoal
layer Corylus avellana L. (hazel) 1 0.02 3 medium 4
strongly
curved
No
No
39 EBA/mixed 25 56
Charcoal
layer
Maloideae sp. (pomaceous
fruitwood) 3 0.4 5-8 medium 8-12
strongly
curved
No
No
54

Sample Date Ctg Context Description Identification
Fragment
count
Weight
(g)
Size
(mm)
Growth
Ring
count
Ring
curvature
Insect
holes
Tyloses
Comment
39 EBA/mixed 25 56
Charcoal
layer Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak) 4 0.35 5-10 medium 8-10
strongly
curved
No
No
39 EBA/mixed 25 56
Charcoal
layer Salix sp. L. (willow) 5 0.98 6-9 medium 6-9
strongly
curved
No
No
55

Table 5
Charcoal identifications from Belderg Beg (E109)
Sample
Trench
Time
period Description Identification
Fragment
count
Weight
(g)
Size
(mm)
Growth
Ring
count
Ring
curvature
Insect
holes Tyloses Comment
None A1 EBA
Charcoal
adhering to pot
Alnus sp. L. Gärtner (alder)
1 0.8 4 Medium 7
Strongly
curved No No
2 A1 EBA
Charcoal
adhering to
quern
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch)
4 0.03 2 Medium 2
Strongly
curved No No
19 A1 EBA
Shallow area
near pit
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch)
6 0.72 4-5 Medium 4-5
Weakly
curved No No
19 A1 EBA
19 A1 EBA
19 A1 EBA
22 A1 EBA
Shallow area
near pit Corylus avellana L. (hazel) 4 1.25 5-8 Slow 15-20
Shallow area
near pit Hedera helix L. (ivy) 1 0.04 4 Medium 4
Shallow area
near pit Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak) 69 2.93 10-15 Medium 15-19
Underlying
brown
habitation Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak) 80 13.24 20-25 Slow 25-30
Strongly
curved No No
Strongly
curved No No
Weakly
curved No No
Weakly
curved No Yes
27 A1 EBA
Charcoal
spread
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch)
8 1.36 4-8 Medium 4-13
Weakly
curved No No
27 A1 EBA
27 A1 EBA
Charcoal
spread Corylus avellana L. (hazel) 5 0.55 12-15 Medium 8-15
Charcoal
spread Hedera helix L. (ivy) 2 0.17 6 Medium 10
Strongly
curved No No
Strongly
curved No No
56

Sample
Trench
Time
period Description Identification
Fragment
count
Weight
(g)
Size
(mm)
Growth
Ring
count
Ring
curvature
Insect
holes Tyloses Comment
27 A1 EBA
35 A1 EBA
Charcoal
spread Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak) 10 1.24 10-15 Medium 10
Charcoal
spread,
containing
large pieces Alnus sp. L. Gärtner (alder) 5 0.39 8 Medium 10-12
Weakly
curved No Yes
Weakly
curved No No
35 A1 EBA
Charcoal
spread,
containing
large pieces
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch)
18 1.31 4 Medium 3
Strongly
curved No No
35 A1 EBA
35 A1 EBA
35 A1 EBA
40 A1 EBA
Charcoal
spread,
containing
large pieces Corylus avellana L. (hazel) 25 2.89 10-20 Medium 5-26
Charcoal
spread,
containing
large pieces Pinus sp. L. (pine) 1 0.42 8 Medium 8
Charcoal
spread,
containing
large pieces Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak) 31 2.48 8-16 Medium 15-26
Charcoal
spread Alnus sp. L. Gärtner (alder) 20 1.18 10-20 Medium 3-8
Strongly
curved No No
Weakly
curved No No
Weakly and
curved No Yes
Weakly
curved No No
40 A1 EBA
Charcoal
spread
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch)
2 0.06 4 Medium 3
Strongly
curved No No
96 A1 EBA
Burnt residue
Corylus avellana L. (hazel) 25 2.37 3-12 medium 5-9
Strongly
Many
No
All same
57

Sample
Trench
Time
period Description Identification
Fragment
count
Weight
(g)
Size
(mm)
Growth
Ring
count
Ring
curvature
Insect
holes Tyloses Comment
relating to horn curved branch
200 B1 MBA
Pit under flat
stones
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch)
1 0.04 3 Medium 3
Strongly
curved No No
200 B1 MBA
200 B1 MBA
200 B1 MBA
Pit under flat
stones Corylus avellana L. (hazel) 18 0.58 3-5 Medium 2-5
Pit under flat
stones Fraxinus sp. L. (ash) 7 0.41 4-5 Medium 3-5
Pit under flat
stones Ilex aquifolium L. (holly) 5 0.1 5 Medium 5
Strongly
curved No No
Strongly
curved No No
Strongly
curved No No
200 B1 MBA
Pit under flat
stones
Maloideae sp. (pomaceous
fruitwood) 3 0.18 5-6 Medium 12-15
Strongly
curved No No
200 B1 MBA
200 B1 MBA
Pit under flat
stones Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak) 2 0.09 4 Medium 6
Pit under flat
stones Salix sp. L. (willow) 44 0.93 5-6 Fast 3-10
Strongly
curved No No
Strongly
curved No No
201 B1 MBA
Charcoal
sample from
wall trench
containing
quernstone
Corylus avellana L. (hazel)
19 0.47 3-4 medium 5-8
Strongly
curved
No
No
roundwoods,
bark
present.
Very friable.
201 B1 MBA
Charcoal
sample from
wall trench
containing
quernstone
Salix sp. L. (willow)
24 0.38 2-4 medium 2-3
strongly
curved
No
No
roundwoods,
bark
present.
Very friable.
58

Sample
Trench
Time
period Description Identification
Fragment
count
Weight
(g)
Size
(mm)
Growth
Ring
count
Ring
curvature
Insect
holes Tyloses Comment
205
B1
MBA
Under small
stones around
sill stone Alnus sp. L. Gärtner (alder) 6 0.19 3 Medium 3
Weakly
curved No No
205
B1
MBA
Under small
stones around
sill stone
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch)
3 0.03 1 Medium 2 No No
205
B1
MBA
Under small
stones around
sill stone Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak) 70 1.73 6-7 Slow 3-16
Weakly
curved
Yes
205
B1
MBA
Under small
stones around
sill stone Salix sp. L. (willow) 1 0.04 4 Medium 3
Strongly
curved No No
213
B1
MBA Wall trench Corylus avellana L. (hazel) 1 0.03 4 Medium 5
Strongly
curved No No
213
B1
MBA
Wall trench
Maloideae sp. (pomaceous
fruitwood) 16 1.13 6-7 Medium 4-5
Strongly
curved No No
226
B1
MBA
Foundation
trench Corylus avellana L. (hazel) 71 3.37 2-11 Medium 2-12
Strongly
curved No No
226
B1
MBA
Foundation
trench Ilex aquifolium L. (holly) 5 0.17 8-10 Medium 4-12
Strongly
curved No No
226
B1
MBA
Foundation
trench Salix sp. L. (willow) 4 0.1 4 Medium 4
Strongly
curved No No
234
B1
MBA
From amongst
stones
Alnus sp. L. Gärtner (alder)
5 0.39
4 Medium 4
weakly
curved No No
234 B1 MBA
From amongst
Corylus avellana L. (hazel) 2 0.19 5 Medium 4
strongly
No
No
59

Sample
Trench
Time
period Description Identification
Fragment
count
Weight
(g)
Size
(mm)
Growth
Ring
count
Ring
curvature
Insect
holes Tyloses Comment
stones
curved
234
B1
MBA
From amongst
stones
Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak)
68 7.87
10-14 Medium 10-20
Weakly and
strongly
curved No No
234
B1
MBA
From amongst
stones
Salix sp. L. (willow)
5 0.28
8 Medium 6
strongy
curved No No
235
B2T
EBA
Wall trench Alnus sp. L. Gärtner (alder) 4 0.19 6-7 Medium 3-4
Weakly
curved No No
235
B2T
EBA
Wall trench
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch)
1 0.04 4 Medium 4
Strongly
curved No No
235
B2T
EBA
Wall trench Corylus avellana L. (hazel) 5 0.14 2-6 Medium 3-6
Strongly
curved No No
235
B2T
EBA
Wall trench Ilex aquifolium L. (holly) 1 0.02 3 Medium 3
Strongly
curved No No
235
B2T
EBA
Wall trench Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak) 68 2.42 8-12 Medium 7-12
Weakly
curved No Yes
235
B2T
EBA
Wall trench Salix sp. L. (willow) 1 0.04 4 Medium 2
Strongly
curved No No
236
B1
MBA
Sample of
burnt timbers? Alnus sp. L. Gärtner (alder) 80 5.28 7-8 Medium 4-5
Weakly
curved No No
238
B1
MBA
Wall trench Alnus sp. L. Gärtner (alder) 1 0.02 2 Medium 3
Strongly
curved No No
238
B1
MBA
Wall trench Corylus avellana L. (hazel) 32 2.03 6-8 Medium 10-12
Strongly
curved
Yes
60

Sample
Trench
Time
period Description Identification
Fragment
count
Weight
(g)
Size
(mm)
Growth
Ring
count
Ring
curvature
Insect
holes Tyloses Comment
238
B1
MBA
Wall trench
Maloideae sp. (pomaceous
fruitwood) 4 2.35 10-12 Medium 8-9
Strongly
curved No No
238
B1
MBA
Wall trench Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak) 1 0.07 2 Medium 2
Strongly
curved No No
238
B1
MBA
Wall trench Salix sp. L. (willow) 1 0.04 3 Medium 3
Strongly
curved No No
241
B1
MBA
Wall trench Corylus avellana L. (hazel) 69 1.49 2-6 Medium 3-8
Strongly
curved No No
241
B1
MBA
Wall trench
Maloideae sp. (pomaceous
fruitwood) 1 0.04 3 Medium 8
Weakly
curved No No
241
B1
MBA
Wall trench Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak) 7 0.12 4-5 Medium 5-6
Strongly
curved No No
241
B1
MBA
Wall trench Salix sp. L. (willow) 3 0.14 8 Medium 4
Strongly
curved No No
242 B1
MBA
Charcoal
sample from
wall trench
containing
quernstone
Corylus avellana L. (hazel)
61 18.15 2-11 medium 2-17
strongly
curved
No No roundwoods
242 B1
MBA
Charcoal
sample from
wall trench
containing
quernstone
Salix sp. L. (willow)
37 4.76 2-7 fast 3-4
strongly
curved
No
No
246
B1
MBA
Under stone
setting of
Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak) 7 0.04 3-4 Medium 2-3
Weakly
curved No No
61

Sample
Trench
Time
period Description Identification
Fragment
count
Weight
(g)
Size
(mm)
Growth
Ring
count
Ring
curvature
Insect
holes Tyloses Comment
central flag
246
B1
MBA
Under stone
setting of
central flag Salix sp. L. (willow) 2 0.02 4 Medium 3
Strongly
curved No No
247 B1
MBA
Below entrance
flagging
Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak)
5 0.03 2-4 medium 2-4
weakly
curved
No
Yes
252
B1
MBA
Sample of flint
and burnt wood Alnus sp. L. Gärtner (alder) 46 2.54 4-5 Medium 2-4
Strongly
curved No No
252
B1
MBA
Sample of flint
and burnt wood
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch)
5 0.1 3-4 Medium 2-3
Strongly
curved No No
252
B1
MBA
Sample of flint
and burnt wood Fraxinus sp. L. (ash) 1 0.01 2 Medium 2
Weakly
curved No No
252
B1
MBA
Sample of flint
and burnt wood Ilex aquifolium L. (holly) 21 0.55 4-8 Medium 6-7
Strongly
curved No No
252
B1
MBA
Sample of flint
and burnt wood Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak) 6 0.23 3 Medium 3
Weakly
curved No Yes
252
B1
MBA
Sample of flint
and burnt wood Salix sp. L. (willow) 5 0.14 3 Medium 3-8
Strongly
curved No No
253 B2A EBA
Charcoal
sample
Alnus sp. L. Gärtner (alder)
32 6.13 3-15 medium 2-24
strongly
curved
No
No
253 B2A EBA
Charcoal
sample
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch) 10 1.6 8-11 medium 10-14
weakly
curved
No
No
62

Sample
Trench
Time
period Description Identification
Fragment
count
Weight
(g)
Size
(mm)
Growth
Ring
count
Ring
curvature
Insect
holes Tyloses Comment
253 B2A EBA
Charcoal
sample
Corylus avellana L. (hazel)
8 0.8 6-7 medium 6-7
strongly
curved
No
No
253 B2A EBA
Charcoal
sample
Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak)
13 2.25 11-14 medium 14-18
Weakly and
strongly
curved
No
Yes
253 B2A EBA
Charcoal
sample
Salix sp. L. (willow)
14 2.52 12-18 fast 9-15
strongly
curved
No
No
254
B1 MBA Wall trench
Corylus avellana L. (hazel) 44 2.01 5-12 Medium 2-13
Strongly
curved No No
254
B1 MBA Wall trench
Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak) 30 2.93 5-18 Medium 10-12
Strongly
curved No No
254
B1 MBA Wall trench
Salix sp. L. (willow) 6 0.28 5-6 Fast 2-3
Strongly
curved No No
255
B1 MBA Posthole
Alnus sp. L. Gärtner (alder) 20 9.09 3-30 Medium 2-12
Strongly
curved No No
256
B2T
EBA
Midden Alnus sp. L. Gärtner (alder) 12 3.33 13-15 Medium 10-12
Weakly
curved No No
256
B2T
EBA
Midden
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch)
9 2.72 9-14 Mixed 15-28
Strongly
curved No No
256
B2T
EBA
Midden Corylus avellana L. (hazel) 46 15.57 20-35 Medium 22-30
Medium to
strongly
curved No No
256
B2T
EBA
Midden Ilex aquifolium L. (holly) 5 0.65 8-10 Medium 5-6
Weakly
curved No No
63

Sample
Trench
Time
period Description Identification
Fragment
count
Weight
(g)
Size
(mm)
Growth
Ring
count
Ring
curvature
Insect
holes Tyloses Comment
256
B2T
EBA
Midden Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak) 8 2.13 3-12 Medium 4-26
Weakly
curved No Yes
257 B2T
EBA
Midden Alnus sp. L. Gärtner (alder) 6 0.28 6-12 Medium 6-9
Weakly
curved No No
257 B2T
EBA
Midden
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch)
2 0.16 6 Medium 5
Strongly
curved No No
257 B2T
EBA
Midden Corylus avellana L. (hazel) 14 0.46 3-8 Medium 2-8
Strongly
curved No No
257 B2T
EBA
Midden Ilex aquifolium L. (holly) 2 0.05 8-10 Medium 6-8
Strongly
curved No No
257 B2T
EBA
Midden
Maloideae sp. (pomaceous
fruitwood) 3 0.27 4 Medium 7-8
Strongly
curved No No
257 B2T
EBA
Midden Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak) 51 4.05 8-10 Medium 10-18
Weakly
curved No No
257 B2T
EBA
Midden Salix sp. L. (willow) 2 0.02 4 Medium 6
Strongly
curved No No
258 B2T EBA
Charcoal
sample Alnus sp. L. Gärtner (alder) 11 5.15 15-16 Slow 20-33
Weakly
curved No No
258 B2T EBA
Charcoal
sample
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch)
4 1.18 10-16 Medium 7-8
Strongly
curved No No
258 B2T EBA
258 B2T EBA
Charcoal
sample Corylus avellana L. (hazel) 23 4.34 4-7 Medium 5-15
Charcoal
sample Ilex aquifolium L. (holly) 2 0.26 8-9 Medium 4-9
Strongly
curved No No
Weakly
curved No No
64

Sample
Trench
Time
period Description Identification
Fragment
count
Weight
(g)
Size
(mm)
Growth
Ring
count
Ring
curvature
Insect
holes Tyloses Comment
258 B2T EBA
Charcoal
sample
Maloideae sp. (pomaceous
fruitwood) 1 0.1 6 Medium 6
Strongly
curved No No
258 B2T EBA
272 B1 MBA
Charcoal
sample Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak) 42 10.76 15-20 Medium 10-20
Burnt wood
and soil from
trench at
entrance Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak) 80 7.55 10-14 Medium 10-14
Weakly
curved No Yes
Weakly
curved No Yes
277 B2P EBA Midden Alnus sp. L. Gärtner (alder) 27 3.55 5-6 Slow 15-20
Weakly
curved No No
277 B2P EBA Midden
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch)
11 1.13 3-6 Medium 2-6
Weakly and
strongly
curved No No
277 B2P EBA Midden Corylus avellana L. (hazel) 3 0.23 4-6 Medium 3-6
277 B2P EBA Midden Ilex aquifolium L. (holly) 4 0.84 10-16 Medium 4-15
277 B2P EBA Midden Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak) 35 1.78 5-6 Medium 10-15
319 B2P EBA Midden Alnus sp. L. Gärtner (alder) 31 2.44 6-10 Fast/Medium 5-6
Strongly
curved No No
Strongly
curved No No
Weakly
curved No Yes
Weakly
curved No No
319 B2P EBA Midden
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch)
58 3.44 4-12 Fast/Medium 3-6
Strongly
curved No No
319 B2P EBA Midden Corylus avellana L. (hazel) 5 0.56 6-10 Slow/Medium 5-25
Strongly
curved No No
65

Sample
Trench
Time
period Description Identification
Fragment
count
Weight
(g)
Size
(mm)
Growth
Ring
count
Ring
curvature
Insect
holes Tyloses Comment
319 B2P EBA Midden Ilex aquifolium L. (holly) 2 0.14 8 Medium 16
319 B2P EBA Midden Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak) 4 0.17 8-9 Medium 8-9
320 B2P EBA Midden Alnus sp. L. Gärtner (alder) 5 0.84 5-7 Slow 4-30
Weakly
curved No No
Weakly
curved No Yes
Weakly
curved No No
320 B2P EBA Midden
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch)
69 2.57 5-20 Medium 5-15
Weakly and
strongly
curved No No
320 B2P EBA Midden Corylus avellana L. (hazel) 3 0.21 8 Medium 10
320 B2P EBA Midden Ilex aquifolium L. (holly) 2 0.41 7-18 Medium 5-12
320 B2P EBA Midden Salix sp. L. (willow) 1 0.12 6 Medium 6
321 B2P EBA Midden Alnus sp. L. Gärtner (alder) 20 0.65 4-7 Medium 4-7
Strongly
curved No No
Strongly
curved No No
Weakly
curved No No
Strongly
curved No No
321 B2P EBA Midden
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch)
60 2.69 5-17 Fast 3-8
Strongly
curved No No
321 B2P EBA Midden Salix sp. L. (willow) 1 0.05 3.5 Medium 8
322 B2P EBA Midden Alnus sp. L. Gärtner (alder) 32 3.3 5-20 Medium 4-7
Weakly
curved No No
Weakly and
strongly
curved No No
66

Sample
Trench
Time
period Description Identification
Fragment
count
Weight
(g)
Size
(mm)
Growth
Ring
count
Ring
curvature
Insect
holes Tyloses Comment
322 B2P EBA Midden
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch)
48 2.05 6-12 Medium 6-8
Weakly and
strongly
curved No No
323 B2P EBA Midden Alnus sp. L. Gärtner (alder) 30 0.79 4-5 Medium 5-6
Strongly
curved No No
323 B2P EBA Midden
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch)
45 2.15 6-7 Medium 5-6
Strongly
curved No No
323 B2P EBA Midden Corylus avellana L. (hazel) 3 0.37 7-8 Medium 6-7
323 B2P EBA Midden Ilex aquifolium L. (holly) 1 0.03 3 Medium 3
323 B2P EBA Midden Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak) 1 0.04 7 Medium 4
324 B2P EBA Midden Alnus sp. L. Gärtner (alder) 30 1.65 6-11 Fast 6-35
Strongly
curved No No
Strongly
curved No No
Weakly
curved No No
Weakly
curved No No
324 B2P EBA Midden
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch)
68 7.71 6-19 Fast 5-10
Strongly
curved No No
324 B2P EBA Midden Corylus avellana L. (hazel) 1 0.58 4 Medium 5
324 B2P EBA Midden Ilex aquifolium L. (holly) 1 0.05 6 Fast 32
Strongly
curved No No
Weakly
curved No No
325 B2P EBA Midden Alnus sp. L. Gärtner (alder)
42 4.17
7-12 Medium 2-18
weakly
curved No No
325 B2P EBA Midden Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch) 33 5.01 5-12 Medium 6-8
weakly
No
No
67

Sample
Trench
Time
period Description Identification
Fragment
count
Weight
(g)
Size
(mm)
Growth
Ring
count
Ring
curvature
Insect
holes Tyloses Comment
curved
325 B2P EBA Midden Ilex aquifolium L. (holly)
3 0.31
5 Medium 4
strongly
curved No No
325 B2P EBA Midden Salix sp. L. (willow)
2 0.08
5 Medium 5
strongly
curved No No
326 B2P EBA Midden Alnus sp. L. Gärtner (alder)
11 1.6
6-8 Medium 6-7
weakly
curved No No
326 B2P EBA Midden
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch) 20 4.92
4-12 Medium 5-12
strongly
curved No No
326 B2P EBA Midden Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak)
5 1.53
10 Medium 7
weaky and
strongly
curved No yes
327 B2P EBA Midden
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch)
2 0.08 3 Medium 2
Strongly
curved No No
327 B2P EBA Midden Corylus avellana L. (hazel) 16 1.13 7-8 Medium 9-11
327 B2P EBA Midden Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak) 62 1.94 8-15 Medium 14-23
328 B2P EBA Midden Alnus sp. L. Gärtner (alder) 10 1.31 8-9 Mixed 7-35
Strongly
curved No No
Weakly
curved No No
Weakly
curved No No
328 B2P EBA Midden
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch)
40 4.06 6-8 Medium 6-14
Weakly
curved No No
328 B2P EBA Midden Corylus avellana L. (hazel) 3 0.12 5 Medium 3
Strongly
curved No No
68

Sample
Trench
Time
period Description Identification
Fragment
count
Weight
(g)
Size
(mm)
Growth
Ring
count
Ring
curvature
Insect
holes Tyloses Comment
328 B2P EBA Midden Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak) 2 0.18 3-6 Medium 4-5
328 B2P EBA Midden Salix sp. L. (willow) 3 0.11 3 Medium 2
329 B2P EBA Midden Alnus sp. L. Gärtner (alder) 7 0.77 8 Medium 7
Weakly
curved No No
Strongly
curved No No
Weakly
curved No No
329 B2P EBA Midden
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch)
10 1.01 8 Medium 6
Weakly
curved No No
329 B2P EBA Midden Ilex aquifolium L. (holly) 1 0.07 6 Medium 4
329 B2P EBA Midden Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak) 7 0.57 8-10 Medium 4-12
Weakly
curved No No
Weakly
curved No Yes
330 B2P EBA Midden
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch)
8 1.37 5-10 Fast 4-6
Strongly
curved No No
331 B2P EBA Midden Alnus sp. L. Gärtner (alder)
23 2.92
8-16 Medium 8-15
moderately
curved No No
331 B2P EBA Midden
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch) 55 3.18
8-10 Medium 4-7
strongly
curved No No
331 B2P EBA Midden Corylus avellana L. (hazel)
1 0.36
8 Medium 7
strongly
curved No No
331 B2P EBA Midden Ilex aquifolium L. (holly)
1 0.03
10 Medium 13
strongly
curved No No
332 B2P EBA Midden Alnus sp. L. Gärtner (alder) 33 1.38 3-15 Slow to fast 10-20
Weakly
curved No No
69

Sample
Trench
Time
period Description Identification
Fragment
count
Weight
(g)
Size
(mm)
Growth
Ring
count
Ring
curvature
Insect
holes Tyloses Comment
332 B2P EBA Midden
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch)
45 1.25 6-8 Medium 8-13
Strongly
curved No No
332 B2P EBA Midden Ilex aquifolium L. (holly) 15 0.35 4-5 Medium 3-5
332 B2P EBA Midden Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak) 7 0.34 3-7 Medium 4-8
Weakly
curved No No
Weakly
curved No Yes
900 B1 MBA
Sample from
between upper
and lower level
of paving stones.
1.75M S, 11.80M
W Alnus sp. L. Gärtner (alder) 60 5.66 10-12 Medium 9-12
Weakly
curved Yes No Recent roots
900 B1 MBA
Sample from
between upper
and lower level
of paving stones.
1.75M S, 11.80M
W
Maloideae sp. (pomaceous
fruitwood) 2 0.3 7 Medium 8
Strongly
curved No No
900 B1 MBA
Sample from
between upper
and lower level
of paving stones.
1.75M S, 11.80M
W Salix sp. L. (willow) 7 1.23 8 Fast 3-13
Strongly
curved No No
901 B2P EBA Midden Alnus sp. L. Gärtner (alder) 5 0.39 6-8 Medium 3-6
Weakly
curved No No
901 B2P EBA Midden Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch) 19 1.23 8 Medium 18-21
Strongly
No
No
70

Sample
Trench
Time
period Description Identification
Fragment
count
Weight
(g)
Size
(mm)
Growth
Ring
count
Ring
curvature
Insect
holes Tyloses Comment
curved
901 B2P EBA Midden Fraxinus sp. L. (ash) 1 0.01 2 Slow 3
901 B2P EBA Midden Ilex aquifolium L. (holly) 2 0.01 3 Medium 3
Weakly
curved No No
Weakly
curved No No
901 B2P EBA Midden
Maloideae sp. (pomaceous
fruitwood) 5 0.36 8 Medium 7
Strongly
curved No No
901 B2P EBA Midden Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak) 8 0.31 2-4 Medium 2-4
902 B2P EBA Midden Alnus sp. L. Gärtner (alder) 28 1.01 8-10 medium 5
Weakly
curved No No
Weakly
curved No No
902 B2P EBA Midden
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh (birch)
50
1.62
6-7 Medium 5-6
Moderately
curved No No
902 B2P EBA Midden Corylus avellana L. (hazel) 1
0.03
4 medium 4
Strongly
curved No No
902 B2P EBA Midden Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak) 1
0.14
5 medium 5
Weakly
curved No No
1152
Burnt wood
over grass
matting over
burnt paving
Fraxinus sp. L. (ash)
4 3.09
14-15 Medium 24
strongly
curved No No
Roundwood,
probably the
same piece
71

Table 6
Sample
Sample assessment Belderg Beg (E109)
Reason for not analysing
2 Peat
5 Charcoal too small for identification
19 Peat
22 Peat
32 Peat
33 Peat
33 Peat
40 Charcoal too small for identification
243 Peat
245 Charcoal too small for identification
308 Peat
312 Peat
313 Peat
72

Table 7
Wood identification details Belderg Beg (E109)
Sample no Identification Trench Description
239
Unidentified,
too degraded
B1
293
295
Quercus sp.
L./Liebl (oak) C1 Wooden post axe trimmed
Quercus sp.
L./Liebl (oak) C1 Wooden post (no 7)
296
Quercus sp.
L./Liebl (oak)
C1
Wooden post (after wall on
bog)
297
298
1151
Quercus sp.
L./Liebl (oak) C1 Wooden post - split
Unidentified,
too degraded C1 Wooden post (no 5)
Salix sp. L.
(willow)
1153 floor matting
1232
1233
1234
1235
Quercus sp.
L./Liebl (oak)
Quercus sp.
L./Liebl (oak)
Quercus sp.
L./Liebl (oak)
Quercus sp.
73

Sample no Identification Trench Description
L./Liebl (oak)
1237
1240
Quercus sp.
L./Liebl (oak)
Quercus sp.
L./Liebl (oak)
Bag 13 Box 12 co ords 267.3 98.35
Bag 9 Box 12
Box 12 Bag 2 co ords 266.3 102.2
Box 12 Bag 5 co ords 200 C04203
Box 12 Bag 6
Box 9 Bag 8
Quercus sp.
L./Liebl (oak)
Quercus sp.
L./Liebl (oak)
Quercus sp.
L./Liebl (oak)
Quercus sp.
L./Liebl (oak)
Unidentified,
too degraded
Quercus sp.
L./Liebl (oak)
74

Table 8 Charcoal identifications from Rathlackan (E580)
Cutting
Sample Date Feature Description Identification
Fragment
count
Weight
(g)
Size
(mm)
Growth
Ring
count
Ring
curvature
Insect
holes
Tyloses
Comment
B 3 LN 6
Hearth (in
house)
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh
(birch) 2 0.31 8 medium 12
strongly
curved No No
B 3 LN 6
Hearth (in
house)
Corylus avellana L.
(hazel) 98 7.36
10-
12 medium 13-20
strongly
curved No No pith
C
14
E/MN
21 Layer
Corylus avellana L.
(hazel)
1 0.01 2 medium 2
strongly
curved No No
C
14
E/MN
21 Layer
Salix sp. L. (willow)
3 0.03 2-3 medium 1-3
strongly
curved
No
No
Friable
charcoal,
difficult to
identify
C 19 UNKNOWN 27
Layer
(charcoal
rich soil on
top of F2)
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh
(birch)
5 0.39 5 medium 4 No No
C 19 UNKNOWN 27
Layer
(charcoal
rich soil on
top of F2)
Corylus avellana L.
(hazel) 65 2.39
10-
12 medium 10-15 No No
C 19 UNKNOWN 27
Layer
(charcoal
rich soil on
top of F2) Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak) 1 0.21 4 medium 4
weakly
curved No No
C 19 UNKNOWN 27
Layer
(charcoal
rich soil on
top of F2) Salix sp. L. (willow) 29 2.58 8-12 medium 3-14
No
No
75

Cutting
Sample Date Feature Description Identification
Fragment
count
Weight
(g)
Size
(mm)
Growth
Ring
count
Ring
curvature
Insect
holes
Tyloses
Comment
F 22 EBA 31 Layer
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh
(birch) 15 9 2-3 fast 6-7
strongly
curved
No
No
F 22 EBA 31 Layer
Corylus avellana L.
(hazel) 1 0.03 5 7
No
No
F 22 EBA 31 Layer Ilex aquifolim (holly) 30 1 4-9 10-20
strongly
curved
No
No
F 22 EBA 31 Layer Salix sp. L. (willow) 54 0.63 5-6 3-6
strongly
curved
No
No
1 Betula
fragment put
into the Salix
bag
C
31
E/MN ?
40 Stakehole
Alnus sp. L. Gärtner
(alder)
1 0.02 3 medium 9
strongly
curved No No
C
31
E/MN ?
40 Stakehole
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh
(birch)
1 0.02 3 medium 3
strongly
curved No No
C
31
E/MN ?
40 Stakehole
Corylus avellana L.
(hazel)
3 0.03 2-3 medium 4
strongly
curved No No
C
32
E/MN ?
41 Stakehole
Corylus avellana L.
(hazel)
4 0.08 2 medium 3
strongly
curved No No
C
32
E/MN ?
41 Stakehole
Maloideae sp.
(pomaceous fruitwood)
1 0.01 2 medium 2
strongly
curved No No
F
34 LN 44 Layer
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh
(birch)
1 0.01 3 2 No No
F
34 LN 44 Layer
c.f. Salix sp. L. (willow)
2 0.21 8 medium 1
strongly
curved
No
No
76

Cutting
Sample Date Feature Description Identification
Fragment
count
Weight
(g)
Size
(mm)
Growth
Ring
count
Ring
curvature
Insect
holes
Tyloses
Comment
F
34 LN 44 Layer
Corylus avellana L.
(hazel)
14 0.15 3-5 medium 2-3
strongly
curved
No
No
F
34 LN 44 Layer
Maloideae sp.
(pomaceous fruitwood)
1 0.03 3 medium 4
strongly
curved
No
No
F
34 LN 44 Layer
Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak)
2 0.02 2 medium 2
strongly
curved
No
No
F
34 LN 44 Layer Ulmus sp. L. (elm) 3 0.03 3 medium 2
weakly
curved
No
No
F 36 EBA 30
Layer-
Charcoal
stuck to
pottery
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh
(birch)
2 0.91
8
fast
3
strongly
curved
No
No
F 38 EBA 31
Layer-
Charcoal
stuck to
pottery
Corylus avellana L.
(hazel)
1 0.12
3
slow
15
strongly
curved
No
No
F 38 EBA 31
Charcoal
stuck to
pottery
Salix sp. L. (willow)
1 0.1
8
fast
4
strongly
curved
No
No
F
42
E/MN ?
49 Layer
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh
(birch)
2 0.07 4-5 medium 3-5
strongly
curved
No
No
F
42
E/MN ?
49 Layer
Corylus avellana L.
(hazel)
11 0.54 3-5 medium 2-10
strongly
curved and
weakly
curved
No
No
F 42 E/MN ? 49 Layer
Maloideae sp.
1 0.04 4 4
strongly
No
No
77

Cutting
Sample Date Feature Description Identification
Fragment
count
Weight
(g)
Size
(mm)
Growth
Ring
count
Ring
curvature
Insect
holes
Tyloses
Comment
(pomaceous fruitwood)
curved
F 42 E/MN ? 49 Layer Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak) 16 1.06 3-5 medium 4-5 both No No
F
42
E/MN ?
49 Layer
Salix sp. L. (willow)
2 0.02 2-4 3
strongly
curved
No
No
F
45 E/MN 58 Layer
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh
(birch)
1 0.08 4 slow 15
strongly
curved
No
No
F
45 E/MN 58 Layer
Corylus avellana L.
(hazel)
9 0.15 4 medium 4-5
strongly
curved
No
No
F
45 E/MN 58 Layer
Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak)
12 0.33 2-4 medium 2-4
weakly
curved
No
Yes
F 45 E/MN 58 Layer Salix sp. L. (willow) 4 0.04 3 medium 2 No No
F
45 E/MN 58 Layer Ulmus sp. L. (elm) 1 0.01 2 medium 2
weakly
curved
No
No
F
47
E/MN ?
63 Layer
Alnus sp. L. Gärtner
(alder)
1 0.02 medium 3
strongly
curved
No
No
F
47
E/MN ?
63 Layer
Corylus avellana L.
(hazel)
34 0.75 4-10 medium 4-9
strongly
curved
No
No
F
47
E/MN ?
63 Layer
Maloideae sp.
(pomaceous fruitwood)
2 0.16 3-10 medium 6-8
strongly
curved
No
No
F
47
E/MN ?
63 Layer Pinus sp. L. (pine) 1 0.01 2 medium 2
weakly
curved
No
No
F
47
E/MN ?
63 Layer
Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak)
3 0.07 3 medium 2-3
weakly
curved
No No Twig
78

Cutting
Sample Date Feature Description Identification
Fragment
count
Weight
(g)
Size
(mm)
Growth
Ring
count
Ring
curvature
Insect
holes
Tyloses
Comment
F
47
E/MN ?
63 Layer
Salix sp. L. (willow)
4 0.07 3 medium 3-5
strongly
curved
No
No
C 48 E/MN ? 64 Layer
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh
(birch) 6 0.21 4 3-4
strongly
curved No No
C 48 E/MN ? 64 Layer
Corylus avellana L.
(hazel) 14 1.2 3-15 mixed 13-15 No No
C 48 E/MN ? 64 Layer Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak) 3 0.18 4-6 2-10
strongly
curved No No
C 48 E/MN ? 64 Layer Salix sp. L. (willow) 2 0.24 6 7
strongly
curved
No
No
F
50 mixed 66 Pit
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh
(birch)
2 0.01 2 medium 3
strongly
curved
No
No
F
50 mixed 66 Pit
Corylus avellana L.
(hazel)
18 0.36 4-8 medium 8-13
strongly
curved
No
No
F
50 mixed 66 Pit
Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak)
8 0.07 4-5 medium 3-5
weakly
curved
No
Yes
F
50 mixed 66 Pit
Salix sp. L. (willow)
2 0.02 2 medium 3
strongly
curved
No
No
F
50 mixed 66 Pit Ulmus sp. L. (elm) 2 0.01 2 medium 2
weakly
curved
No
No
? 59 56
slot trench
Alnus sp. L. Gärtner
(alder)
2 0.02
3 medium 4
strongly
curved No No
? 59 56
slot trench
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh
(birch)
1 0.02
3 medium 3
weakly
curved No No
79

Cutting
Sample Date Feature Description Identification
Fragment
count
Weight
(g)
Size
(mm)
Growth
Ring
count
Ring
curvature
Insect
holes
Tyloses
Comment
? 59 56
slot trench
Corylus avellana L.
(hazel)
2 0.02
3 medium 4
weakly
curved No No
Beetle remains
in sample
? 59 56
slot trench
Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak)
1 0.01
3 medium 3
weakly
curved No No
C
60
E/MN ?
97 Layer
Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak)
125 1.76 4-7 medium 1-10
strongly
curved
No
Yes
C
61 MN 68 Layer
Betula sp. Roth/Ehrh
(birch)
7 0.1 4-5 medium 3-5
strongly
curved No No
C
61 MN 68 Layer
Corylus avellana L.
(hazel)
18 0.14 4-6 medium 4-6
strongly
curved No No
C
61 MN 68 Layer
Maloideae sp.
(pomaceous fruitwood)
5 0.18 14 medium 4-15
strongly
curved No No
C
61 MN 68 Layer
Salix sp. L. (willow)
1 0.04 5 medium 5
strongly
curved
No
No
C
63
E/MN ?
93 Pit
Corylus avellana L.
(hazel)
2 0.09 4 medium 3-4
strongly
curved No No
C
63
E/MN ?
93 Pit
Salix sp. L. (willow)
1 0.09 5 medium 8
strongly
curved
No
No
F
66 E/MN 87 Layer
Corylus avellana L.
(hazel)
2 0.05 3 medium 3
strongly
curved
No
No
F
66 E/MN 87 Layer
Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak)
1 0.02 3 medium 2
strongly
curved
No
No
F
67 E/MN 87 Layer
Corylus avellana L.
(hazel)
2 0.07 3-4 medium 3
strongly
curved
No
No
80

Cutting
Sample Date Feature Description Identification
Fragment
count
Weight
(g)
Size
(mm)
Growth
Ring
count
Ring
curvature
Insect
holes
Tyloses
Comment
F
67 E/MN 87 Layer
Maloideae sp.
(pomaceous fruitwood)
2 0.1 3 medium 4
strongly
curved
No
No
F
69 E/MN 95 Layer
Alnus sp. L. Gärtner
(alder)
3 0.11 2-4 medium 3-4
strongly
curved
No
No
F
69 E/MN 95 Layer
Corylus avellana L.
(hazel)
29 0.3 2-4 medium 4-6
strongly
curved
No
No
F
69 E/MN 95 Layer
Maloideae sp.
(pomaceous fruitwood)
1 0.19 3 medium 3
strongly
curved
No
No
F
69 E/MN 95 Layer
Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak)
5 0.11 5 medium 3-4
weakly
curved
No
Yes
H 72 E/MN 65
Organic
layer with
pottery
within it,
collapse
Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak)
3 0.1
4
medium
4
weakly
curved
No
Yes
C
73 E/MN 78 Stakehole
Corylus avellana L.
(hazel)
6 0.02 2 medium 1-2
strongly
curved No No
C
73 E/MN 78 Stakehole
Quercus sp. L./Liebl (oak)
2 0.03 2 medium 1-2
strongly
curved
No
No
C
75 E/MN 107 Layer
Maloideae sp.
(pomaceous fruitwood)
2 0.07 3 medium 2-4
strongly
curved No No
C
75 E/MN 107 Layer
Corylus avellana L.
(hazel)
2 0.05 3 medium 2-4
strongly
curved No No
81

Table 9
Charcoal identifications from Rathlackan (E580)
Sample Feature Reason for not analysing
2 6 Charcoal analysed from this context already
17 27 Charcoal analysed from this context already
20 30 No identifiable charcoal
38 31 Charcoal analysed from this context already
52 68 Charcoal analysed from this context already
54 65 Charcoal analysed from this context already
58 96 Charcoal analysed from this context already
61 68 Charcoal analysed from this context already
64 66 Charcoal analysed from this context already
67 87 No identifiable charcoal
68 95 Charcoal analysed from this context already
82

Table 8
Sample assessment Rathlackan (E580)
Sample Feature Reason for not analysing
2 6 Charcoal completed from this context already
17 27 Charcoal completed from this context already
20 30 No identifiable charcoal
38 31 Charcoal completed from this context already
52 68 Charcoal completed from this context already
54 65 Charcoal completed from this context already
58 96 Charcoal completed from this context already
61 68 Charcoal completed from this context already
64 66 Charcoal completed from this context already
67 87 No identifiable charcoal
68 95 Charcoal completed from this context already
83

Analysis of non-wood plant macro-remains
Meriel McClatchie, UCD School of Archaeology
Introduction
A total of 69 samples from excavations at Rathlackan court tomb, Behy-Glenulra (Céide
Fields) visitor centre, Glenulra scatter, and Belderg Beg roundhouse and field system were
examined for their archaeobotanical content. Thirty samples from Rathlackan, 11 samples
from the Céide Fields visitor centre, two samples from Glenulra and 26 samples from
Belderg Beg were analysed. A relatively small quantity of non-wood plant macro-remains
was recorded, including cultivated remains and potentially gathered foodstuffs.
This report provides information on the recovery and analysis of non-wood plant macroremains
from the examined deposits. The methods employed in the extraction and
identification of remains will firstly be outlined. The following section will investigate the types
of plant remains recorded and the deposits from which the remains were derived. These
results will then be discussed in a more general temporal and geographic context.
Recommendations on retention of the material as part of the site archive will also be
suggested.
Methodology
The soil samples had previously been processed, using conventional flotation methods,
before the flots (floated material) were presented to the author for analysis. Examination of
the flots was carried out using a stereo-microscope, with magnifications ranging from x6.3 to
x50. The archaeobotanical material was identified by comparison to reference material in
McClatchie’s collection of modern diaspores.
Botanical and common names follow the order and nomenclature of New flora of the British
Isles (Stace 1991). When referring to specific deposits, the term ‘F.’ refers to Feature
number, and ‘S.’ refers to Sample number.
Plant macro-remains recorded
Rathlackan court tomb (E580)
Thirty samples from excavations at the Rathlackan court tomb were presented for analysis,
14 of which contained non-wood plant macro-remains. All of the material was preserved as a
result of charring, and all of the taxa recorded are likely to represent plants growing in the
local environment.
84

Phase F. S. Trench Deposit type Location Plant remains
present
LN 6 3 B Layer House interior: hearth …
E/MN 21 14 C Layer Court area: above ground surface and beneath collapse x
E/MN? 26 12 C Stake-hole fill Court area: stake-hole …
EBA 30 36 F Layer Rear chamber …
EBA 31 22 F Layer Rear chamber …
E/MN? 40 31 C Stake-hole fill Court area: stake-hole …
E/MN? 41 32 C Stake-hole fill Court area: stake-hole x
LN 44 34 F Layer Rear chamber x
E/MN? 49 42 F Layer Rear chamber x
E/MN? 56 59 C Slot-trench fill Beneath southern arm of cairn …
E/MN 58 45 F Layer Rear chamber: SE area, pit fill x
E/MN? 63 47 F Layer Rear chamber: burnt deposit x
E/MN? 64 48 C Layer Court area: layer above hearth x
E/MN 65 70 H Layer Middle chamber: beneath collapse …
E/MN 65 71 H Layer Middle chamber: beneath collapse …
E/MN 65 72 H Layer Middle chamber: beneath collapse …
Mixed 66 50 F Layer Rear chamber: pit fill x
Mixed 66 64 F Layer Rear chamber: pit fill …
E/MN 68 52 C Layer Court area: deposit surrounding hearth stone x
E/MN 68 61 C Layer Court area: deposit surrounding hearth stone x
E/MN 78 73 C Stake-hole fill Court area: stake-hole x
E/MN 78 111 C Stake-hole fill Court area: stake-hole …
E/MN 87 66 F Layer Rear chamber …
E/MN 87 67 F Layer Rear chamber …
LN? 93 63 C Pit fill Court area: small pit x
E/MN 95 68 F Layer Rear chamber: N area, beneath rough stone surface x
E/MN 95 69 F Layer Rear chamber: N area, beneath rough stone surface x
E/MN? 97 60 C Layer Court area …
E/MN 107 75 C Layer Court area: deposit beneath hearth …
E/MN? 111 78 C Pit fill Court area: south of hearth …
Table 1: Examined deposits from Rathlackan court tomb: (x = present)
85

Plant macro-remains were recorded in six samples within the court area, all of which are
thought to date to the Early–Middle Neolithic period. The largest quantity of remains was
recorded in the fill of a stake-hole in the court area, F.78, which contained 48 shell fragments
of Corylus avellana L. (hazelnut). Smaller quantities of hazelnut shell fragments were
recorded in four other contexts – a stake-hole fill at the forecourt entrance (F.41), a deposit
surrounding the hearth-stone (F.68), a layer above the hearth (F.64), and a deposit located
above the ground surface and beneath the tomb collapse (F.21).
Plant macro-remains that are thought to date to the Early–Middle Neolithic period were also
recorded in five deposits within the rear chamber of the court tomb. Small quantities of
hazelnut shell fragments were present in layers within the rear chamber (F.49, F.63 and
F.95). A small number of achenes (seeds) of Rumex acetosa L. (sorrel) and Rumex spp.
(docks) were also found in layers F.63 and F.95, as well as in pit fill F.58. Sorrel and species
of the dock genus can grow in a variety of environments, including grassy areas, cultivated
fields and on disturbed ground around settlements.
F. 21 41 44 49 58 63 64 66 68 68 78 93 95 95
S. 14 32 34 42 45 47 48 50 52 61 73 63 68 69
Botanical name
CORYLACEAE
Corylus avellana L.
POLYGONACEAE
Plant
part
Nutshell
fragment
Common
name
Hazelnut 16 5 1 1 … 1 2 3 3 12 48 … 1 …
Rumex acetosa L. Achene Common
sorrel
… … … … 1 … … … … 4
Rumex spp. Achene Docks … … … … … 1 … … … … … … … 1
ROSACEAE
Rubus sp. Nutlet Bramble … … … … … 1 … … … …
cf. Malus sylvestris
Mill.
Endocarp
fragment
Possible
crab-apple
… … 1 … … … … … 1 …
GRAMINEAE
Gramineae
Culm
fragment
Grass … … … … … … … … 2 …
Table 2: Plant macro-remains recorded at Rathlackan
A Late Neolithic layer within the rear chamber (F.44) contained a possible crab-apple
endocarp fragment, as well as a hazelnut shell fragment. A small pit located within the court
area (F.93) is most likely early/middle Neolithic but may date to the Late Neolithic period,
and this pit contained a possible endocarp (core) fragment of Malus sylvestris Mill. (crabapple)
and a culm (stem) fragment of Gramineae (indeterminate grass). An undated pit fill
within the rear chamber (F.66) contained a nutlet (seed) of Rubus spp. (bramble) and
hazelnut shell fragments.
86

Behy-Glenulra: Céide Fields visitor centre (E494)
Eleven samples were analysed from excavations carried out in association with construction
of the Céide Fields visitor centre. The deposits were located in Zone 1 and were excavated
during the 1989 phase of investigations at this location. Non-wood plant macro-remains were
absent from all 11 samples.
Phase F. S. Trench Deposit
EBA 3 3 C Burnt layer
EBA 9 16 H Layer
EBA 11 18 H Burnt layer
EBA 11 27 H Burnt layer
EBA 13 … H Shallow trench
EBA? 14 … H Possible shallow trench
LN 15 19 H Fill of pit (F.19)
LN 16 29 H Fill of pit (F.19)
EBA? 20 … H Shallow trench
LN 21 30 H Fill of pit (F.19)
EBA? 24c 28 H Fill of stake-hole in possible structure
Table 3: Examined deposits from Céide Fields visitor centre
Glenulra scatter (92E0140)
Two deposits from excavations at the Glenulra scatter were presented for analysis, neither
of which contained non-wood plant macro-remains.
Phase F. S. Deposit
MN? 6 5 Shallow spread
MN? 8 9 Fill of stake-hole
Table 4: Examined deposits from Glenulra scatter
87

Belderg Beg roundhouse and field systems (E109)
Twenty-six samples from excavations at Belderg Beg were presented for analysis, four of
which contained non-wood plant macro-remains. All the material was preserved as a result
of charring, and both cultivated and wild plants were represented.
Phase S. Trench Deposit type/location Plant remains
present
EBA 2 A1 Charcoal spreads: deposit adhering to quern stone …
EBA? 19 A1 Charcoal spreads: shallow area near pit …
EBA? 22 A1 Charcoal spreads: beneath brown habitation soil …
EBA? 27 A1 Charcoal spreads: possible spread …
EBA? 35 A1 Charcoal spreads …
EBA? 40 A1 Charcoal spreads …
EBA 96 A1 Deposit …
MBA 200 B1 House: Base of pit beneath flat stones …
MBA 201 B1 House: wall trench containing quernstone …
MBA 205 B1 House: beneath small stones around sill stone x
MBA 213 B1 Wall slot …
MBA 226 B1 House: SE quadrant foundation trench …
MBA 234 B1 House: deposit amongst stones …
MBA 236 B1 House: burnt timber …
MBA 238 B1 Wall slot …
MBA 241 B1 Wall slot …
MBA 242 B1 House: wall trench …
MBA 243 B1 Wall slot …
MBA 247 B1 House: beneath entrance flagging x
MBA 252 B1 House: shattered flint and burnt wood …
EBA 253 B2a Charocal spreads: deposit that pre-dates ploughing …
MBA 254 B1 House: wall trench W of site …
MBA 255 B1 House: near post hole …
EBA 256 B2T East B2T possible midden …
EBA 901 B2P West B2P possible midden x
EBA 902 B2P West B2P possible midden x
Table 5: Examined deposits from Belderg Beg
88

A possible midden (B2P) contained a small quantity of hazelnut shell fragments (S.901 and
S.902). Cereal remains, consisting of grains of Hordeum vulgare L. (barley), were found
beneath entrance flagging at the house (S.247), while achenes of Persicaria spp.
(knotweeds) were recorded in the area around the sill stone at the house (S.205). Species of
the knotweeds genus can grow in a variety of environments, including cultivated fields and
on disturbed ground around settlements.
S. 205 247 901 902
Botanical name Plant part Common name
CORYLACEAE
Corylus avellana L. Nutshell fragment Hazelnut 1 1
POLYGONACEAE
Persicaria spp. Achene Knotweeds 2
GRAMINEAE
Hordeum vulgare L. Grain Barley 2
Hordeum vulgare L. Grain fragment Barley 1
Gramineae Grain Indeterminate grass 1
Table 6: Plant macro-remains recorded at Belderg Beg
Four samples from excavations at Belderg Beg were previously examined by Mick Monk,
revealing evidence for c. 100 fragments of hazelnut shell (M. Monk, pers. comm. 2010).
Further hazelnut remains were also present in a number of B2T and B2P ‘midden’ deposits
that were not examined as part of this study.
Discussion
Overview
Deposits from four sites – Rathlackan court tomb, Glenulra scatter, Céide Fields visitor
centre and Belderg Beg house and field system – were examined for their archaeobotanical
content. Non-wood plant macro-remains were recorded only at the Rathlackan court tomb
and the Belderg Beg settlement. Remains at Rathlackan consisted of wild plants, some of
which may have been collected, while both wild and cultivated plants were represented at
Belderg Beg.
89

Cultivated remains
The presence of a small quantity of barley grains in a Middle Bronze Age deposit associated
with the entrance to the house at Belderg Beg is of particular interest. Previous studies of
plant macro-remains have indicated that barley is often, although not exclusively, the
predominant cereal type at Middle–Late Bronze Age settlement sites in Ireland (Monk 1986;
McClatchie 2007; Fuller et al. in press). Its presence at Belderg Beg represents, therefore, a
commonly occurring cereal of this period. This plant macro-remains evidence also correlates
well with results from other environmental studies in this area. Soil microphological analysis
of Bronze Age deposits at Belderg Beg has demonstrated that cereal cultivation was taking
place, while analysis of pollen remains also indicates that barley was being cultivated (Verrill
and Tipping 2010),
As well as the presence of cereals at Belderg Beg, it is the location of the cereal remains at
this site that is of interest. The cereal remains were found at the entrance of the house,
beneath flagging. The cereal remains could be interpreted as simply representing floorsweepings,
which accumulated at the edge of the structure. There is, however, increasing
evidence at Bronze Age sites in Ireland for the deposition of materials at boundary locations.
As well as the discovery of cereal grains at the entrance area, a number of saddle querns
were found in the packing of post-holes at the Belderg Beg house (Caulfield et al. 2009, 35).
There are also a number of other Bronze Age settlements in Ireland with comparable
deposits, for example the saddle-quern fragments recorded at the entrance post-holes in
structures at Ballybrowney, Co. Cork (Cleary 2006, 20).. A similar practice has been
recognised at Bronze Age settlement sites in southern Britain (Brück 1999a, 152–4).
Entrances may have been regarded as boundary areas – barriers between the safe, inside
and the unknown, outside worlds – that were deemed suitable for the deposition of food and
associated remains. Remains could have been placed as token offerings, being deposited at
various times throughout the life of the structure, and perhaps also on abandonment (Brück
1999a, 154; 1999b, 334; 2006, 300–01). It should, therefore, be considered that these cereal
remains were deliberately deposited in this location at Belderg Beg, rather than simply
representing discarded debris.
Although the presence of charred cereal grains at Belderg Beg is an important find, it should
be noted that very few remains were recorded. Given the archaeological, soil
micromorphological and palynological evidence for cereal-related activity at this location, the
relatively small quantity of actual cereal grains is somewhat disappointing. Indeed, cereal
macro-remains have been somewhat elusive from excavations of prehistoric sites in this
area. A notable exception is the very small quantity of cereal remains that was present at the
Early Neolithic rectangular structure in nearby Ballyglass (McClatchie, in press). The
somewhat paltry evidence for cereal macro-remains at Belderg Beg underlines the
importance of conducting multi-proxy analyses when investigating the potential for past
agricultural activity – a reliance on the plant macro-remains alone from Belderg Beg might
have produced a somewhat different picture.
90

Wild remains
Hazelnut shell fragments dominated the assemblage at Rathlackan, with smaller quantities
of common sorrel, bramble and crab-apple remains also present. Hazelnut remains were
also recorded at Belderg Beg, in addition to knotweed remains.
The predominance of hazelnut shell at Rathlackan is partly due to taphonomic issues,
whereby hazelnut shells are more likely to be preserved when compared with many other
plant categories. Nutshell may have been discarded into fires in order to reduce its mass or
to act as fuel. The robust shells are therefore more likely to be charred and preserved when
compared with plants that are more often eaten raw or boiled, such as vegetables and fruits.
It is therefore likely that the activities at Rathlackan, and indeed Belderg Beg, may have
incorporated a wider range of plants than that represented in the examined deposits. It is
clear, however, that hazelnuts appear to have been available at Rathlackan and Belderg
Beg, providing a seasonally available, highly nutritious foodstuff. Hazelnuts are strongly
associated with prehistoric food procurement strategies in many parts of northern Europe,
including at Irish Neolithic and Bronze Age sites (McComb and Simpson 1999).
The presence of crab-apple remains in what appear to be Late Neolithic (and perhaps
earlier) deposits associated with the tomb at Rathlackan is interesting. Apple endocarp
remains dating to the Late Neolithic have previously been recorded in cremation pits at
Castletown Tara 1, Co. Meath (Elder 2009). In Britain, a number of later Neolithic–earlier
Bronze Age sites have produced crab-apple endocarp fragments, pips and even whole and
half apples, which have sometimes been interpreted as ‘ritual’ deposits (e.g. at Clifton
Quarry, Worcestershire; E. Pearson, pers. comm.). The remains of crab-apple, as well as
hazelnut and bramble, at Rathlackan may represent the remains of meals consumed by the
living during burial ceremonies, or may have been deliberately placed into deposits at the
court tomb in order to accompany or represent the dead. The presence of charcoal from
hazel and Maloideae (pomaceous fruitwood, which includes apple) in deposits at Rathlackan
suggests that the wood of these plants may also have been used in activities at this location,
while hazel wood was also recorded in Rathlackan deposits (L. O’Donnell, pers. comm.).
The stone-built Neolithic field systems of the North Mayo region are often interpreted as
being constructed for the containment of animals, due to the large size of the fields (Caulfield
1978; Waddell 2000, 36). It should be considered, however, that organic boundaries, making
use of scrub plants such as hazel, crab-apple and bramble, may also have been utilised to
sub-divide these fields. Given the evidence for cereal pollen in deposits contemporary with
the Neolithic field systems (for example, O’Connell and Molloy 2001, 104–6), it should be
considered that smaller arable fields, sub-divided by organic boundaries, were also a feature
of Neolithic agricultural activity in this region.
91

The presence of common sorrel and docks seeds in deposits at Rathlackan, and knotweeds
seeds at Belderg Beg may represent plants that were growing locally. Common sorrel may
have been gathered for consumption, as it provides leaves and flowering heads that can be
eaten as leafy greens (Mears and Hillman 2007, 261). The knotweeds seeds at Belderg Beg
may similarly represent locally growing weeds, or plants that were growing alongside the
cereals and inadvertently harvested,
Recommendation for retention/deaccessioning
It is recommended that the charred plant macro-remains from this site should be retained for
any future analyses that may be carried out. Future investigations may utilise new scientific
analyses of previously excavated material, including further radiocarbon dating. A recent
development in archaeological science is the ability to carry out 14 C AMS dating on single
plant components (e.g. a seed or nutshell fragment). The remains of annual plants – such as
hazelnut shell and cereal grains – are ideal material for radiocarbon dating, as they are more
likely to produce narrow date-ranges when compared with longer-lived species (e.g. wood
charcoal).
Another recent development in archaeological science is the exploration of palaeo-diets and
agricultural reconstruction through the analysis of crop stable isotope ratios. The practice of
manuring (use of animal dung as fertiliser to enhance crop yields) causes substantial
enrichment of crop 15N ratios, which can be detected through the scientific analysis of
charred cereal grains (Bogaard et al. 2007). Stable isotope analysis of the cereal grains at
Belderg Beg could therefore provide new insights into agricultural practices in Bronze Age
Ireland.
This material requires relatively little storage space. Charred remains are stable and do not
usually require additional conservation when stored in an appropriate manner (e.g. in welllabelled
hard-cased vials).
Conclusions
Analysis of archaeobotanical remains from four sites – Rathlackan court tomb, Behy-
Glenulra (Céide Fields) visitor centre, Glenulra scatter, and Belderg Beg roundhouse and
field system – produced evidence for a small quantity of cultivated and wild remains.
Archaeobotanical material was absent from the examined samples at Glenulra scatter and
the Céide Fields visitor centre. Deposits at Rathlackan provided evidence for a range of
plants that may have been gathered as foodstuffs, including hazelnut, crab-apple, bramble
and common sorrel. These potential foodstuffs may have been consumed during activities at
the tomb, such as burial ceremonies, or may have been deposited to accompany or
represent the dead. Hazel, crab-apple and bramble shrubs may also have been utilised in
the prehistoric field systems of North Mayo, perhaps providing material for organic
boundaries in the sub-division of the larger stone-built field walls. Barley remains were
recorded at the entrance to the house at Belderg Beg, representing the only cultivated
remains identified from any of these sites. Hazelnut shell and knotweed remains were also
present. The presence of cereal remains complements other archaeological evidence at
Belderg Beg, including the field system and quern stones, indicating that cereal-related
activities were taking place at this location.
92

References
Beijerinck, W. 1947. Zadenatlas der Nederlandsche Flora. Wageningen: H. Veenman &
Zonen.
Bogaard, A., Heaton, T.H.E., Poulton, P. and Merbach, I. 2007. The impact of manuring on
nitrogen isotope ratios in cereals: archaeological implications for reconstruction of diet
and crop management practices. Journal of Archaeological Science 34, 335–43.
Brück, J. 1999a. Houses, lifecycles and depositions on Middle Bronze Age settlements in
southern England. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 65, 145–66.
Brück, J. 1999b. Ritual and rationality: some problems of interpretation in European
archaeology. European Journal of Archaeology 2(3), 313–44.
Brück, J. 2006. Fragmentation, personhood and the social construction of technology in
Middle and Late Bronze Age Britain. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 16(3), 297–315.
Caulfield, S. 1978. Neolithic fields. In H.C. Bowen and P.J. Fowler (eds), Early land allotment
in the British Isles: a survey of recent work, 137–43. Oxford: British Archaeological
Reports British Series 48.
Caulfield, S., Byrne, G., Downes, M., Dunne, N., Warren, G., Rathbone, S., McIlreavy, D.
and Walsh, P. 2009. Archaeological excavations at Belderg Beg (E109) Stratigraphic
report. Excavation report prepared for UCD School of Archaeology. Downloaded from
http://www.ucd.ie/archaeology/research/researcha-z/nbnm/ in December 2010.
Cleary, K. 2006. Irish Bronze Age settlements: more than meets the eye? Archaeology
Ireland 20(2), 18–21.
Elder, S.D. 2009. M3 Clonee–North of Kells Motorway. Report on the archaeological
excavation of Castletown Tara 1, Co. Meath; Ministerial Directions No. A008/025; E3078.
ACS Ltd. Downloaded from
http://www.m3motorway.ie/Archaeology/Section2/CastletownTara1/ in December 2010.
93

Fuller, D., Stevens, C. and McClatchie, M. (in press) Routine activities, tertiary refuse and
labor organization: social inferences from everyday archaeobotany. In M. Madella and M.
Savard (eds), Ancient Plants and People – Contemporary Trends in Archaeobotany.
Tucson: University of Arizona Press.
Katz, N.J., Katz, S.V. and Kipiani, M.G. 1965. Atlas and keys of fruits and seeds occurring in
the quaternary deposits of the USSR. Moscow: Nauka.
McClatchie, M. (in press). Appendix 4: Plant remains. In S. Ó Nuailláin and S. Greene (eds),
Excavation of the centre-court tomb and underlying house site at Ballyglass, Co. Mayo.
Seandálaíocht Monograph 3. Dublin: UCD School of Archaeology.
McClatchie, M. 2007. The study of plant macro-remains: investigating past societies and
landscapes. In E. Murphy and N. Whitehouse (eds), Environmental archaeology in
Ireland, 194–220. Oxford: Oxbow.
McComb, A.M.G. and Simpson, D. 1999. The wild bunch: exploitation of the hazel in
prehistoric Ireland. Ulster Journal of Archaeology 58, 1–16.
Mears, R. and Hillman, G. 2007. Wild foods. London: Hodder & Stoughton.
Monk, M.A. 1986. Evidence from macroscopic plant remains for crop husbandry in
prehistoric and early historic Ireland: a review. Journal of Irish Archaeology 3, 31–6.
O’Connell, M. and Molloy, K. 2001. Farming and woodland dynamics in Ireland during the
Neolithic. Biology and environment: Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 101B (1–2),
99–128.
Stace, C. 1991. New flora of the British Isles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tutin, T.G., Heywood, V.H., Burges, N.A., Valentine, D.H., Walters, S.M. and Webb, D.A.
1964–83. Flora Europaea (Volumes 1–6). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
94

Verrill, L. and Tipping, R. 2010. A palynological and geoarchaeological investigation into
Bronze Age farming at Belderg Beg, Co. Mayo, Ireland. Journal of Archaeological
Science 37, 1214–1225.
Waddell, J. 2000. The prehistoric archaeology of Ireland (second edition). Bray: Wordwell.
95

Part two:
Draft Chapters for final
volume
96

Soils and Geology
Graeme Warren
This chapter reviews the soils, geology and geomorphological background to the area. It is essentially
complete, but may have some further figures – plates giving views of the landscapes - added
This chapter outlines the geology, geomorphology and soils of the region from Annagh Head in the
west to Killala Bay in the east. On first encounter, this North Mayo region is a strikingly beautiful, if
sometimes stark, landscape seemingly dominated by bog. Whilst the presence of such extensive
blanket bog deposits is central to understanding both the archaeology of the region and its modern
settlement patterns, a deeper understanding of soils, geology and geomorphology reveals surprising
complexities. Figure 1 shows the location of the case study area, and Figure 2 includes some key
landscape features.
Geology
Figure 1: location of case study area
The geology of this area is complex, but can be simplified into four main components (Sleeman 1992,
Stone 1991) which tell a story of changing sea levels and major geological changes. The rocks
generally become younger as we move east along the study area (Figure 3).
97

Figure 2: overview of case study area
98

Figure 3: overview of geological features of case study area
99

The southern two thirds of the Mullet peninsula are part of the Erris complex, mainly gneisses with a
small area of more recent rocks to the extreme south. The Erris complex rocks are amongst the
oldest in Ireland, with some of those on the Mullet dating back to 1,900 million years ago (mya).
Other rocks in this complex range from 1,900 through to 900 – 650 mya. These rocks, which have
been significantly transformed by later metamorphism and deformation formed part of an ancient
North American continent which was later sundered from comparable rocks in Greenland and NE
America by the formation of the Atlantic ocean approximately 200 mya.
From the north of the Mullet peninsula eastwards, through Broad Haven Bay and to Glenlassra the
underlying rock is Dalradian in age, from the Grampian and Appin groups. Most of the Dalradian
rocks were deposited in a shallow sea following c. 750 mya, and they contain evidence for tropical
and glacial climates at different times. Following c 590 mya the Dalradian rocks were uplifted into
substantial mountains and eroded as the continental plates converged and moved apart. The
Grampian group includes the quartzite and psammitic schists that form the spectacular cliffs of this
part of the North Mayo Coast, whilst the northern slopes of the arc of mountains from Ben More to
Slieve Fyagh immediately to the south of Belderrig and extending west are mainly part of the Appin
group of quartzites and psammitic schists (Dalradian), with Carboniferous sandstones forming the
southern slopes and the summit of Slieve Fyagh. The complex of archaeological features in Belderrig
is associated with the Broadhaven group of quartzites and psammites. Dalradian pelitic schists of
the Inver Schist formation are the core of the area studied by Noel Dunne, including the hills of
Knocknalower and Dooncarton. The Dalradian rocks also include intrusive Caledonian metadolerites
associated with the opening and closing of the Atlantic (c400 mya). These are significant in the
Belderrig area, where they are visible through the psammites and quartzites and are associated with
massive quartz veins. Metadolerites to the south and south east of Belderrig form a significant part
of the Ben More range.
East of Glenlassra the region is dominated by Carboniferous sandstones and limestones deposited
from c 360 – 325 mya. Sandstones run from Glenlassra to the west of Killala Bay, which is underlain
by Carboniferous limestones (the Upper and Lower Ballina Limestone Formation). Some of the
Carboniferous sandstones were deposited on a coastal plain by rivers, but the Downpatrick
formation provides evidence of the encroaching Lower Carboniferous sea. The Ballina Limestones
indicate the deepening of this sea and fully marine conditions. North of Inishcrone, on the Eastern
side of Killala Bay these limestones include fossil corals. The Carboniferous limestones include cherts
and silicified limestones. These generally soft sedimentary rocks underlie the coastal lowlands and
low hills of the Ballycastle – Killala area, including Maumakeogh and form the dramatic Céide cliffs
outside the Céide Fields Centre and, most strikingly, at Downpatrick Head. This base geology
underlies the main Céide Fields complex and the complexes of field walls and associated structures
discovered by Gretta Byrne’s survey work between Ballycastle and Killala Bay.
Deglaciation and sea level change
The geological background provides the skeleton, but the surface of the North Mayo landscape has
been extensively reworked by the actions of ice and other associated processes during millennia of
glaciations and deglaciation. The last Ice Age culminated in Ireland being completely covered in an
extensive Ice Sheet at about 28-22,000 years ago. As this ice sheet retreated it left a series of
100

distinctive deposits and landscape features in North Mayo. So distinctive are these, that in fact, the
retreat of the ice at the end of the last Ice Age in the area has been the subject of long standing
research (for example Symes 1881). Hinch (1913) argued that the ‘shelly drift’ exposed at Belderg
and Glenulra was deposited by floating ice although later opinion suggests that this was an active ice
margin (see below).
Models of the late Glacial history of ice in the region vary (Greenwood and Clark 2009a, Greenwood
and Clark 2009b, McCabe 2008) but McCabe suggests that the area was last glaciated c. 26,000 cal
BC with evidence at Glenulra and Belderrig for ice moving in a NW direction. The ice then retreated
and appears to have been followed by a period of significant isostatic depression (depression of the
earth’s crust through the weight of the ice) associated with (very) high relative sea level and
deposition of a variety of glaciomarine and marine muds, sands and gravels. Glenulra Valley contains
a sequence of glaciomarine/marine muds deposited under water at a period of isostatic depression
(25-24,000 cal BC). These are found at c. 80m above today’s sea level, implying that the land was
80m below relative sea level at this time. Given that global sea level was c. 130m below present day
sea levels because of the very substantial bodies of water caught up in ice sheets in the Late Glacial,
this implies an isostatic depression of c. 210m.
Following this period of massive isostatic depression and hence local relative high sea levels, there is
evidence for the readvance of the ice. The Belderg shelly drift is now argued to be derived from ice
proximal sedimentation from tide water glaciers, followed by ice berg zone mud (McCabe 2008,
McCabe, Clark, and Clark 2005): i.e. the area was underwater at the margins of an ice sheet. This
dates to approximately 17,000 BC and again indicates considerable isostatic depression, with relative
sea level being hypothesised as c 20-30m above present (McCabe 2008, 250). Ice may then have
retreated again, and the last major advance of ice in the region was the Killard Point Stadial (c
13,500 cal BC). At this time McCabe reconstructs the Ice Sheet margin as lying at or just beyond the
western edge of Killala Bay or Lacken Strand, oriented approximately NNE/SSW, and therefore lying
immediately to the east of our primary study areas.
The story of deglaciation is important for our region. The ice shaped the hills and valleys of this
region over millennia, depositing tills and moving materials across the landscape – some of which
were to be important resources following colonisation by people. The area has been ice free for a
considerable period of time, although parts of the region were inundated by the sea at different
points in this sequence. The deposition of marine muds and gravels in specific parts of the landscape
is significant, and creates small pockets of variable resources and soils.
Sea level
Sea level changes continued long after the immediate retreat of Ice from the Belderrig area,
reflecting global sea level change due to ice melt (glacio-eustacy) and local rebound following the
removal of Ice masses. The interplay of these processes is complex, and unfortunately, there is no
radiocarbon data available on Holocene (post-glacial) sea level in the North Mayo area (Brooks and
Edwards 2006), but general models (Brooks et al. 2008) suggest that relative sea levels have
consistently risen in the region due. These models suggest that early in the Holocene (which began
9,700 cal BC) sea levels in the region were about 20 metres below present day, and these have since
101

isen. Due to greater isostatic rebound to the east due to its proximity to the centre of Ice
accumulation relative sea level has changed less in this area. According to these models, at
approximately 4000 BC, relative sea level at Killala Bay was about -3m and in Belmullet -5m.
Intertidal peats at Blacksod Bay and Killala Bay demonstrate the innundation of ancient landscape by
the rising sea.
The impact of this vertical sea level rise on the location of the coast line is harder to assess, as
erosion and shoreline migration are hard to reconstruct. In areas of hard coast – the high rocky cliffs
that dominate much of the North Mayo coast for example – the sea level change will have made no
difference to the location of the shoreline, beyond the impact of thousands of years of cliff erosion.
However, in areas of soft sediment, sea level rise will have also involved coastal erosion and,
potentially, the redeposition of material, making the precise reconstruction of prehistoric shorelines
very difficult. In areas such as the Mullet peninsula the comparatively gentle topography means that
small sea level rises could have drowned comparatively large areas and ancient shore lines may lie
some distance off the modern coast.
River processes
This coast line includes a number of significant rivers. The extensive Glenamoy basin includes two
main rivers: the Glenamoy and the Muingnabo which trend west. Further east, the rivers of the
North Mayo coast flow south to north: the Belderg River, Glenlassra River and Glenulra River. The
Glenlassra and Glenulra rivers are hanging valleys, exiting on high cliffs. At Ballycastle, the Ballinglen
River flows into Banatrahir Bay, along with the Bellananaminnaun River at the west of this Bay. To
the east the Cloonalaghan River flows into Lackan Bay, overlooked by Lackan Hill. Killala bay is
primarily fed by the River Moy, and the estuary is associated with complex shifting sand banks, bars
and islands.
In keeping with many parts of Ireland, little is known about the details of river development in the
case study area (Brown et al. 2007, Turner et al. 2010). The Glenamoy River is associated with
significant alluvial deposits and small scale investigations carried out by Davis, Warren and Turner
near the mouth of the Belderg river have indicated that c4.8m of sediment has been deposited since
375-175 cal BC (UBA-8287, 2195±35 bp). This suggests that, in some places at least, significant
landscape change may have taken place in terms of river activity. A deeper understanding of how
rivers have changed over time would be extremely helpful.
Soils
The modern soils of the region are dominated by high and low level blanket peat which extends
along most of the North Mayo coast. This has a very limited range of potential agricultural uses, and
today they are dominated by rough grazing (Gardiner and Radford 1980). This blanket peat has been
extensively used for peat cutting, mainly by hand, but with significant recent use of mechanised
extrusion technologies in recent years. Some small pockets of wet and dry podzols are also present
in river valleys in these extensive peat lands (Associations 155/185p) (??) and these support slightly
more intensive grazing.
102

Figure 4: major landuse categories. Data source EPA.
Peat development in this region began in prehistory and has a complex relationship with human
activity (see passim for detailed discussion). To the west of Belderrig varied dates on peats and trees
within peats suggest that peat formation had begun in the early post-glacial period, and the absence
of archaeological materials from the Glenamoy Basin is argued to demonstrate that peat was
present from early prehistoric times (Caulfield, O’Donnell, and Mitchell 1998). Recent work on Achill
Island (Caseldine et al. 2005) confirms the early date for peat initiation in some other locations in the
Atlantic west. Recent work in Belderrig (see below) is demonstrating considerable complexity in the
timing and extent of peat growth even within small areas and caution is needed in extrapolating
data from one location to another.
The Mullet peninsula includes pockets of gleys (174), and extensive windblown sands (5) to the west;
these are also found on the east of Blacksod and Broadhaven Bay. The wind-blown sands are
comparatively recent deposits, related to rising sea levels in the region and strong Atlantic gales.
To the east, the region from Ballycastle to Killala Bay is dominated by degraded grey-brown
podzolics (Soil Association 32) formed from calcareous gravelly loam tills of Carboniferous
limestones. They are generally well drained. Soils of this association have a limited range of potential
uses for modern agriculture; it is moderately suitable to cultivation today. The association is varied
spatially (see above for discussion of varied glaciomarine and marine sediments underlying these
soils), and this has limits the use of machinery, meaning that much of the area is in grassland.
Pockets of gleys lie to the west of this association, giving way to blanket peat. The hills of the upland
are between Lackan and Ballycastle see a return to blanket bog and associated peaty gleys.
103

Comparatively little is known about the pre-bog soils of North Mayo. A crude distinction may have
existed between soils developed over Carboniferous lime- and sandstones and those on the
Dalradian and older rock to the west, with the Carboniferous areas likely to have had higher quality
soils with better drainage and productivity. However, this will have been moderated by the tills,
glacio-marine and marine muds and other superficial deposits consequent upon deglaciation.
Variation at a small scale is likely to have been significant, and exposure to winds important in
determining farming potential.
104

References
?? Soil Map of West Mayo.
Brooks, A., and R. Edwards. 2006. The Development of a Sea-Level Database for Ireland. Irish Journal
of Earth Sciences 24, 13–27.
Brooks, A. J., S. L. Bradley, R. J. Edwards, G. A. Milne, B. Horton, and I. Shennan. 2008. Postglacial
relative sea-level observations from Ireland and their role in glacial rebound modelling.
Journal of Quaternary Science 23, 175-192.
Brown, A. G., G. Aalbersberg, M. Thorp, and P. Glanville. 2007. Alluvial Geoarchaeology in Ireland, in
E. M. Murphy and N. J. Whitehouse (Eds). Environmental Archaeology in Ireland, pp. 241-
258. Oxford: Oxbow.
Caseldine, C., G. Thompson, C. Langdon, and D. Hendon. 2005. Evidence for an extreme climatic
event on Achill Island, Co. Mayo, Ireland around 5200–5100 cal. yr BP. Journal of Quaternary
Science 20, 169–178.
Caulfield, S., R. G. O’Donnell, and P. I. Mitchell. 1998. 14C Dating of a Neolithic Field System at Céide
Fields, County Mayo, Ireland. Radiocarbon 40, 629-640.
Gardiner, M. J., and T. Radford 1980. Soil Associations of Ireland and Their Land Use Potential:
Explanatory Bulletin to Soil Map of Ireland 1980 Dublin: An Foras Talúntais.
Greenwood, S. L., and C. D. Clark. 2009a. Reconstructing the last Irish Ice Sheet 1: changing flow
geometries and ice flow dynamics deciphered from the glacial landform record. Quaternary
Science Reviews 28, 3085-3100.
—. 2009b. Reconstructing the last Irish Ice Sheet 2: a geomorphologically-driven model of ice sheet
growth, retreat and dynamics. Quaternary Science Reviews 28, 3101-3123.
Hinch, J. d. W. 1913. The shelly drift of Glenulra and Belderrig, Co. Mayo. Irish Naturalist 22, 1-6.
McCabe, A. M. 2008. Glacial Geology and Geomorphology: the Landscapes of Ireland. Edinburgh:
Dunedin.
McCabe, A. M., P. U. Clark, and J. Clark. 2005. AMS 14C dating of deglacial events in the Irish Sea
Basin and other sectors of the British–Irish ice sheet. Quaternary Science Reviews 24, 1673-
1690.
Sleeman, A. G. Editor. 1992. Geology of North Mayo: a geological description to accompany the
bedrock geology 1:100,000 map series: Sheet 6, North Mayo. Dublin: Geological Survey of
Ireland.
Stone, J. J. 1991. North Mayo - Regional Geology, in P. Coxon (Eds). Fieldguide to the Quaternary of
North Mayo, pp. 4 - 24. Dublin: Irish Association for Quaternary Studies.
Symes, R. G., Traill, W.A, McHenry, A. 1881. Explanatory Memoir to Accompany Sheets 39, 40, 51, 52
and Northern Portion of 62 of the Maps of the Geological Survey of Ireland, including the
country around Belmullet, Bangor, Corick, Belderg and Portacloy, and the Islands of Inishkea,
Inishglora and Duvillaun. Dublin: HMSO.
Turner, J. N., M. G. Macklin, A. F. Jones, and H. Lewis. 2010. New perspectives on Holocene flooding
in Ireland using meta-analysis of fluvial radiocarbon dates. Catena 82, 183-190.
105

History of Archaeological and Related Research in North
Mayo
Seamas Caulfield
This draft chapter reviews the history of research into the pre-bog archaeology of the region from the
nineteenth century into the twenty-first century. Further work is required in terms of illustrations,
editing and the relationship with other chapters of the volume as a whole.
Introduction
Formal research into the prehistory of North Mayo and related environmental change has its roots
over a century ago but observations on both natural phenomena and archaeological monuments go
back over half a century earlier. In 1841 a clergyman the Rev. Caesar Otway made very interesting
comments on the stumps of pine trees which he had observed along the Glenamoy river.
‘I had an opportunity to remark along the boggy banks............that immense roots of the bog fir trees
as they spread their horizontal limbs on every side and reposed not on the gravel below the bog, but
on the bog itself...............there was as much bog under them as over them...............I observed as in
other places, from five to eight feet of bog below the roots that with their stems set horizontally as
there they had grown, there made a large and flourishing tree and there by some sudden process
had been destroyed. .............The roots are always horizontal, they are always at the same line of
depth they in fact seem to have grown where they now are and the difficulty is to account for how
the underlying bog was formed, how such large timber could grow in bog and how it was
subsequently overthrown; for experience shows us that by no present means that we may use can
fir trees of any species be got to grow to any size upon the bog let us drain it or improve it how we
may. ....Hence I am led to come to the conclusion at any rate that some great change in the climate
and character of the country took place when it ceased to be a pine-growing country’(Otway
1841,341).
Caesar Otway’s acute observation of the significance of the location of the pine roots in, not under
the bog touches on one of the fundamental issues of ongoing research one hundred and seventy
years later – the phenomenon of the synchronous pines as a manifestation of climate changes.
There is a further observation in the use of bogs and pine trees to identify sea level inundation of the
land. Otway’s local informant from the Mullet peninsula told him ...’there are bogs and bog timbers
below the sands and under where the sea always flows ....... there was a ship stranded not long ago
on the sandy beach off Terraun Point; in order to raise her or at any rate to save her timbers the
people dug all around her during the ebb of a spring tide and cutting as they did down through the
sand and where the sea came in on them so that their labour was in vain, yet still at the bottom they
found nothing but bog and large pieces of bog fir’. A coastguard in the company verified the
phenomenon. ‘I have often seen in Blacksod Bay of a clear day fathoms down the roots of trees that
seemed of the same sort as what are every day dug out of our bogs’(Otway 1841,80).
106

The first scientific paper on late glacial phenomena was published by Hinch in 1913. His study of the
Belderg and Glenulra shelly drift, on the landward side of the road to the pier in Belderrig and beside
the bridge in Glenulra valley established the marine context of the glacial deposit (Hinch 1913).
Archaeological Research
The recognition of pre-bronze Age archaeological remains in North Mayo was confined to an
awareness of the megalithic remains in Ballyglass townland. Here again a local informant of Caesar
Otway gives a folk narrative of an incident involving the tomb which may be closer to the perception
of the structure by its original builders than is normally found in modern interpretations by
archaeologists. Interest in megalithic structures other than Passage Tombs was very limited and the
main impetus in the 1930s came from the Belfast based Oliver Davies and Estyn Evans. In
geographical terms the closest research to the North Mayo area was Hencken’s excavation of the
megalithic tomb at Creevykeel in Co. Sligo (Hencken 1939).
When the late Professor Ruaidhrí de Valéra took up the study of megalithic tombs, his initial
research for a post-graduate degree was a study of the megaliths of Co. Clare. His later interest in
the work of the Belfast researchers led him to question the evidence of a lone tomb at Ballyglass.
His instinct was that the tomb was too isolated from the nearest neighbouring tombs in Co. Sligo.
He came to the Ballycastle area to enquire from local knowledge if other ‘giants’ graves’ existed in
the area. The result of his fieldtrip was the discovery of over a dozen megalithic tombs between
Killala Bay and the smaller Bunatrahir Bay on the North Mayo coast (de Valéra 1951). Megalithic
tombs were considered to be intimately connected with the spread of farming and the first
occurrence of pottery and other Neolithic artifacts. The entire Neolithic period was thought to be as
short as two centuries. A major issue of debate arose in regard to the line of evolution of these longcairned
megaliths. Had their builders entered Ireland on the east coast and spread westwards with
their horned facades developing deeper and deeper facades as the tomb builders spread westwards,
ending up as so-called “lobster claw cairns”. Piggott’s (1954) The Neolithic Cultures of the British
Isles proposed the Clyde Carlingford culture as seen in the long cairn tombs of both islands with
entry around Carlingford and a fanning out of the farmer communities from there. It was also
proposed that the primary area of colonisation was likely to have a high level of uniformity with
divergence from the norm indicating later evolution.
De Valéra’s (1959) study of the “Court Cairns of Ireland”, his doctoral thesis sought to reverse
Piggott’s Clyde Carlingford sequence by arguing that if density of distribution was indicative of
primary focus of entry, coupled with standardised form, then a western origin with two rather than
three-chamber gallery and with full lobster claw as the norm was more likely. He proposed that
Bunatrahir Bay on the west rather than Carlingford Lough on the east was the most likely point of
entry. The debate took place at a time when the Neolithic of Ireland and Britain was thought to be
no more than two to four centuries in duration, so that the process of colonising the island by
farmers could be seen to occupy a significant portion of that time. One long term result of the de
Valéra thesis was the acceptance of the lobster claw as the primary form by the general acceptance
of the term ‘Court Cairn’ for the tomb type.
In de Valéra’s early research in North Mayo he had been taken to see “The Roomeens”, a megalithic
structure of three cruciform chambers completely encased in two metres of bog on the middle
slopes of Céide hill in Behy townland. The cruciform layout of the chambers which at that time was
107

associated only with Passage Tombs in Ireland led de Valéra and Ó Nualláin to publish an article on
the tomb identifying it as Passage Tomb (de Valéra and Ó Nualláin,1952). They noted however some
anomalous features both within the tomb structure and in its siting and location. Structural detail
such as the jamb and sill segmentation at the eastern end of the main chamber was more suggestive
of a court tomb. The isolated location, at some distance from the passage tomb cemeteries of Sligo
but in particular its siting on the middle slopes of Céide hill was recognised as unusual for a passage
tomb and much more the expected location of a court tomb.
During the 1950s continuing research by de Valéra and Ó Nualláin on Volume 2 of the Megalithic
Survey (de Valéra and Ó Nualláin 1964) led to the recognition that some court tombs had one or
more chambers opening off the main gallery of chambers. They came to the conclusion that the
Behy tomb was not a passage tomb as originally identified but was instead the prime example of a
small group of those court tombs with transeptal chambers. In 1963, in collaboration with Professor
Michael Herity of the Archaeology Department in UCD they excavated to the east of the chambers in
the Behy tomb in the expectation that they would find a rectangular rather than circular cairn and
that they would find a court rather than passage at this location, both of which predictions were
borne out. Apart from de Valéra’s desire to put his western entry theory to the test of the spade he
saw the Behy excavation as contributing to an understanding of his theories on the essential unity of
the whole long barrow tradition in earth and stone. De Valéra’s extreme megalithic unionist view
saw a common origin on mainland Europe and a cousinly relationship between the megaliths of the
Severn Cotswold area and the court tombs of Ireland(de Valéra 1965). The fact that many of the
Severn Cotswold tombs possessed transepted chambers in long cairns led de Valéra to conclude that
this feature was an early international feature introduced into Ireland and lost at an early stage
before the expansion of the farming communities from the initial area of colonisation. Because de
Valéra argued for a western entry for court tomb builders he saw the geographically confined
transepted sites as early examples still manifesting international form which was lost before
expansion of the farmer builders out of the west. The Behy tomb as the best example of the
international tradition and sealed by two metres of bog was an obvious choice to test the thesis.
Excavations were begun in 1963 and the eastern end of the cairn was exposed and as anticipated, a
court leading directly into the burial chambers was revealed. The de Valéra thesis of the cousinly
relationship with the Severn Cotswold tombs was strengthened by the fact that the court was
constructed of small stone dry walling rather than of the expected orthostats.
Over the collapsed facade on the left side of the court a stratigraphically later rubble stone wall
overlay the cairn collapse and ran eastwards towards the uncut bog. During the 1963 excavation
while on a field trip to Belderrig valley seven kilometres west of the Behy tomb, the writer’s father,
Patrick Caulfield showed the excavation team the Belderrig ‘stone circle’ and associated stone walls
in its vicinity in an area of cutaway bog. In 1934 Patrick Caulfield had written to the National
Museum bringing to the attention of the Director, Dr. Adolf Mahr, the megalithic remains, pre-bog
stone walls and ancient quernstones found in bogs in the Belderrig area. Mahr replied and while he
made no reference to the pre-bog walls and indicated that quernstones without decoration were of
little interest to the Museum, he made the prescient observation that ‘it is especially the cromlech
beneath the bog which may turn out to be extremely important and everything should be done to
keep them undisturbed until that date at which a scientific examination can be made of them’.
108

Also in the summer of 1963, fifty kilometres to the south of Behy, at Carrownaglogh near
Bonnyconlon at the foot of the Ox Mountains, a local postman, Tommy Togher had noted a sizeable
stone wall where he had cut his turf. He discovered a very large flint scraper in the wall and sent it
to the National Museum. Peter Danagher, then assistant keeper in the National Museum visited the
site and from there continued on to visit the Behy excavation. Herity, close friend and colleague of
Peter Danagher returned with him to Carrownaglogh where he met with Tommy Togher and saw the
pre-bog walls.
Visitors to the excavations at the Behy tomb accustomed to walking over cutaway bog and
interested in what the pre-bog surface revealed had observed the walls at various locations
between the road and the tomb 400 metres upslope into the bog. De Valéra and Ó Nualláin’s single
minded focus on the megalithic tomb saw the wall on the collapsed cairn as obviously
stratigraphically later and separated possibly by millennia from their focus of study. Herity was
particularly interested in investigating further the Behy stone wall but the other directors of the
excavation were not supportive of the idea. It was recognised during that summer from the Behy,
Belderrig and Carrownaglogh discoveries that pre-bog walls were a more widespread
phenomenon than previously thought. In 1967 Herity proposed that he and the writer should
undertake a study of the phenomenon.
In 1969 a programme of excavation of the pre-bog walls commenced at two locations, Herity at
Carrownaglogh and the writer on the walls in the vicinity of the Behy tomb. Archaeological
excavations in the North Mayo area were well established by this stage. Ó Nualláin had excavated
the small Ballyglass tomb(Mayo 14) in 1967 and was into his second season at the large Ballyglass
(Mayo 13). During the excavation of the walls in 1969, a reconnoitre of the cutaway bog with Patrick
Caulfield led to the identification of partly exposed enclosures in the cutaway bog. In 1970 it was
decided to excavate one of these enclosures sited about 300 metres to the east of the Behy tomb
just across the townland boundary in Glenulra townland. It was already obvious from the recce of
Céide hill that the field walls were much more extensive than had been thought, creating the
problem of where to identify within the fields, potential concentrations of human activity which
could lead to artifact or other critically diagnostic phenomena. The confines of an enclosure - for
whatever purpose – offered the best opportunity. The western half of the enclosure was excavated
in the summer of 1970. No internal structure was observed but some flint artifacts and a polished
chip of stone identified as probably from a stone axe were recovered. In the same season five
kilometres to the east, Ó Nualláin’s third season of excavation at Ballyglass had discovered the
foundation trenches of a large house which underlay and therefore predated the tomb(Ó Nualláin
19xx). The discovery of the Ballyglass house was very important at the time. It was the most
substantial Neolithic house known from Britain or Ireland and only a handful of houses of the period
were known. In Ireland the only parallels known were Knockadoon on Lough Gur and Ballinagilly in
Co. Tyrone. It was also the only polycameral house identified in these islands. The discovery gave
rise to considerable interest among the general public. An open day held on the 15 August 1970
attracted a crowd of over one thousand from throughout the county and further afield despite a
deluge and severe flooding.
In 1971, Herity’s second season of excavation led to the discovery of cultivation ridges on the prebog
surface, the prime breakthrough that had been hoped for of being able to identify the purpose
of the fields. Again the discovery caused widespread interest..
109

The second season of excavation of the Glenulra enclosure entailed the removal of the uncut bank of
turf over much of this part of the site. During the 1970 season some small densely concentrated
pockets of tiny quartz chips had been noted in the soil immediately under the peat. In 1971 after
some dry and very sunny days one of these concentrations was seen to have dried out and was
recognisable as a sherd of very degraded pottery. Once identified some further sherds of Neolithic
pottery and degraded pottery were recovered.
The most important result of the season’s fieldwork did not come from the excavation but in the
weeks immediately following. Turf cutting for fuel over a number of generations had removed the
overlying bog from almost one square kilometre of Céide hill, the equivalent of many millions of
pounds worth of archaeological excavation. On completion of the season’s excavation the writer
and one of the undergraduate assistants on the excavation, now Dr. Brian Dornan, mapped the field
boundaries exposed in the cutaway bogs in Behy and Glenulra townlands which resulted in the
drawing up of the original map of the Behy/Glenulra field system(Caulfield 1978).
The initial survey led to two conclusions which remain valid today. Firstly the Behy/Glenulra field
system was laid out as a series of long parallels divided by cross walls into large fields and appear to
be contemporary with the enclosure . This conclusion is based on the fact that neither the enclosure
nor the wall nearby has been robbed out, something one would expect if they were not
contemporary. Secondly, the walls seem to have been built to create enclosed pasture for cattle.
Both the size of the individual fields and the overall size of the field system indicated pasture though
this did not rule out the possibility of small tillage plots within the larger fields.
The Belderrig Valley Research: Belderg Beg Excavations.
Dire economic circumstances in autumn 1971 led to a government initiative to expend €30 million
on labour as rapidly as possible with archaeological excavations seen as an ideal medium for this as
it had been since 1933. The problem for academic archaeologists was that the work had to start
promptly and to be completed by end of March which ruled out student participation or full time
involvement by lecturing staff. Herity’s discovery of the cultivation ridges at Carrownaglogh had
shown that early farming practices within the field boundaries could be recovered. The windswept
bleak hillside at Behy/Glenulra and the size of the fields made Céide hill an unlikely candidate for the
discovery of prehistoric cultivation practices. It was decided to turn attention to the stone walls on
the western side of Belderrig valley in Belderg Beg townland, a much more sheltered location. A
project was proposed to employ twelve local workmen for ten weeks under the day to day
supervision of Patrick Caulfield to uncover the stone walls about which he had written to the
National Museum in 1934. The writer travelled from University College Dublin at the weekends and
by re-scheduling lectures with colleagues was able to extend the visits to be there for Friday and or
Monday working day. The local workforce was fully briefed about what had been discovered at the
Glenulra enclosure but it was not expected to recover artifacts and certainly not pottery at this
phase of the work. Yet within two weeks one of the workmen, Micheál O Malley had identified and
recovered early Neolithic pottery which remains as the most intact vessel found during the years of
excavation.
The Glenulra excavation was completed at Easter 1972 and the first full season of excavation at
Belderg Beg commenced that summer. Half the “stone circle” was excavated and it quickly emerged
that the circle of stones was part of an outer bank of earth and stone of a large circular house with
110

the earth for the bank coming from a wide ditch dug outside. The most significant discovery given
the purpose of the excavations was a small spread of charcoal with a long V of the charcoal
extending from it in the subsoil, the first discovery of prehistoric ard marks in the country. The
typical pattern of two sets of ard marks at right angles to one another indicating cross ploughing was
visible in the subsoil. Later expansion of this area of ploughing led to the fortuitous discovery of
cultivation ridges similar to those found at Carrownaglogh and which in places overlay the ard
marks. This raised an issue at the time: were the ridges an early example of rig and furrow meaning
that the primitive ard was capable of moving the soil sufficiently to form the ridges. If this was so,
rig and furrow cultivation could no longer be seen as requiring the Roman plough.
By the end of the 1972 season there was significant interest in the research programme though this
was mainly by archaeologists from abroad where research into early agriculture was much more
developed than in Ireland. Professor Bernard Wailes, based at University of Pennsylvania arranged
for the Radiocarbon dating of samples by the Smithsonian Institute in Washington DC which
provided the first series of dates from the early farming sites. The most significant of these dates
was the Neolithic date for the Glenulra enclosure, the terminus ante quem date for a pine tree
growing in peat close by a pre-bog wall and a number of dates which indicated second millennium
re-occupation of the site, a phase to which the round house and a wall built on peat were dated.
Excavations were carried out over a number of seasons on various features of the Belderg Beg site
from 1972 to the final season in 1982 (Caulfield 1983). Given the extent of the finds in the initial
season, there was a marked scarcity of artifacts in later years and despite the archaeological and
Radiocarbon evidence for Neolithic settlement no dwelling structure was identified. The 1976
season which concentrated on the excavation of the enclosure which had been partly robbed out by
the second millennium re-occupation of the site was particularly disappointing in regards to both
internal structure and artifacts.
The eighties marked a further extension of the research when students who had worked on the
project as undergraduates at both Belderg Beg and Céide Fields were invited to carry out research
on blocks of the North Mayo region for their postgraduate theses. The two principal assistants over
the years at Céide Fields, Gretta Byrne and Noel Dunne undertook two major blocks which form
sections of this report. Others who undertook significant research were Michael McDonagh,
Margaret Keane, Antonine Healy and Karl Brady. Other major archaeological work carried out in the
early 1990s was a probed survey of the very extensive but irregular field boundaries on the eastern
side of Belderrig valley in Belderg More townland.
In the 1970s, Telefís Éireann, the national television station produced a weekly farming programme.
In 1973 they made a documentary programme entitled “The First Farmers” based on the recent
research at Carrownaglogh, Behy/Glenulra and Belderrig. The documentary attracted a very wide
audience because it had not been made as an archaeological programme but as a straightforward
farming programme which happened to be about farming five thousand years ago. The
documentary was also very important for the long term success of the North Mayo research in
introducing the presenter of the programme, till then acquainted with the contemporary world of
farming, to the world of farming in the past. The presenter, Professor Martin Downes, then on a
career break from the world of academia remains associated with the project and became the main
link between the archaeological world of the humanities and the world of science. His
111

communication skills have played a very big part in the later developments of the research in taking
the findings to a wider public and to the decision makers in the later development of the project.
Archaeological excavation and research has continued in Belderrig valley in recent years with a new
programme of research into an earlier pre-farming settlement of fisher-gatherers on a low cliff edge
overlooking the seashore in Belderg More townland. The research work is led by Dr. Graeme
Warren on a site originally identified by Patrick Caulfield. Apart from its significance as the major
late Mesolithic site identified west of the Shannon it may emerge as central to an understanding of
the subsequent settlement of the valley because of the virtually contiguous Neolithic walls (Warren
2009).
Scientific Research associated with the Archaeological Projects.
From the initial excavations at the Behy tomb in 1963, the potential of the bogland location was
seen as significant for pollen analysis and Radiocarbon dating. The first dates were received from
the Belfast Radiocarbon Laboratory. Professor John Moore of the Botany Department in UCD
carried out some early pollen analysis in which he identified a ‘landnam’ phase in deeper bog to the
west which he examined. Another result of his preliminary work on pollen analysis at Behy was in
recognising the dominance of pine in the arboreal pollen(Moore 1979).
Professor Martin Downes investigated the potential of the pine stumps for tree-ring analysis in the
1970s. At the time the thrust of the tree-ring analysis in Belfast was to complete and extend the
dendrochronological sequence as a calibration for Radiocarbon dating and there was little interest in
site-specific or short sequence ring matching. The work demonstrated the potential for identifying
the direction of spread of the trees onto the bog.
The pine phase in the bogs of North Mayo, first commented on by Otway marks such a significant
change in the botanical record that it should be recognisable even where the tree stumps do not
survive. The fact that pine pollen is one of the larger pollens and most readily identifiable led
Downes to develop a rapid method of seeking the pine peak in the bogs with a view to using it as a
chronological marker. Ms. Antonine Healy undertook the application of the method on Céide Fields
for her M.A. thesis in 1992.
In 1991, as part of the ongoing research into Céide Fields, Dr. Karen Molloy of the Palaeoecology
Laboratory in NUIG was commissioned to carry out pollen analysis in the area. This research was
expanded to a more extensive research project on Céide Fields in association with Professor Michael
O’Connell of the same Laboratory which led to the definitive publication of the long sequence
monolith from a deep very confined bog basin in Glenulra townland(Molloy and O’Connell 1995).
The monolith indicated a ‘landnam phenomenon of herbaceous replacement of arboreal dominance
with grassland dominant for a relatively short period. The pollen analysis also showed sporadic
farming activity in the millennia after the main occupation of the fields, something which could be
expected given that parts of the fields had very limited growth of bog in some places. A
controversial addendum to the report which proposed an alternative interpretation of the
archaeology of the field boundaries does not diminish the important contribution which the primary
botanical analysis has provided for the nature and duration of the period of main occupation of the
fields. The Radiocarbon dates associated with the Glenulra peat monolith are in agreement with the
112

dates from the macrofossil remains and from the archaeological material that the main occupation
of Céide Fields was in the middle of the fourth millennium BC.
In 1988 an exhibition of ongoing research projects throughout UCD led to collaborative research
between Professor Peter Mitchell and Dr. Rory O’Donnell of the Experimental Physics Department
and the Céide Fields research project. The Radiocarbon equipment was used to date many of the
pine trees in the bogs overlying Céide Fields and Belderrig field systems and numerous other
locations in North Mayo. The series of dates provided for the North Mayo pine trees confirmed the
broadly synchronous nature of these trees as originally commented on by Otway. They also confirm
the general indication that the bog in which the majority of the dated trees grew was established by
3000 BC and that the wall boundaries beneath must date to the fourth millennium BC at the latest
(Caulfield et al. 1998).
In 1996 Dr. Lisa Doyle who had worked on the Céide Fields project as an undergraduate undertook a
pollen and tephra analysis at two locations, one on the Belderg Beg excavation and the second in
Geevraun townland about 400 metres to the west beside a peat monolith and pine stump for which
Radiocarbon dates had been obtained.
The North Mayo Research and the Public
From the first Open Day on 15 August 1970 it was always the policy of the archaeologists involved
to communicate with the wider public through on site visits and through the media. Articles in the
local and national press brought the significance of the discoveries to the general public despite the
fact that visually even the minor part of the monument which could be seen was about as
uninteresting as a collapsed stone wall can be. In 1972 the television programme The First Farmers
was broadcast on Telefís Éireann as it then was titled and the visual impact of the scenery combined
with the story of the roots of Irish farming led to increased visitor numbers in North Mayo. In the
latter half of the eighties, European funding was being made available for the construction of
interpretative centres to manage and increase visitor numbers at key heritage sites throughout the
country. A request to national government that Céide Fields be considered for funding was rejected
on the legitimate grounds that a location which was attracting relatively small numbers of tourists
did not require an interpretative centre to manage those tourists. An appeal to local government in
Co. Mayo received a much more positive response. An initial grant of £40,000 made available by the
County Development Team was matched by local fundraising of 50,000 and a further £40,000 from
the County Council itself created an Irish fund of close to £130,000. European funding of 75% now
left a project of half a million pounds ready to be developed by autumn 1988. The project was
subsequently encouraged to be increased to £2.5 million with the understanding that external
funding of almost £2 million would be available though this was subsequently reduced to half that
amount. By summer 1990 the scaling back of the project was causing much disappointment but a
visit by the Taoiseach Charles Haughey led to the involvement of national government and the
acceptance of responsibility for the development of the project by the Office of Public Works. Three
years later Céide Fields interpretative centre was opened in an award winning building designed in
house in the Office of Public Works, only the second occasion ever that the Office had received the
Triennial Gold Medal of the RIAI.
The Céide Fields development project had got great support at immediately local and county level
and this continued after the responsibility for the project was taken over by the Office of Public
113

Works. During the 1980s the cities of Galway, Cork and Dublin had marked significant historical
dates by celebrating the 500, 800 and millennium years in the three cities. The writer proposed to
Mayo County Council that a rural county with roots extending back for at least five thousand years
should designate 1993 as ‘Mayo 5000’ to celebrate five thousand years of rural settlement which
continues to be the dominant form of settlement in the county. The Council agreed and a
promotional programme and a series of events were organised throughout the county. Many of the
events throughout the county were of a one-off local nature but a number, briefly described below
had a wider and more far reaching effect.
An Post agreed to issue a commemorative stamp to mark the opening of Céide Fields and the artist
Charles Roycroft succeeded in accommodating a view of the fields and the North Mayo coastline,
the detailed plan of four square kilometres of the site, a cross-section of the bog and the chronology
all within the confines of the postage stamp.
An international sculpture symposium was held over a period of three weeks where sculptors
working with the aid of local volunteers and social employment workers created fifteen pieces of
earth and stone construction throughout North Mayo. In keeping with the non-nucleated
settlement pattern of Céide Fields the creations were not all created in a sculpture park but instead
were widely dispersed throughout North Mayo. Because the symposium was established as part of
the celebration of the Mayo 5000 it was a condition of the tenders for participation that the
proposed creation should have the potential to survive for another five thousand years, which is why
earth and stone construction was specified.
In order to highlight the opening of Céide Fields in early summer 1993 it was decided that one of the
highlights of the Mayo 5000 celebration should be the performance of a specially commissioned
symphony ‘The Spirit of Mayo’ in the National Concert Hall in Dublin. The symphony was preceded
by a traditional concert of Irish music and dance. The symphony was composed by Bill Whelan,
dancers included Michael Flatley and Jean Butler, among the singers and musicians were Anúna and
Davy Spillane and the concert was produced by John McColgan of Abhainn Productions. Within a
month of the concert in June 1993 Moya Doherty of Abhainn Productions was asked to produce the
Eurovision Contest being held in Dublin in Spring 1994. Putting the same performers ‘on the centre
stage of Eurovision’ Doherty created a ten minute interval act called Riverdance and in their own
words ‘the rest is history’.
The achievement of securing a major interpretative centre for Céide Fields and the celebration of
Mayo 5000 was not without its disappointments. The original project had envisaged the provision of
a regional display area and facilities for study and ongoing research. Unfortunately costs dictated
that these elements had to be excised and the structure functions as an interpretative centre for
general tourism. It was eventually decided to seek a basic research and study facility in Belderrig
and again the County Council with the County Vocational Education Committee with the writer,
Martin Downes and a local Belderrig committee succeeded in securing a grant of half a million
pounds in 1998 on the recommendation of the then Minister for Science and Technology, Mr. Noel
Treacy. This provided two basic laboratories, one for science and one for archaeological research
and another general purpose building for conferences and meetings which also functions as a
Belderrig community centre.
114

New Research and Researchers
Over the last decade, new research projects have been carried out in the Belderrig area. Dr. Lucy
Verrill completed her doctorate in Edinburgh University on the analysis of the soils and pollen of the
Belderg Beg farm site. Other research by Dr. Erica Guttmann Bond on the Neolithic soils at Céide
Fields and Belderg Beg is to be published in the near future. Verrill and Dr. Richard Tipping have
published on the Bronze Age farm at Belderg Beg (Verrill and Tipping 2010).
When the writer retired from the Department of Archaeology in University College Dublin in 2000 it
severed the strong direct link between research by members and students of the Department and
North Mayo which had started with Professor de Valéra and had lasted for almost half a century.
The appointment of Dr. Graeme Warren to the staff of the Department, now the School of
Archaeology, whose main research interest was in the Mesolithic period provided an opportunity to
introduce him to the site at the seashore in Belderrig. In an eroding gully at the low gravel cliffs on
the east side of Belderrig harbour Patrick Caulfield had noted the high concentration of chipped
quartz and some other struck pieces. Professor Peter Woodman had confirmed the Late Mesolithic
assemblage on a visit some years previously. Warren’s excavation of the site in Belderg More
townland has yielded and enormous quantity of late Mesolithic, mainly quartz artefacts with
fishbone and hazelnut surviving and dating to the fifth millennium BC. Earlier research on the field
systems in Belderg More townland had located walls in close proximity to the Mesolithic site on the
cliff edge. Warren’s excavation trench running inland from the cliff site intercepted one of these
walls within metres of the Mesolithic material.
The Warren research programme has led to significant spin-off research with Killian Driscoll
completing his doctoral thesis on the quartz material from the Belderg More excavation. The
potential of Belderrig valley to provide a sharply focussed picture of environmental conditions and
change over the period of the Mesolithic Neolithic transition/replacement has led to collaborative
research between Warren, Dr. Steve Davis and Dr. Naomi Holmes into late glacial and post glacial
lake deposits at the southern end of Belderrig valley five kilometres from the seashore. Surprisingly
early Radiocarbon dates and the crinoid evidence raise issues about the limits and nature of
glaciation in North Mayo. In the last two years, research by Davis on a small lake in Belderg Beg
townland close by the excavated fields and within a kilometre of the seashore has yielded an
environmental sequence which commences before the Mesolithic settlement and continues to the
present.
115

Bibliography
Caulfield, S. 1978. Neolithic Fields: The Irish Evidence. pp. 137-143 in H.C. Bowen and P.J. Fowler
(eds.) Early Land Allotment. British Archaeological Reports 48.
Caulfield, S. 1983. The Neolithic Settlement of North Connaught. pp.195-215 in T. Reeves-Smyth and
F. Hamond (eds.) Landscape Archaeology in Ireland. British Archaeological Reports 116.
Caulfield, S.,O’Donnell, R.G. and Mitchell, P.I. 1998. 14C Dating of a Neolithic Field System at Céide
Fields, County Mayo, Ireland. Radiocarbon 40, 629-640.
de Valéra, R. 1951. A Group of ‘Horned Cairns’ near Ballycastle, Co. Mayo. Journal of the Royal
Society of Antiquaries of Ireland 81, 161-197.
de Valéra, R. 1960. The Court Cairns of Ireland. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 60C, 9-140.
de Valéra, R. 1965. Transeptal Court Cairns. Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland 95,
5-37.
de Valéra,R. and Ó Nualláin,S. 1952. Journal of the Galway Historical and Archaeological Society 25,
47-51.
de Valéra,R. and Ó Nualláin, S. 1964. Survey of the Megalithic Tombs of Ireland. Volume 2 County
Mayo. Stationery Office. Dublin.
Hencken, H. 1939. A Long Cairn at Creevykeel, Co. Sligo. Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries
of Ireland 69, 53-98.
Hinch, J.deW. 1913. The Shelly Drift of Glenulra and Belderrig, Co. Mayo. The Irish Naturalist 22,1-6.
Molloy, K. and O’Connell, M. 1995. Palaeological investigations towards the reconstruction of
environment and land-use changes during prehistory at Céide Fields, western Ireland.
Problemeder Kustenforschung im sudlichen Nordseegebiet 23,187-225.
Ó Nualláin, S. 1972. A Neolithic House at Ballyglass near Ballycastle, Co. Mayo. Journal of the Royal
Society of Antiquaries of Ireland 102, 49-57.
Otway,C. 1841. Sketches in Erris and Tyrawly. Longman, Orme and Co. London.
Piggott, S. 1954. The Neolithic cultures of the British Isles. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
Verrill, L. and Tipping, R. 2010. A palynological and geoarchaeological investigation into
Bronze Age farming at Belderg Beg, Co. Mayo, Ireland. Journal of Archaeological Science 37,
1214-1225.
Warren, G. 2009. Belderrig: A ‘New’ Later Mesolithic and Neolithic Landscape in Northwest Ireland.
pp. 143-152 in N.Finlay, S. McCartan, N. Milner and C.W. Jones (eds), From Bann Flakes to
Bushmills; Papers in Honour of Professor Peter Woodman. Oxford.
116

Probed Surveys: Erris, Céide Fields and Belderg More
Seamas Caulfield
This draft chapter outlines the progress and results of Caulfield’s main survey projects. It requires
editing and integrating with illustrations. These will include the use of maps of the Céide complex at
different stages, showing the development of the project.
Traditional Turf Cutting in North Mayo
Hand cutting of turf for fuel varies from one region to the next due to the nature of the bogs being
cut and the extent of bog available. In the case of the deep, rapidly growing Midland bogs, the
raised bogs may be five or more metres in depth but confined in area. Turf cutting in these bogs
involves a team of at least three people with only one person cutting, another throwing up the sods
to the bank and another piling the cut sods on a special flat-bed wooden wheelbarrow and wheeling
the sods away from the bank to a spreadfield where they are placed flat on the ground to dry. The
top metre or more of the bog is a lightly compacted sphagnum which will not dry and condense so
that even if relatively dry, easily absorbs massive amounts of water when left exposed. This metre
or more of top is discarded by throwing it into the hole left by last year’s cutting. As many as twelve
to fifteen ‘spits’ or ‘tops’ of turf are cut below this, very often the flooding of the boghole rather
than reaching the base of the bog is what terminates the cutting. The turf becomes more
compacted and therefore dries more densely as one goes downwards though the very dense turf at
the base lacking in any binding fibre tends to disintegrate if dried in strong sunshine. The sods range
from 10 to 12 cm in square cross-section and from 30 to 40 cm in length cut with a ‘sleán’ or
turfspade with a wing at right angles to the normal cutting edge which allows the cutting of the
regular square sectioned sod with one thrust and lift of the spade. The turfspade comes in both left
and right forms for use by left and right cutters. To cut left-handed is to have the left hand as the
lifting hand half way down the handle while the right hand provides some thrust and controls the
spade. A left-handed turfspade has the wing on the right hand side of the spade so that the sod
when thrown to the left of the cutter is thrown away from the wing. A right-handed turfspade has
the wing on the left side for the same reason. The bank of turf cut in a deep raised bog may be up to
two metres wide and may be no more than ten metres in length.
In regions of extensive blanket bog such as North Mayo, bog depth can vary from a metre or less on
slopes to over four metres on flat ground. Gradient rather than altitude is the controlling factor and
four metres of bog can be found on flat hill tops as well as in valley bottoms. In North Mayo turf
cutting is a one-man operation. The top ten to fifteen centimetres of the growing ‘scraw’ is
‘scrawed’ with the traditional general purpose spade along a bank face 80 to 90 cm wide and one
hundred metres or more in length. The first ‘top’ seven to nine sods wide is thrown from the
turfspade in a ‘corraí’ or continuous heap one and a half to three metres in from the bank edge. The
second top is thrown onto the vacant one and a half metre strip between the bank edge and the first
corraí. The third and if present a fourth top is cut and thrown into the boghole. Irrespective of the
depth of the bog, no more than four tops is ever cut because of the difficulty of spreading it
afterwards. In deeper blanket bog where two or more tops remain uncut, after ten to twelve years
117

cutting the bank face will have receded by eight to ten metres and turf cutters will again remove the
scraw and have a second cutting and in very deep bog may even have a third cutting. Turf cutting
normally takes place in April and May. After about three weeks in the corraí, in which time a skin
dries on the exposed sods, the turf is spread by throwing the first corraí further outwards so that all
sods are lying flat on the ground in a strip between three and six metres from the bank edge. The
second top is then spread flat on the ground in the three metre strip from the bank edge which had
been covered by the first and second corraí. The third and fourth tops are spread in the boghole in
a similar manner. In reasonably fair weather the turf is sufficiently dry to be ‘reckled’ three weeks
after spreading. Reckling involves standing four sods in a pyramid and if the turf is well dried adding
perhaps another six to eight sods around the pyramid with intact or broken sods on top. The open
centre of the reckle and the fact that the sod is now in minimal contact with the potentially wet
ground allows the turf to dry completely when it is then referred to as ‘saved’.
The Erris Survey
A major change of direction in the research was initiated in 1979. There were no funds available for
excavation that year but a chance meeting with Lelia Doolan who was co-ordinator of a
development group in Erris at the time led to the offer of a small grant to investigate some aspect of
the archaeology of the Erris area. A short four week programme of reconnoitring areas of cutaway
bog and turbary (where bogs were still being cut) located pre-bog walls at numerous locations to the
west of Belderrig, including a number at the northern end of the Mullet peninsula. In preparing a
brief report on the programme for the Doolan committee and the general public the team were
acutely aware of how weak the visual record was. Over the years they knew that even professional
archaeologists had at times doubted the existence of the walls from the remains to be seen above
ground. The difficulty arose because people thought that where the bog has been cut away, that the
prehistoric surface remains exposed but as explained above this is not the case. Because the upper
ten to fifteen centimetres of growing bog is removed and thrown down onto the surface exposed in
the previous year’s cutting, the ground surface and plants visible in the cutaway bog is the modern
surface and plants of the uncut bog. The only place where the pre-bog surface is exposed is the less
than one metre wide strip immediately adjacent to the bank face where the last season’s turf has
been cut. If the bog depth exceeded four tops deep even this strip will merely show the residual
uncut turf. The redeposited top sod or “scraw” can easily cover up the exposed walls so that only
the top stones are exposed. This is particularly the case where the bog has not been cut to its full
depth.
In order to show the profile of the walls in the cutaway bogs, a dozen bamboo rods, three feet in
length were inserted into the bog as a transect across the line of the wall at 30 cm intervals. The
bamboos were all pushed into the soft bog until they hit the hard ‘gravel’, that is the mineral soil
beneath. The resultant profile of the tops of the bamboos is a precise profile of the mineral soil and
the prehistoric wall unaffected by the overlying scraw and/or any residual uncut bog. The wall
profiles could now be captured in photographs and by giving such unequivocal visual verification it
was found that the bamboos allowed the walls to be followed even where there was no visual
evidence. During this short season in 1979 it was found that the walls could be followed in under
the uncut bog by using bamboos of six feet in length though the insertion and in particular the
extraction of the bamboos proved to be very arduous.
118

Iron probes of varying lengths had for long been used to locate fallen timbers and to establish the
length and bulk of trees and their depth in the bog. Similar probes had been used to a limited extent
when surveying the original Behy/Glenulra fields and at Belderg Beg. Noel Dunne who had worked
on the Belderg Beg excavations from 1975 and on the Erris survey now combined the use of probes
of different lengths with short bamboos to locate walls in deep uncut bog as he concentrated on
part of the Erris survey for a Master’s thesis. T-headed probes made from standard building site rod
iron of lengths from 1.5 to 4.0 metres were used depending on the depth of the bog and short
bamboos were inserted beside the top of the probe before it was extracted from the bog. In this
way, the profile of the pre-bog surface and the walls built on that surface even when under four
metres of bog could be transferred to the surface in a few minutes. It is this very basic method
which has been in use since then.
The Céide Fields Survey
The Behy/Glenulra plan was first published in 1978 (Caulfield, 1978). By the early 1980s the plan
had been republished in a number of papers and books on early agriculture by a number of
archaeologists writing on early agriculture. The Neolithic date and the scale of such early fields was
often commented on. Yet it was obvious that what had been mapped was only that part of the
fields which happened to be exposed by modern turf cutting and that all the long parallel walls on
the plan did not terminate but instead disappeared into uncut bog. In September 1983 the writer
returned to the Behy/Glenulra area with a group of UCD undergraduates to attempt to extend the
long parallels under the bog. In teams of three with iron probes from 1.5 to 4.0 metres in length
and short bamboos the teams located the position of the walls from where they entered the uncut
bog. Moving forward about five metres along the projected line of the wall from its last identified
location and then moving approximately four metres at right angles, a transect was probed across
the projected line. The probe was inserted at every 30cm in order to establish the ground level
beneath the bog. As the probe crossed the line of the wall the marker bamboos stand higher than
those marking ground level. Even though the feel of the probe hitting on stone is more firm than
when it hits the mineral soil and the sound of metal on stone can also be heard, only a raised profile
with lower ground level on either side delineated by the template of the bamboos indicates with
certainty where the wall is. Once the midpoint of the wall is located a bamboo is left in situ and the
team move forward a further five metres. In a short four week programme the long parallels were
traced as far again under the bog, doubling the originally mapped area of the Behy/Glenulra system.
That system comprised a series of xx parallel walls running inland from the cliff and following the
axis of Céide hill, a spur which runs northwards from the plateau of Maumakeogh mountain. Over
one and a half kilometres inland from the cliffs some of the walls curve to link with the adjacent
parallel closing off the strips with a rounded end. The two most easterly parallel walls of the
original Behy/Glenulra field system ran to the summit of Céide hill where they rounded off to link
the two parallels together. The most easterly wall also forked to the left in a curve which then
became a straight line but which was not parallel to the other walls and was over the crest of the
Céide ridge looking eastwards into Glenulra valley. The closest comparison for these large fields
were the very extensive fields of the Dartmoor reaves but in one element there was a major
contrast. Where the Dartmoor parallel reaves appear to run up to a previously constructed terminal
reave at right angles to the parallels, the Behy/Glenulra parallels have no such common boundary.
119

The following season the team continued to extend the known walls further eastwards into Glenulra
townland. Hitherto the probing had only attempted to extend known walls where they had been
identified in cut away bogs. The new wall discovered at the end of the 1983 programme on the
summit of Céide hill had a different alignment to the Behy/Glenulra system of parallels. It was
decided to attempt a “blind probe” in a continuous transect eastwards from the summit of the ridge
down the eastern side of Céide hill which is the western side of Glenulra valley. A continuous probe
at 30 cm intervals was carried out and the raised profiles of four new walls were discovered. Once
located, the walls were extended to either side of the transect by the normal method. The new
walls were long relatively straight walls and were parallel to the wall on the summit. But whereas
the walls on the western side of Céide hill were aligned on the direction of the spur of this hill the
new walls on the eastern side of the hill were very much out of kilter with the natural axes of the
terrain. Parallel field boundaries whether ancient or modern tend to follow one of the natural axes,
either running up slope or along the contours but in contrast these new walls ran diagonally across
the slope of the hill.
Céide hill which is a spur off Maumkeogh runs in a northerly direction. Ballyknock hill which forms
the eastern side of Glenulra valley is on a different axis to Céide hill running in a more northeasterly
direction. As well as Glenulra townland, a number of other townlands including Muingelly,
Doonfeeney Upper, Doonfeeney Lower, Ballyknock and Sralagagh also extend onto the hill. Most of
the bog has been cut off Ballyknock hill and walls had been observed at a number of different
locations there. Sralagagh townland which lies to the south of Glenulra and west of Ballyknock has
very extensive turbary allotments in bog up to four metres in depth and the location of these walls
had been published in 1983. In 1987 the probing programme concentrated on this hill. Most of the
earlier observations of pre-bog walls now integrated into a pattern of new parallels aligned in this
case on the alignment of Ballyknock hill or else enclosing the top of the hill. One long parallel ran
westwards from the summit of Ballyknock hill into the deep Sralagagh bog. It could be seen from
the plan that the Sralagagh Ballyknock wall was in harmony with the direction of the land and was
also parallel to the walls on the western side of the valley on Céide hill. If those fields were indeed
part of a parallel system it had clearly originated on the Ballyknock Sralagagh side of the valley. If
this interpretation was correct there should be other walls down the east side of Glenulra valley and
those walls should be parallel to those already mapped. A series of blind probes from the Sralagagh
townland boundary down the eastern side of Glenulra valley did locate a number of walls and as
predicted they were parallel to both the Céide hill east and the Sralagagh walls.
To the south and southeast of Ballyknock there are extensive tracts of forest but beyond that walls
were identified in the townlands of Aghoo, Ballinglen and Ballykinletteragh. One season of probing
and mapping in those townlands has identified a less regular system of boundaries. While these
walls to the south east of Ballyknock may eventually be integrated into the main Céide Fields
complex their closer proximity to the field systems on Suí Finn across the Ballinglen valley and less
than a kilometre away suggest that they should be grouped directly with them.
By the end of the 1980s a problem of nomenclature had arisen. The Behy/Glenulra field system was
an appropriate name when the fields were confined to the two townlands but the extension onto
Ballyknock hill meant the fields forming an integrated system had now been extended into a number
of other townlands as well. At this time plans were getting under way for the economic exploitation
of the research in a major tourism initiative in Co. Mayo. The research work had commenced on
120

Céide hill twenty five years earlier and the proposal was to build a major interpretative centre
overlooking the Céide cliffs where Céide hill ends abruptly. The new name ‘Céide Fields’ was coined
to describe the entire field system extending over many square kilometres and into numerous
townlands.
The extension of the original Behy/Glenulra field system in 1983 and 1984 had extended the known
parallels to more than double their length. In the area of the original survey where the bog had
been cut away, the plan showed long parallel walls which defined long strips of ground divided by
offset crosswalls. The proven success of the blind probing in locating totally concealed walls on
both sides of Glenulra valley led to a programme of blind probing between the parallels. This
programme carried out in 1989 and 1990 concentrated on an intensive probed survey of a 2km
x2km square of hillside straddling the Behy/Glenulra hillside. The blind probing located the
crosswalls dividing the strips and also some internal features within the fields particularly one field
away to the south of the Behy tomb. The intense structuring of this area of Céide Fields compared
to the looseness of Ballyknock/Sralagagh is in part at least a reflection of the intensity of research
concentrated on this area. Much work still remains to be done on the eastern part of Céide Fields.
Céide Fields is made up of two distinct adjoining field systems, the original Behy Glenulra system
aligned on Céide hill and the Ballyknock system aligned on Ballyknock hill to the east. Where they
clearly meet at the summit of Céide hill, they are buried under more than three metres of bog.
There is a hint that the two systems may not simply abut one another. The first wall encountered
immediately east of the Ballyknock aligned wall on the summit is not part of the Ballyknock
alignment but appears instead to be on the Céide alignment. If it belongs with the Céide field
system it is possibly a residual element with the Ballyknock system over riding the southeastern end
of the Céide system.
Belderrig Valley: The Belderg More Survey
Towards the end of the final season of excavation at Belderg Beg in 1982, the lessons learned on the
Erris survey were applied to the wall originally notified to the National Museum in 1934. A limited
amount of probing of the wall running eastwards into deep bog extended the wall by over 100
metres. Further work remains to be done on commonage and in private land to the north and east
of the excavated site. The hill on the eastern side of Belderrig valley has the enclosed fields of the
modern farms on the lower slopes on its western and southern side running down to Belderrig river
but the summit and eastern and northern side is unenclosed commonage originally bog covered but
now with almost all the bog cut away. Degraded stone walls are visible on the top of the hill as well
as two megalithic tombs, one a basic single chamber in a small cairn and the other, a Wedge Tomb
built on the highest point of the hill. Looking west across the valley from here one is looking at the
Belderg Beg settlement while to the east a Court Tomb (Mayo xx) is visible. When the Céide Fields
Interpretative Centre was under construction it was intended that the Centre would act as a magnet
to attract tourists to the area and that the Centre would interpret a wider North Mayo in order to
hold people within the area for longer. In 1991 the archaeological team was divided with half the
team working on the survey at Céide Fields and the other half, surveying the largely exposed
remains on Cruinnioc hill in Belderg More townland. This research was part funded by the Heritage
Council.
121

The Belderg More survey mapped a series of irregular walls on the summit and in the unenclosed
commonage to the northeast and north of the modern enclosed farmland. The top of the hill is
enclosed within an irregular but mainly contour wall. At the southwest there may be a hint of two or
more walls more or less parallel to the enclosure but as these terminate in the modern farmland it is
not possible to say if these parallels were extensive or if the parallel contour strips were repeated
further down slope towards the river in the valley bottom. To the north the walls have a more
rectilinear pattern and in this area Radiocarbon dates for pine trees growing in one case on top of a
wall and in another on 30cm of peat beside a pre-bog wall have given the earliest dates (4580+60
BP; 4480+60 BP). One long and relatively straight wall runs downslope towards Belderrig harbour
where it runs into the most northerly modern enclosed field. Just to the north of this field the
Warren excavation of the Belderg More Mesolithic site has uncovered a further stretch of pre-bog
walling. This wall is probably contemporary with if not part of the main complex of walls for which
the early dates have been obtained. A kilometre further to the east , prebog walls have been
surveyed in an area of turbary. The walls do not display a regular pattern. A Radiocarbon date of
4010+60 for a pine stump growing in peat 50cm above the mineral soil was 55 metres from a
junction of two walls which are likely to be contemporary with the fourth millennium BC walls in
Belderrig to the west and Céide Fields to the east.
122

Survey on the Glenamoy – Bartnatra Peninsula
Noel Dunne
This draft chapter reviews Noel Dunne’s survey work at the western end of the NBNM landscapes.
Minor work on text and images is required for completion. Further editing and cross referencing with
other chapters will be required. We need to finalise new GIS figures for this chapter to replace those
used in Dunne’s MA thesis and – all relevant data has been digitised as part of this phase of the
project. Figures are not included in this draft. Dunne will obtain new publication quality plates to
accompany the final text. Those taken in the 1980s are considered to be in need of updating.
Introduction
In the Summer of 1979, Prof. Seamas Caulfield switched his attention from excavation work at
Belderrig to reconnaissance survey of pre-bog archaeology, focussing on the Northwest corner of
Mayo. This survey revealed evidence of pre-bog boundaries on moderately elevated slopes at a
number of locations, including the Northeast portion of the Mullet peninsula in the townlands of
Knocknalina, Moyrahan, Shanaghy and Tallaght. Individual occurrences were also recorded at Tristia
to the Southwest of Carrowmore Lake, Glencullin Upper to the East of Carrowmore Lake and
Rosdoagh on the Rossport peninsula. Isolated megaliths in the Northwest, such as Rosduagh,
Shanaghy and Tristia (de Valera and O Nuallain, 1964, Ma2, Ma18 and Ma45) were all shown to have
pre-bog walls in their vicinity.
Further sites were recorded to the North of Carrowmore Lake over a geographical area for
convenience titled the Glenamoy – Barnatra peninsula, with pre-bog boundaries located in the
townlands of Faulagh, Muingerroon South, Knocknalower, Gortmelia and Gortbrack North. The
present author expanded the survey work in this latter area from 1983 to 1985 as part of an MA
thesis in Archaeology at UCD, titled Pre-Bog Archaeology, The Glenamoy-Barnatra Peninsula, Co.
Mayo.
Study Area
As stated, the present study area concentrates on the Glenamoy – Barnatra peninsula, covering an
area of c. 53kms 2 , with a maximum E-W distance of c. 10kms and N-S of 8kms. The peninsula is
bounded on the North by Broad Haven Bay and on the West and Southwest by Inver Bay and Tra
Kirtaun, both inlets of Broad Haven Bay. On the Northeast, Sruwaddacon Bay and the Glenamoy
123

River form the boundary, with Glenamoy village delimiting the maximum East extent of the survey.
The region is delimited on the S by the North shore of Carrowmore Lake, a large expanse of water,
6kms long (N-S) and 4kms wide along its North shore, tapering to 1.5kms wide along its S shore.
Some prehistoric monuments were known within the peninsula prior to the present survey. A total
of 14 megalithic tombs were recorded, 7 of which are listed by de Valera and O’Nuallain (1964). Five
others have been published by Aldridge (1961, 1965), while the remaining 2 were discovered in the
course of the 1979 reconnaissance fieldwork. Three cists are listed in the National Museum of
Ireland topographical files and a stone circle, on the North end of the peninsula, has been published
by Westropp (1912, 130-2).
Convex-shaped hills form the most striking topographical features over the peninsula. Five such hills
exist, namely, Carrowmore hill (200 ft +), Faulagh hill (500 ft +), Pollatomish hill (348 ft),
Knocklalower hill (616 ft) with its W shoulder known locally as Gortmelia hill (400 ft +) and
Dooncarton hill (875 ft)/. The latter displays numerous shoulders and 3 individual peaks in excess of
800 ft. In general the slopes and summits of these hills possess a cover of blanket bog, the principal
exception being portions of the uppermost slopes of Dooncarton hill, especially its North slope,
where bedrock outcrops and where slope is sufficiently steep to discourage the development of
blanket bog.
In contrast, the East end of the peninsula is low-lying with deep blanket bog cover. This area forms
the southwest extent of the Glenamoy plain, a large expanse of lowland bounded on the South by
Slieve Fyagh, on the East by Benmore and on the North by the uplands of Glinsk, Knockadaff and
Benwee Head. Narrow strips of low-lying terrain exist along the North end of the peninsula between
Dooncarton hill and the sea and along the North shore of Carrowmore Lake. A wider band of similar
terrain is present along the W edge of the peninsula in the townlands of Graghil, Inver and
Gortmelia.
The drainage pattern of the peninsula is radial, mostly composed of short youthful stretches of
stream. The major river, the Glenamoy, is located at the East edge and drains the plain of the same
name, flowing westwards into Sruwaddacon Bay. The Owenduff River drains the South slopes of
Knocknalower hill, flowing westwards through the Gortbrack valley floor into Inver Bay. The
124

Bungurra River drains the Knocknalower valley floor in a Northwest direction and then turns South
to drain the lowlands East of Faulagh hill, before flowing into the Northeast corner of Carrowmore
Lake.
Present day settlement and farmland totals 1650ha, or 31% of the area, while blanket bog covers
3,635 ha (69%). The major block of present day settlement is on the lowland along the West coast,
the West slope of Gortmelia hill, the Owenduff valley floor and the lower Southwest slope of
Dooncarton hill. A continuous narrow band of settlement stretches along the North and Northeast
coast from Dooncarton townland, through Barnaguillew, Carnhill and Pollatomish, to Aghoos.
Elsewhere, the present day settlements are in the form of small, fairly fertile oasis within the
bogland. These islands include the land adjacent to the Glenamoy River, close to Bellanaboy bridge,
the lower South slope of Faulagh hill, the East slope of Knocknalower hill and a band of land that
stretches from the Northwest corner of Carrwomore Lake to Barnatra.
Turbary, or the practice of turf cutting, is generally practised in close proximity to the present
settlements. This is most evident in the case of the West and Southwest slopes of Dooncarton hill
and most of Gortmelia hill, which are close to the quite densely settled villages of Dooncarton,
Graghil, Gortbrack, Inver and Gortmelia. These villages were even more densely settled in prefamine
times. Elsewhere, turbary is normally practised on South and West hillslopes, to facilitate the
drying of the turf and on bogland that is in close proximity to roads. Completely cut-away tracts of
bogland are present on the two previously mentioned hillslopes, on the slopes of Carrowmore hill,
on the Southwest slope of Faulagh hill and on the South slope of Knocknalower hill. The major
continuous tract of uncut bog covers the lowland in the East of the study area, the summit and
North and East slopes of Faulagh hill, the Southeast spur of Faulagh hill and the lowland between
Faulagh and Pollatomish hills. An exception here is the turbary practised on the low-lying bog in
Aghoos townland. Part of the surface of the low-lying, eastern bog is now planted with coniferous
forest. The other areas of uncut bog cover the summit and North slope of Knocknalower hill, large
areas of the summit and South to Southeast slopes of Dooncarton hill, the upper slopes of
Pollatomish hill and the low-lying area between Gortmelia and Carrowmore hills.
Evidence of prehistoric forest cover in the area is gained from the extensive remains of tree stumps,
trunks and branches, predominantly of pine and birch, but with some oak, preserved in their levels
of growth either in lower layers of the bog or under it. A band of bog containing such remains covers
125

the lowland South of Faulagh hill, all of Carrowmore hill, the lowland between Carrowmore and
Gortmelia hills and the lowland close to the coast in Gortmelia, Inver and Graghil townlands. Where
bog sections are present, there is evidence of tree stumps in the low-lying bog in the East part of the
study area. Large numbers are present in the cut-away bog in the lowland between Faulagh and
Pollatomish hills and close to the coast in Aghoos townland. In 1984, large oak trunks were removed
from the bog in the course of land drainage close to the Northeast corner of Carrowmore Lake. Tree
stumps are visible below the water level along the East edge of the lake. They are also evident uphill
of the uppermost limit of prehistoric settlement on the South slopes of Dooncarton and Faulagh
hills.
The extensive remains of scrubby pine in the lower levels of the bog in Aghoos townland were
studied by Prof. Martin Downes. One pine stump gave a C-14 determination of 2,348 bc (pers com).
One kilometre W of Bellanaboy bridge, a pine stump with its roots in the bog, 20cms above the
mineral soil, yielded a determination of 2390 + 65 bc. A second pine stump from the same spot, but
from a lower level and with its roots in the mineral soil, give a determination of 5160 + 75 bc
(Hakansson, 1974, 323). While the latter tree did not grow in the bog, its preservation would suggest
that anaerobic conditions existed by 5,000 bc, thus preserving it from decay.
Megalithic tombs, cists and stone circles
Of the 14 megalithic tombs now known within the study area, 6 are classified as court tombs, 2 as
portal tombs and 1 as a wedge tomb, while 5 remain as unclassified. Seven of these tombs are
included by de Valera and O Nuallain (1964, Ma 1, Ma19, Ma20, Ma21, Ma22, Ma23 and Ma38).
Three others, M1, M2 and M3, were known at the time their survey was undertaken, but were not
included for reasons that will be discussed later. These 3 megaliths, along with 2 others, M6 and M7,
were subsequently published by Aldridge (1961, 1965), while the remaining 2 tombs, M4 and M5,
were located in the course of preliminary reconnaissance work in the area in 1979.
Although the number of tombs has been doubled for the area, the new tombs, rather than altering
the distribution pattern in any way, tend to intensify that pattern already established. However, such
an increase in tomb numbers would have a profound effect on locational analysis type settlement
studies, which use megaliths as basic raw data to indicate settlement pattern.
126

The elevation of the tombs, all sited between 100 and 500 ft OD is consistent with that noted for Co.
Mayo generally. Six of the tombs are located between 100 and 200 ft OD, with 4 of the 6 court
tombs falling within this bracket. Three of the tombs are located between 200 and 300 ft OD, 3
others between 300 and 400 ft OD, and 2 between 400 and 500 ft OD. Such elevations are related to
siting on moderately elevated hillslopes with a tendency to avoid lowlands, such as the eastern
lowlands, the valley floors and the coastal strips.
Where the megaliths are located in general low-lying areas, they still tend to be sited in elevated
positions. The 2 megaliths, M5 and Ma19, in the Owenduff valley are sited on sloping ground above
the valley floor proper. Dooncarton tomb, Ma1, is sited on the shoulder of a terrace, immediately
overlooking the lowland along the North coastal strip. The Knocknalower tomb, M4, is the only
megalith within the area that has a true valley floor siting.
In general, the tombs favour slopes with a South or West aspect. Seven are sited on Southsouthwest
facing slopes, with 5 of these being located on Faulagh hill. The major exceptions here, and indeed
the major exceptions to the whole prehistoric settlement pattern noted over the area, are the 3
tombs located on North hillslopes. One is located on Faulagh hill, Ma21, one on Knocknalower hill,
Ma20 and one on Dooncarton hill, Ma1.
The Knocknalower tomb is sited on a Westnorthwest facing basal slope of a natural amphitheatre
set into the North side of that hill. This natural feature is probably a corrie dating to the Munsterain
Glaciation. It may be no coincidence that the court tomb sited on the North slope of Dooncarton hill
and a second court tomb in Rosdoagh (de Valera and O Nuallain, 1964, Ma2) on the adjacent
peninsula are located either side of Sruwaddacon Bay, a stretch of water that holds a very rich
salmon run.
Nine of the megaliths are located in bogland, with the remaining 5 on present day agricultural land.
The latter 5 megaliths are extremely important to the study, representing the principal means by
which the prehistoric settlement pattern can be extended into such areas.
127

The principal surviving components common to 4 of the 5 unclassified tombs, M1, M3, M4 and M7,
consist of an orthostat with a displaced capstone resting at its side. At 3 of these sites other stones
are evident, some of which may be orthostatic, but these are now in a very destroyed and collapsed
state. Two of these sites, M1 and M3, were known at the time that the Megalithic Survey of Ireland,
Vol 2 (de Valera and O Nuallain, 1964), was been compiled, but they were not included.
That survey represented a minimum definite rather than a maximum probable listing of megalithic
tombs and the 2 sites were not regarded as falling within the former category. However, having
conducted the present survey, these sites can be definitely regarded as being megalithic tombs,
even in their present state of collapse.
This judgement is substantiated by the 2 probed transects that were undertaken across site M3. The
transects show the presence, under the present bog surface, of a substantial subcircular cairn
surrounding the above ground megalithic remains. The cairn is at least 10m, and may be as much as
18.5m, in diameter and has a surviving height of up to 1m. Such probed transects could be expanded
in order to perform complete sub-surface contour plans of sites such as megalithic tombs still
covered by bog.
A maximum number of 8 cists, none of which are now visible, are known for the study area. Four of
these date to the prehistoric period, 3 are problematic and one is likely to be more recent.
The latter, site C5, was discovered in 1961 in Dooncarton or Glengad townland and consisted of an
unaccompanied inhumation in a long stone cist that was orientated E-W. The orientation and the
fact that the inhumation survived under a very acid bog cover, suggests that the site is not
prehistoric.
A very strong local tradition of a long stone cist, which contained an inhumation, exists for site C6. It
was located on level ground very close to the coast in Inver townland and was discovered in the
mineral soil, which had subsequently been covered by sand deposits. However, local reports
regarding the date of discovery and the form of interment are extremely conflicting.
128

In 1936, 2 sub-rectangular cists, C1 and C2, were uncovered during the removal of a gravel mound
on Gortmelia hill. The deposits of one of the cists contained cremated bone and “burnt clay”.
Subsequently, the present landowner has uncovered 3 cists. However, since the original cists were
not removed in 1936, it is not clear whether these 3 sites include either of both of the original
discoveries. It means that at least 3, and possibly 5 cists, were uncovered altogether. The
relationship of the sites to the mound is not clear.
In 1928, a cist of small dimensions, site C4, was discovered in Knocknalower townland and yielded
cremated bone in an upright urn.
Sites C1, C2 (Waddell, 1970, 125) C3 and C4 can be regarded as burials dating to the Bronze Age, to
which may possibly be added sites C7 and C8.
The Gortmelia group are sited at the top of a Southwest facing slope at an altitude of 200 to 300 ft
OD, in an area of present day farmland, Site C4 is also on present day farmland at an altitude of 300
to 400 ft OD, on an ESE facing slope.
Two stone circles and an arc setting of stones are present within the study area. The latter, site SC 3
in Knocknalower townland, is included within the stone circle category as it may originally have been
one. A roadway immediately to the North may have partially destroyed the site. Six stones are now
evident, ranging in height from 60cms to 1m.
Site SC 1 in Gortbrack North townland consists of a ring of 9 low, set stones, ranging from 4cms to
55cms above present ground level. The site is sub-circular in plan and measures 3.6m by 4.2m.
Nine orthostats are also evident at site SC 2 in Dooncarton or Glengad townland and these range in
height from 50cms to 1.2m. The tallest stone, located in the East of the circle, is pillar-shaped, unlike
the other slab-shaped stones of the circle. The site has a diameter of 5.2m. Westropp (1912, 130-
132) shows 11 orthostats and 4 prostrate stones on his plan of the site. The circle could originally
129

have had up to 15 orthostats, as Otway (1841, 236) records that some of the stones from the site
had been overthrown.
SC 3is sited on a S facing slope, at an altitude of 300 to 400 ft OD. SC 1 is sited at an altitude of 200 to
300 ft OD on a SSW facing slope. SC 2 is located close to the court tomb, M14, and is on a
Northnorthwest facing slope at an altitude of 100 to 200 ft OD.
The extension of the prehistoric settlement into areas of present day farmland already indicated by
5 of the megalithic tombs, is further supported by the latter site, along with cists C1, C2 C3 and C4.
An earthen mound, located in the Owenduff valley floor at an altitude of 50 to 100 ft OD is of
uncertain origin, but is almost definitely man-made and may be a pre-bog barrow or tumulus. The
feature is sub-circular in plan, measuring 21m by 17.5m and has a height of 3m. Bog depths in the
vicinity of the site vary from 60cms to 1.25m, tapering to 10cms at the top of the mound.
Prehistoric boundaries
A total of 9.5kms of prehistoric field boundary was located and surveyed in the course of the
fieldwork. The various areas were these boundaries occur and the length sub-total for each area is
listed in Table 1. The boundaries are exclusively confined to areas of bogland. Two stretches which
occur on present-day agricultural land, one on the Northwest slope of Dooncarton hill and the other
on the Southwest slope of the same hill, are within areas of true Gweesalia-type blanket bog. The
upper surface of the bog in such areas has been modified by man to support grass growth. Boundary
features can, however, be traced by probing in this type of bogland, though this exercise proves
quite strenuous.
Hill Location on Hill Length of Boundary
Faulagh South and West slopes 1.35 km
Knocknalower South slope 0.6 km
Gortmelia Hilltop and Southwest slope 2.3 km
Dooncarton Southeast shoulder 0.4 km
130

Dooncarton Southwest slope 3.15 km
Dooncarton Northwest slope 1.3 km
Dooncarton North slope 0.4 km
Table 1: Total length of pre-bog boundary recovered per area
The term field boundary, rather than field wall or fence, is deliberately used here as a variety of
boundary types, mainly constructed with earth and stone, are evident across the study area. This is
in sharp contrast to the almost exclusive evidence of collapsed dry-stone walls noted at Belderg Beg
and Behy-Glenulra (Caulfield, 1978, 1983). In fact, this boundary type does not even form the norm
within the study area.
The variety of boundary types can be seen in the profiles illustrated in Figs X-X. These profiles were
constructed by recording pre-bog and bog surface levels, normally every 20cms across a transect.
The pre-bog levels were then joined together using straight lines. Jagged, saw-tooth profiles reflect
the presence of stone in the feature, while the smoother forms reflect earthen remains.
Collapsed dry-stone walls are evident on the summit and Southwest slope of Gortmelia hill. The
uppermost boundary on Knocknalower hill is also of similar construction. A second type of stone wall
consists of widely spaced orthostats, arranged in lines with no surviving evidence of intermediate
bank or wall material. Such features are evident along part of the uppermost boundary on the
Northwest slope of Dooncarton hill and on the South slope of Faulagh hill, immediately East of
megalith tomb M1. This form of boundary, if it exists under uncut bog within the study area, would
be almost impossible to locate and follow by probing.
Earthen banks and ditches with evidence of stone capping or collapsed stone walls on top of the
bank are the most common type of boundary within the area. These forms are especially evident on
131

the North, Northwest and Southwest slopes of Dooncarton hill and along parts of the boundaries on
the S slope of Faulagh hill.
Simple bank and ditch boundaries are evident on the Southeast shoulder of Dooncarton hill, on the S
slope of Knocknalower hill and the Southwest slope of Faulagh hill. The East side of the enclosure on
the Southwest slope of Faulagh hill consists of a bank with a ditch to either side. Slight secondary
banks on the opposite side of the ditch to the main bank are evident in some instances.
The earthen banks and ditches proved to be the most difficult form of boundary to locate in the
early stages of fieldwork. Two reasons account for this. Firstly, the initial reconnaissance was
psychologically tuned towards the search for boundaries of stone, as this was the predominant form
noted in the general north Mayo region up to that point. Secondly, dry-stone walls and earthen
banks capped with stone can be readily visible in cut-away bogland, even from afar, as the stones
will generally protrude in places through the redeposited top scraw. Also, the bright colour of the
stones from having been bleached by the acid bog can provide a sharp contrast to that of the bog
surface. Earthen banks, however, will have slipped somewhat and the ditches silted since their
formation and such features are very easily masked by bog and vegetation cover.
During the second season of surveying a number of factors combined to make the ditches much
easier to recognise. Wetter conditions can prevail over the ditch areas, coupled with the associated
vegetation cover and the occasional reflection of the feature in the bog surface. Once located, such
earthen features can be extended with comparative ease and the probability of recovery is probably
just as good as that of their stone counterparts.
Each individual boundary within the study area is not necessarily constructed in similar fashion, or
with similar materials, along all of its length. For example, the upper boundary noted on the
Northwest slope of Dooncarton hill comprises, along part of its length, an earthen bank capped with
stone, with a ditch on the uphill side, while along other stretches it is formed with widely spaced
orthostatic stones. The long boundary on the S slope of Faulagh hill is generally in the form of an
earthen bank with a ditch on the uphill side, but in places the bank can be capped with a now
collapsed dry-stone wall.
132

The cross-section area occupied by boundary features in Figs X-X ranges from 0.3m 2 to 2m 2 and
averages 0.8m 2 . Thus, every one kilometre of boundary contains, on average, 800m 3 of material.
Likewise, every 9.5kms (the total length of boundary recovered within the area) contains 7,600m 3 .
The boundaries are almost completely confined to slopes with a West or South aspect, the one
exception being the isolated boundary on the North slope of Dooncarton hill. Their elevation band
between 100 and 600 ft OD is quite similar to that previously noted for the siting of the megalithic
tombs.
When viewed in the context of land allocation, the principal form of boundary that is evident from
the survey, is one that delimits the upper extent of settlement. These are generally the longest
stretches of boundary discovered and tend to follow, for part of their distances at least, the line of
the contours. However, as will be seen later, it would be quite inappropriate to refer to such
features as “contour” boundaries or “contour” fences.
On the North slope of Dooncarton hill, a short stretch of this boundary type is evident just below the
600 ft contour. On the Northwest and Southwest slopes of the same hill, the line of a similar feature
is almost identical to that of the 500 ft contour. Approximately midway along this boundary, an
interesting occurrence was noted. A modern field fence, representing the present day upper limit of
agricultural land, is constructed directly on top of the prehistoric boundary and follows its line for
some distance. On the Southeast shoulder of Dooncarton hill the upper boundary is at a height of c.
570 ft OD, while on Faulagh hill it is located quite close to the 400 ft contour. At the Behy-Glenulra
site, the upper limit of settlement is located at a considerably higher altitude (Caulfield, 1985). On
this hillside, the field walls extend to a height of c. 760 ft OD.
The direction that these upper boundaries can take is most evident on the Northwest and Southwest
slopes of Dooncarton hill. Here the boundary extends for a distance of c. 0.65km along the 500 ft
contour. It then turns abruptly on both slopes to extend downhill and form part of the prehistoric
field system located further downslope. The total length of this boundary recovered in the course of
the survey is 1.35 km. It now represents the only unifying factor between the two prehistoric field
systems which are separated by a finger of modern settlement.
133

Where the boundary turns abruptly on both slopes, further boundaries are tagged on in curving
fashion and continue the upper limit of settlement along the 500 ft contour. The boundary which is
tagged on at the Northwest slope then turns downhill after only a distance of 170m.
The principal upper boundary and its downhill turns, delimits a wedge-shaped portion of the hillside.
This area is sub-divided by two further boundaries which join the main one at right-angles and
extend downhill. Another wedge-shaped delimitation is suggested by the turning angle of the
additional upper boundary on the Northwest slope.
The fact that the upper limit of settlement does not consist of one continuous boundary feature
might suggest that the settlement of this hillside was not undertaken in one overall operation.
Instead, initial settlement may have been delimited by one of the wedges, to which further
accretions were added with time.
The turning of the upper boundary feature abruptly downhill is also noted on the North slope of
Dooncarton hill. On the Southeast shoulder of Dooncarton hill, two short stretches of boundary are
separated by a gap of 500m. The area of this gap consists of uncut bog and time constraints did not
allow the features to be traced into that area. However, they are likely to form one feature
representing the upper limit of settlement in that area. Two short walls are right-angles to the North
stretch and 150m apart are the only indications of land division on the downhill side.
On Faulagh hill, the principal boundary is in the form of a gentle arc that extends generally along the
contour and reaches a maximum elevation of 400 ft OD. To the East, a second boundary runs along
the 400 ft contour and, while a junction was not established, it is likely to tag onto the principal
boundary in similar fashion as noted on Dooncarton hill. Uphill of the West end of the principal
boundary, a short stretch of wall is again sited on the 400 ft contour. This feature may have a
continuation in another short stretch of wall located on the West slope of the hill.
While much further work is required, it appears that at least 3 different boundaries combine to
delimit the upper extent of settlement along the 400 ft contour. This is very similar to the situation
on Dooncarton hill, though at a lower altitude. The manner in which these boundaries extend
downhill, either in gentle or abrupt fashion, shows that it is inappropriate it is to refer to them as
“contour boundaries”.
134

No upper boundary was located on Knocknalower hill, while on Gortmelia hill the field boundaries
extend over the hilltop, which is just in excess of 400 ft OD.
Immediately South of the principal upper boundary on the Southwest slope of Dooncarton hill, a
long boundary extends for 500m in an East-West direction. Three other boundaries extend at rightangles
from this feature, while 2 others are aligned parallel to it. Together they create a quite regular
pattern of land division on the hillslope, consisting of one vertical band, of width 150m to 200m and
2 horizontal bands, 50m and 100m wide.
Within the vertical band, 2 boundaries forming a Y-shaped plan, are aligned, not on the regular
system, but on the upper boundary feature. The regular plan appears to have been superimposed on
an earlier system related to the principal upper boundary. Probing showed that gaps exist between
the boundaries of both systems. The likely explanation is that stones, where they occurred on close
proximity, were robbed from the principal upper boundary system during the construction of the
later, more regular plan.
Two long intersecting walls on Gortmelia hilltop may indicate regular, large-scale land division in this
area but much more reconnaissance work needs to be undertaken before a pattern can be
established.
On Knocknalower hill, 2 parallel boundaries, 125m apart, extend along the contours. 125m further
uphill, another boundary is evident, but is on a slightly different alignment. Also present on this
hillslope are 3 short parallel boundaries that form 2 bands, each 70m side, running oblique to the
contours.
Though no clear pattern of individual fields were located within the overall study area, the upper
boundary features, the widely spaced parallels on Dooncarton and Knocknalower hills and the long
135

stretches of walling on Gortmelia hilltop, all indicate large-scale land divisions, possibly for the
purposes of pasture farming.
However, small enclosures also occur. On the Southwest slope of Gortmelia hill, an oval enclosure
measures 120m by 85m and covers an area of 0.7ha. Tagged onto its uphill side is a semi-oval
enclosure of length 50m and area 0.2ha. These enclosures are located 160m Northeast of a house
site, H1. Their location close to the house and their size may indicate that they were used for the
purposes of tillage. The sub-square enclosure on the Southwest slope of Faulagh hill measures 85m
by 60m (0.5ha) and may also have been used for tillage.
Direct evidence of arable farming appears to be present in the vicinity of 2 round houses on the
Southwest slope of Dooncarton hill. A negative lynchet located to the East of house site H1, is
accompanied by a positive lynchet to the S of house site H2. Two small clearance cairns are
incorporated into the East end of the positive lynchet. What resembles a short stretch of low stone
wall, immediately to the S of the negative lynchet, may in fact be the remains of a headland. The
area enclosed by the lynchets measures 50m by 50m (0.25ha).
Three house sites, all of which are round, were located within the study area. All are sited on
Southwest facing slopes. The 2 house sites previously mentioned on Dooncarton hill, H1 and H2, are
located within 10m of each other, on an area of ground terraced into the hillslope. They are sited at
an elevation of 300-400 ft OD, while the third house, H3 on Gortmelia hill, is at 100 to 200 ft OD.
House site H1 is almost completely exposed. It consists of a low ring of stones, with evidence in
places of inner and outer facing stones. The facing stones indicate an original wall width of c. 85cms
and the internal diameter of the feature is c 5.7m.
The second adjacent house, H2, is completely covered by c. 50cms of bog, with the structure
reflected in the present bog surface. The profiles indicate a collapsed ring of stones, with diameters
of 7.5m internally and 12.5m externally.
136

The third house site, H3, on Gortmelia hill, is partially exposed but is mostly covered by bog varying
in depth from 10 to 85cms. The probed profile also indicates a collapsed ring of stones, with
diameters of 8.6m internally and 15m externally.
Prehistoric settlements
Dooncarton hill
The area of bogland, where the isolated boundary on the North slope of Dooncarton hill is located, is
confined on its West side by present-day agricultural land. It is also confined by agricultural land on
the lower slopes to the East, while the higher slopes of the hillside in that area appear too steep to
allow settlement to occur. The presence of the court tomb, M14 and the stone circle, SC 2, may
indicate that the field boundaries originally extended at least that far along the North slope of the
hill. The inference that the tomb and the stone circle may be reasonably used as indicators of the
original presence of field boundaries will be discussed later. A local inhabitant, Mr James Cuff, stated
that prehistoric boundaries were also present on the agricultural land on the West side, but were
removed within living memory for building purposes.
The lowlying bog along the Northwest coast in Graghil townland mostly comprises cut-away bogland
that displays no evidence of prehistoric boundaries. It is unlikely therefore that the field systems, in
this area at least, extended to the coastline, or even extended below the 100 ft contour.
The system on the Northwest slope is mostly separated from that on the Southwest slope by
modern settlement. However as previously noted, the principal upper boundary represents a
unifying factor. The presence of a 280m stretch of field boundary and an unclassified megalith on an
island of cut-away bogland in the middle of the modern settlement also demonstrate that the
prehistoric field system originally extended into that area.
Agricultural land divides the settlement complex on the Southwest slope from the 2 stretches of
upper boundary feature noted on the Southeast shoulder of the hill. The more northerly of these 2
stretches curves around an elbow of the hillside at an altitude of 570 ft OD, its direction indicating
137

that it may originally have linked with the system on the Southwest slope. The gap in the distribution
here is c. 680m.
Two court tombs, M5 and M6, and one portal tomb, Ma19, demonstrate prehistoric activity within
the area of modern settlement along the S slope of the hill at an altitude of 100 to 300 ft OD.
The gaps in the distribution of prehistoric field boundaries on Dooncarton hill appear to be purely a
function of the modern settlement pattern. If this is the case, and the megalithic tombs are
reflecting areas where field boundaries once existed, then the extent of prehistoric settlement on
the hillside may be postulated. This area is in the form of a band, 5kms long, located between 100
and 600 ft OD, which stretches from the court tomb, site Ma1, along the North, West and S slopes of
the hill to the Southeast shoulder.
Faulagh, Knocknalower and Gortmelia hills
The short stretch of boundary, between 300 and 400 ft OD, on the West slope of Faulagh hill is
probably an extension of the upper boundary feature further to the E. However, uncut bog lies
between and an extensive probing operation needs to be undertaken to confirm whether or not this
is the case. If this proved positive, then the complex on the South slope of Faulagh hill would be
separated by a gap of only 400m from the pre-bog boundaries on the South slope of Knocknalower
hill.
Two long intersecting field walls are evident on the top of Gortmelia hill, along with numerous
shorter stretches and a settlement complex on the Southwest slope. However, the overall pre-bog
field system in this area is likely to be much more extensive. More recently, field walls were noted
extending over the hilltop in the direction of Knocknalower hill. These latter boundaries reduce the
gap between the field systems on Gortmelia hill and those on the S slope of Knocknalower hill to a
distance of c. 650m.
Almost completely cut-away bogland is present on the lower Southwest slope of Gortmelia hill. As
was already noted in the case of Graghil townland, there is again no evidence of the field boundaries
extending to the coast or even below the 100 ft contour.
138

The 2 court tombs, Ma38 and Ma23, lie in an area of uncut bog on the Southeast slope of Faulagh
hill. This is the only region within the study area where extensive field systems may be present, but
have not been recorded due to the unbroken nature of the bog surface.
In contrast to the observations made regarding Dooncarton hill, the gaps in the distribution of the
prehistoric field systems on Faulagh, Knocknalower and Gortmelia hills are probably due to the
limitations imposed on the survey by time and manpower constraints and the presence of tracts of
uncut blanket bog.
The total extent of prehistoric field boundaries may also be postulated for the aforementioned hills.
This is also in the form of a band, 6kms long and located between the 100 and 570 ft OD, that
stretches from the court tombs, Ma38 and Ma23, along the S slopes of Faulagh and Knocknalower
hills, over Gortmelia hilltop to the Southwest slope of that hill.
Overall prehistoric settlement areas and voids
The latter area is separated from the previous settlement zone postulated for Dooncarton hill by the
North slope of Knocknalower hill and the saddle between it and Dooncarton hill. Bog cuttings
bottoming to the mineral soil are present within this area and show no evidence of field boundaries,
therefore, the gap is likely to be genuine. However, if megalithic tombs are regarded as an indicator
of the original presence of field systems, then the siting of the portal tomb, Ma20, within this
postulated void poses a problem.
The possibility that this megalith was located outside the general settlement area may be enhanced
by evidence gleaned from 2 of the unclassified tombs, sites M3 and Ma21. If the main boundary
features noted on the S slope of Faulagh hill represent the true upper limit of settlement, and this
seems likely both from their length and from comparison with the upper boundaries noted on
Dooncarton hill, then M3 was located uphill of the settlement. Ma21, sited on the North slope of the
same hill is in an area of uncut bog. However, as numerous stream erosion gullies section both the
139

og and the underlying mineral soil on this hillslope, pre-bog field boundaries, if present, should
have been located over the course of the fieldwork.
Only 2 hills within the study area, Carrowmore hill (200 ft OD +) and Pollatomish hill (300 ft OD +)
show no evidence of prehistoric settlement. Their altitudes fall within the elevation band for
settlement noted on all of the other hillsides.
Modern settlement covers the S slopes of Carrowmore hill up to the 200 ft contour. The rest of the
hill comprises mostly cut-away bogland. Field boundaries, if originally present would be expected to
extend over the hilltop, as was noted on Gortmelia hill. Extensive excavation during the construction
of a modern waterworks on the summit of the hill failed to turn up any evidence of prehistoric
activity. Where bog still survives on the hilltop and slopes, pine trees can be seen in their position of
growth in its bottom layers. Scrubby pine and birch with their roots firmly in the mineral soil are also
evident. Partially cut-away bogland covers Pollatomish hill and if field boundaries were originally
present here, they should have been located in the course of the fieldwork.
It has already been noted that field boundaries are possibly present on the Southeast slope of
Faulagh hill in the vicinity of the court tombs, Ma38 and Ma23, but that the absence of turbary in
this area hindered their recovery. The other hill slopes where field systems could conceivably be
present are the entire North slope of Faulagh hill and the North slope of Knocknalower hill between
400 and 600 ft contours, also due to the absence of turbary. The correlation of turbary with the
West and S slopes, as rapid drying of turf is more favourable on such slopes, may be exerting a
certain influence on the noted distribution of prehistoric settlement.
The principal absence of settlement over the study area, however, is in the case of the lowlying
regions. These include the valley floors, the West and Northwest coastal strips, the North shore of
Carrowmore Lake and the Glenamoy plain in the E, with its extension into the area between Faulagh
and Pollatomish hills. Sufficient factors are present over these areas, including turbary, stream
erosion gullies, quarries and modern drainage, to permit the location of pre-bog archaeological
features, in at least some instances, if they are present. Since no archaeological evidence was
recorded, the absence is very likely to be genuine.
140

This void is substantiated by examining outside the region to the East (Caulfield, 1983, 197). No
prehistoric monuments are known between the East slope of Faulagh hill and Belderg, 17kms to the
E. This is an extensive area of lowland known as the Glenamoy plain, of which the eastern part of the
present study area forms a western extension. A pine stump with its roots in mineral soil underlying
blanket bog, 1km West of Bellanaboy bridge yielded a C-14 determination of 5160 + 75 bc
(Hakansson, 1974, 323). It is therefore likely that the growth of Low Level Atlantic type bog in the
Glenamoy area had been initiated shortly after this date, thus preserving the tree from decay. The
start of bog growth in the low-lying areas close to the prehistoric settlement within the study area is
likely to be of similar date. The trees in the mineral soil on Carrowmore hill may suggest that this is
the case. The unfavourable conditions which existed in these areas prior to the Neolithic
colonization of the region probably explain the absence of settlement.
A further explanation for the void in the Glenamoy region may be the precipitous nature of the
coastline, broken only at Portacloy and Porturlin, which does not allow ready access to the sea on a
daily basis.
On Faulagh and Dooncarton hills, such pine trees in the lower levels of the blanket bog are present
on the uphill side of the upper boundaries, but do not occur on the downhill side. Fig X shows that,
over the study area as a whole, the distributions of these trees and the areas of prehistoric
settlement are mutually exclusive. This suggests that the two may be contemporary and that
Neolithic farming practices kerbed the encroachment of the bog and the subsequent trees onto the
settled areas. An alternative explanation is that the trees may have been removed in the course of
subsequent settlement of the areas.
141

Bibliography
Aldridge, R. B. (1961). “Some Megalithic and Other Sites in Counties Mayo and Sligo”. J.G.A.S., Vol.
29, 83-90.
Aldridge, R. B. (1965). “Megalithic and Other Sites in Counties Mayo and Galway”. J.G.A.S., Vol. 31,
11-15.
Caulfield, S. (1978). “Neolithic Fields: the Irish Evidence”, in Bowen, H. C. and Fowler, P. J. (Eds.),
Early Land Allotment, B.A.R. 48, Oxford. pp.137-143
Caulfield, S. (1983). “The Neolithic Settlement of North Connaught”, in Reeves-Smyth, T. and
Hammond, F., Landscape Archaeology in Ireland, B.A.R. 116, Oxford. pp. 195-216
Caulfield, S. (1985). “Discovering a 100 Acre Five Thousand Year Old Farm”, U.C.D. News.
de Valera, R. and Ó Nualláin, S. (1964). Survey of the Megalithic Tombs of Ireland, Volume 2, County
Mayo, Dublin.
Hakansson, S. (1974). “University of Lund radiocarbon dates VII”, Radiocarbon, Vol. 16, 307-330.
Otway, C. (1841). Sketches in Erris and Tyrawly, Dublin.
Waddell, J. (1970). “Irish Bronze Age Cists, A Survey”, J.R.S.A.I., Vol. 100, 91-139.
Westropp, T. J. (1912). “Promontory Forts and Early Remains in Co. Mayo”, J.R.S.A.I., Vol. 62, 130-
132.
142

Survey from Ballinglen to Rathfran Bay
Gretta Byrne
This draft chapter reviews the results of Byrne’s survey work at the east of the study area. The text is
complete, bar minor edits. New GIS based figures have been generated and require minor
modifications to labels etc to finalise in terms of cross references with the text. The new figures are
included here, but will be modified for the final texts.
Research Outline and Methodology
The survey was originally undertaken as a requirement for an MA degree (Byrne, 1986). The area
surveyed was the eastern section of the North Mayo blanket bog extending from the Ballinglen River
which flows into Bunatrahir Bay in the west to Rathfran Bay, the estuary of the Cloonaghmore,
sometimes known as the Palmerstown River, in the east. The area was already known to have a
great concentration of megalithic, mostly court, tombs described as “remarkable” by de Valera as
early as 1951 (de Valera 1951, 193). In the intervening years further megaliths had been recorded,
including the Rathlackan court tomb Ma116, by Aldridge who briefly referred to “buried walling and
remains of hut circles” in the area (Aldridge 1965, 12).
During the course of the survey a total linear length of 22kms of pre-bog walls, 20 house sites and
two further court tombs were located and mapped.
The methodology involved a preliminary walking of all areas of peat to determine the depth of peat,
extent of turf cutting and any visible remains of pre-bog features. Frequently the peat was
sufficiently cut away to expose visible lengths of walling, or sometimes an occasional stone might be
visible jutting above the cutover surface. This happened over large parts of the Rathlackan, Barnhill
and Castletown areas and on portions of Carrowmore hill. Other parts of the higher ground on
Carrowmore and on large areas of the broad ridge on top of Seefin the peat was still 2m or more
deep. Sometimes walls would be visible in drains or roadsides and occasionally stones visible in
modern field banks constructed of turf would be an indication of a wall beneath.
Following the initial walkover a detailed systematic survey was conducted using the probing
technique pioneered by Caulfield at Céide Fields. This was used to verify walls where only occasional
stones were visible and also to locate features under the deeper peat. There were however some
limitations to the technique. If the wall was very collapsed and spread out or if the wall had been
robbed it was very difficult to identify in a probed profile. In some cases exposed walls were robbed
of loose portable stones by the turf cutters to provide foundations for bog roads leaving only the
larger or set stones in place. One example of this was Ballymachugh H2 (Figure 9) where according
to a local turf cutter a lot of stones forming a wall “about 1 foot (0.3m) high” were removed in the
1950s leaving only the basal set stones.
Some areas of cutaway peat had occasional stones protruding which may be remains of destroyed
walls but probing could not with confidence discern definite walls so were not included. This
occurred in Lackanhill about 400m N of the Lecarrowntemple court tombs Ma16 and Ma17; in
143

Creevagh about 600m NW of H3 and close to Carrowmacshane wedge tomb Ma126 (Figure 2) and
also in the vicinity of Aghaleague court tomb Ma26 (Figure 5).
In some areas of old turf banks up to 2m high on the East side of Seefin the peat is very dry leaving it
extremely difficult to probe. Because of this some walls have not been completely followed by
probing. There may also be more walls completely concealed under deep uncut peat on the top of
Seefin which have not been located.
On Carrowmore hill a large area to the South and Southwest of Knockboha round cairn was planted
with spruce forestry in the 1960s. One wall was followed for 60m under the trees but it was not
possible to locate further walls due to the thick carpet of spruce needles and the dense shallow
horizontal roots made probing impossible. Subsequent to the original survey further areas on the
South end of Carrowmore; to the North and West of Rathlackan excavated site and on Barnhill have
been forested.
Field Walls
Pre-bog field walls have been located in five separate locations (Figure 1). The Castletown system is
located in a flat low lying area on the coast between Bunatrahir Bay and Downpatrick Head while an
isolated stretch of walling was found in a similar location at the east side of the Downpatrick
headland. Neither of these have any associated megalithic tombs.
The elongated ridge of Seefin hill which extends southwards from Ballycastle to the east of the
Ballinglen valley has an extensive field system along with two court tombs and two large round
cairns. South of Seefin the blanket bog extends and deepens across a broad level area between 100
– 120m altitude in Annaghbeg where no field walls were visible.
East of Seefin the blanket bog extends across the twin low hills of Gallowshill and Barnhill where
field walls occur with two court tombs. North of Barnhill the ground dips down to a basin of deep
peat in Lissadrone, devoid of field walls.
The greatest concentration of walls and associated monuments occur across the elevated plateau of
Carrowmore and the lower Rathlackan plateau which together include all the higher ground
between Bunatrahir and Lackan Bays.
Carrowmore - Rathlackan
This complex of field systems (Figure 2 & 3) could be divided into two separate areas. The higher
ridge in the west referred to here as Carrowmore includes parts of seven townlands – Kilbride,
Carrowneden, Carrowcor, Doonadoba, Knockboha, Conaghra and Carrowmore. The lower plateau to
the east referred to here as Rathlackan covers parts of Creevagh, Rathlackan, Beltra and Castletown.
The Carrowmore hill is a wide undulating N – S ridge with a height of 186m and peat cover generally
confined to above about 120m on the slopes which drop steeply on the Southwest and West sides
and more stepped to the North. On the east there is a steep drop to the peat covered Rathlackan
plateau at a height of between 110 and 130m. To the Southeast the ground drops gradually to the
144

Lissadrone basin. The peat cover is mostly uneven cutover or cutaway but in the central area it still
survives up to 2m deep.
In Rathlackan it is mostly cutaway peat but there are pockets up to 1.3m deep while there is a small
area of deeper basin type peat to the Southwest of the fields.
Carrowmore
The Carrowmore field system (Figure 2) has a total linear length of 8.5kms of walls and six associated
house sites (H6 – 11). There is also a large round cairn (site B), a possible megalithic cist covered by a
cairn (site A) and Carrowmore wedge tomb Ma125. Carrowmacshane wedge tomb Ma126 is 850m
Southwest of Ma125. Doonadoba court tomb Ma122 is located on the peat free slope beneath
forestry between the Carrowmore and Rathlackan systems. The extent of the system is limited on
the lower slopes by the lack of peat and land reclamation and to the Southeast by forestry.
The field system is dominated by a series of long roughly parallel walls varying from 90m to 250m
apart aligned NNW – SSE with some transverse walls connecting adjacent parallels. The long walls
tend to hold their alignment regardless of topography. Occasionally irregularities can be related to
topography e.g. the cross wall extending west from just south of H10 curves southwards to avoid a
low scarp and rock outcrop. A series of sudden turns and kinks in the parallel wall extending north
from the west end of that cross wall however has no apparent explanation.
Although there are few completely enclosed fields evident there seems to have been great variation
in field size, the larger fields tending to be on the higher plateau. The field in the centre that includes
both site A and H10 is 7.2 ha and the adjoining field to the Northeast is 12.5 ha. Neither appears to
have been subdivided. The long stripe west of the first field is 650 – 700m long and may have
subdivisions under the deep peat and it does have some short irregular walls in the east side. On the
west side of the hill three roughly parallel walls on average 90m apart seem to indicate smaller
fields. Groups of short irregular walls North of H6 on the north slopes and some around H11 in the
southwest indicate quite small plots.
On the west side a long wall incorporates a curvilinear enclosure 55m N-S by 32m E-W. Within the
enclosure a circular 6.5m diameter house H7 is attached to the west of the enclosure by a straight
wall. On the outside of the enclosure a 50m long wall connects it to a 9.5m diameter circular house
H8.
Further south of H7 and H8 two portions of a small earthen bank and ditch, 150m long in total, was
aligned E – W. Being much smaller than the stone walls, the ditch varying from 0.25m to 0.4m deep
and up to 0.8m wide may have been a drainage feature. A section exposed in an old quarry showed
a lens of peat 0.04m to 0.1m deep beneath the bank. It could not however be stratigraphically
related to any of the walls.
Rathlackan
At Rathlackan (Figure 2 & 3) the field system incorporates three court tombs; Rathlackan excavated
site Ma116 and two in Castletown, Ma107 and Ma109. Outside the fields on peat free land the pair
in Lecarrowntemple Ma16 and Ma17 are 1km to the S, Doonadoba Ma122 is on the steep slope to
the west and Creevagh wedge tomb Ma120 is 700m to the East. Site E in Creevagh may be a ruined
megalith with a chamber 2.3m wide facing ENE. Site C is a small irregular mostly concealed cairn
145

about 6m by 4m incorporating a number of large stone slabs. Eleven house sites are associated with
the fields.
The field system with a total length of 4.7kms of walls is mainly rectilinear with a dominant N – S
alignment and walls mostly 130m to 150m apart. Field size varies from 3 ha for that incorporating
Ma107 to 1.4 ha for the field west of that. The southern boundary of these two fields is formed by a
wall that runs in a sinuous Southwest to Northeast direction for about 500m and the turns sharply
northwards. From the Southwest it runs into the South end of the tomb cairn and continues from
midway on the East of the cairn. The staggered nature of the junction of this wall with the N – S wall
west of the tomb suggests the latter was built subsequently to the sinuous wall.
The Rathlackan tomb has a D-shaped enclosure wall, 20m by 20m, attached to the N side of the
cairn, in which there was a small square house H13 (Figure 10). Just 200m to the east another small
3m diameter round house, Beltra H16 (Figure 18), is within a curvilinear enclosure 70m by 40m at
the end of a field wall. Further to the North at site D a curvilinear wall may have been a complete
enclosure as a modern road runs along the west side. Incorporated into this wall are two orthostatic
jambs, 0.9m to 1.0m apart and 1.25m high from the sub peat ground level, support a large lintel
stone 2.2m by 1.0m and up to 0.3m thick. This is referred to as ‘Queen’s Grave’ by Aldridge (1961,
86). It is clearly part of the wall making an elaborate entrance although there are a lot of stones
around the structure covered by peat, giving the possibility it may have been part of some other
structure.
Seefin
‘Seefin’ hill includes parts of Carrowkibbock Upper, Rathoonagh, Ballinglen, Aghaleague,
Carrowcuilleen and Annaghmore townlands (Figure 4). It is a steep sided flat topped hill 237m high.
The very steep west slopes are mostly peat free or have been reclaimed as are the lower slopes on
the east side while the less steep northern spur has mostly cutaway peat. Elsewhere there are large
tracts of uncut peat on much of the ridge top while the East and South sides are a chequer board of
old turf banks often over 2m high.
A total length of 5.6kms of walls were located on all areas of the hill (Figure 4) but a more extensive
probing operation would undoubtedly reveal a more complete pattern in areas of deep peat. On the
N slope there are two broadly parallel meandering walls, varying from 100m to 200m apart, running
upslope with some offset cross walls. On the S end a straight wall almost 700m long, but with a gap
in the middle where it has not been probed, maintains a straight course regardless of topography,
the S section running up the steep slope and the N end following the contour. On either side of this
two straight offset cross walls, all between 110m to 150m long, may indicate a more regular pattern
of walls. Elsewhere the walls do not have a distinct pattern but many continue under uncut peat and
have not been probed further. No major area of the hill is devoid of walls and the general indication
is of larger rather than small fields.
A circular enclosure 40m d. is located on a fairly level terrace at a height of 150m on the N hillside.
420m upslope from it at a height of 185m a house site, Carrowkibbock Upper H20 (Figure 19), is
attached to the end of a field wall. There are two court tombs on the hill, Carrowkibbock Upper
Ma108 on the N side and Ballinglen Ma121 at the end of a field wall on the South slope.
146

Two similar large round cairns are interestingly located on the ridge top 700m apart but not
intervisible. Aghaleague, 3.7m high and 19m d. has spectacular views from the Northeast to the
South but slightly rising ground restricts the view elsewhere. Carrowcuilleen Site B, 3m high and 20m
d., has views from the Southeast around to the Northwest.
Barnhill
A total of 1.4kms of walls were located in Barnhill and Aghaleague in shallow cutaway peat (Figure
5). A regular system of N – S parallels mostly about 150m apart with some E – W cross walls is
indicated on Barnhill. The extent of the system is limited by reclamation on the South and East sides,
including around Barnhill Upper court tomb Ma27. To the N the land dips down to a basin of deep
peat in Lissadrone but the walls could not be traced any further under the deeper peat. To the W a
single wall runs upslope from NE to SW towards the largely destroyed Aghaleague court tomb Ma26
although on opposite sides of the low hill. Occasional isolated upright stones in the vicinity may be
remnants of walls.
Castletown
The Castletown system has a total length of 1.5kms of walls in Castletown, Cabintown and
Ballymachugh in mostly shallow cutaway peat although there are some uncut banks up to 1.5m high.
At least two separate phases of boundaries are evident (Figure 6), the primary system built on
mineral soil and the later on a thin layer of peat. The earlier system has three parallel walls running
NW – SE from the shore, averaging 175m apart with two cross walls forming fields, partly bounded
by the coast, of 1.5ha and 2.2ha. Short walls adjacent to both H2 and Site A are also on mineral soil.
The large 9.5m d. Ballymachugh round house H2 is on mineral soil (Figure 9) and probably also the
8.5m d. Castletown round house H1.
A curving generally N – S wall cuts across one of the parallels and cross walls and is built on a thin
layer of peat. To the west of H1 a slightly curving N – S wall with a semicircular incomplete
enclosure, 15m by 20m, at the N end is also on peat. A curving 60m long earthen bank and ditch
partly extends across the open end of the enclosure but the stratigraphical relationship is not clear.
The 3m wide by 0.5m high bank is on the E side of the 1.1m wide by 0.5m deep ditch. A 50m length
of earthen bank 1m wide and 0.5m high S of Cabintown Site A had no apparent ditch but it is not
clear which phase it belongs to. The Cabintown site A (Figure 8) consists of twenty six large erratic
boulders set upright in an incomplete 32m wide sub triangular shape, which vary in height from
0.32m to 1.01m.
Knockaun
A total length of 350m of walls consists of a curving wall extending away from the cliff edge with two
short offset walls 90m apart. They are under very shallow peat with no associated monuments, the
nearest being a pair of barrows 500m to the NW.
147

Construction Techniques
Often it is not possible to determine the nature of wall construction due to concealment, collapse
and occasional robbing. Where they are sufficiently exposed a variety of construction types are
evident, sometimes in the same system and even in the same wall but often the construction seems
to be determined by the type of stone available. The walls can be divided into different types:
1. Walls can appear as a collapsed linear cairn with no orthostatic stones or foundation course
visible although low foundation courses may be concealed by the collapse. This wall type
was common at Castletown where a lot of sea rolled stones from the adjacent shore were
used. Similar walls were less common on Carrowmore and Rathlackan where the local
sandstone was used. At Rathlackan court tomb the excavated western portion of the
enclosure wall abutting the cairn was built of horizontally laid stones which survived up to
0.7m high and was from 1.0 to 1.5m wide.
2. Single stone walling with a foundation of regularly set boulders. This was common at both
Barnhill and Seefin (Figure 7) where erratic granite boulders were set at intervals with
smaller loose stones between.
3. Single stone walls with set upright slabs or blocks aligned with the wall at intervals. Often
seen at Carrowmore and Rathlackan and also in the single wall near Aghaleague court tomb.
The N – S wall to the west of Rathlackan court tomb had frequent slabs up to 1m long with
smaller stones between.
4. Single stone walls with slabs set upright transversely to the wall. Only two clear examples
were found – the straight wall SE of H11 on Carrowmore, where slabs up to 0.8m wide and
0.5m high were set at intervals of 0.6m to 6m, and a section S of Site C in Rathlackan.
5. Double stone walls with a foundation of a double row of set stones or slabs were common
on both Rathlackan and Carrowmore such as the field wall incorporated in Doonadoba H10
(Figure 16) which has a width of 0.65m to 1.0m.
6. Double stone walls with a foundation of two widely spaced rows of facing stones with rubble
between were mostly found at Rathlackan. The best example is the enclosure incorporating
the lintelled entrance Site D where the E – W straight section is 2.0m wide (Figure 7) but the
remainder averages 1.0m wide.
7. Earthen banks and ditches. Only two examples, already mentioned, were located - one at
Castletown and the smaller section at Carrowmore that was possibly a drain.
8. A single instance of earthen bank without a ditch was also found at Castletown.
Size
Without excavation it is difficult to be certain of the original size of the walls although probed
profiles can indicate the volume of stone used. Where foundations are visible the width is mostly 1m
or less but can be up to 2m. In modern dry stone wall building it is recommended that the
foundation width be half the wall height (McAfee 1997, 103). Occasionally they have survived to a
height of 0.8m to 1.0m which would be the minimum original height.
148

Wall Gaps
Because of concealment and collapse it is extremely difficult to identify wall gaps but two clear
examples of entrance gaps were located. In Rathlackan the lintelled entrance Site D was in a
probable enclosure. On Carrowmore a clear wall gap was located in a long N – S field wall 15m S of
H10 and 6m N of the junction with the cross wall to the west. It consists of two upright sandstone
jamb stones 0.71m and 0.8m high set transversely to the wall with a gap 0.7m wide (Figure 7). There
is possibly a third on Seefin where there is a 0.8m wide gap flanked by two large set blocks to the N
of the house H20. Because of this it is likely that gaps were a feature of the field walls but other
examples could only be found by excavation.
Associated Structures
House Sites
Twenty house sites were discovered within the field systems which exhibited a great variety in size,
form and possibly also in function. Some were clearly exposed in cutaway, others had only a couple
of stones visible and were located by probing. A good example is the Rathlackan excavation site H13.
During the original survey only the tips of a few stones jutted through the peat but after probing the
complete outline with the entrance was planned. This compared well with the subsequently
excavated structure.
Twelve of the sites were circular and could be grouped into three small with internal diameters of
approximately 3 – 4.5m, three medium from 6 – 7m diameter and six larger between 8.5 – 9.5m
diameter. This gives a huge variation in internal areas of from 7m 2 to 71m 2 . The smallest H16 in the
Rathlackan system was unique in that it had a ditch outside the wall (Figure 18). It had a clear
entrance facing NNE and was within an enclosure. One of the largest, H2 in the Castletown system,
had been uncovered during turf cutting in the 1950s when all the loose stones from a wall about
0.3m high were taken away. This exposed the wall foundation of a double facing of stones set solidly
in the ground (Figure 9). The stones included sandstone, granite erratic and sea rolled stones. A
similar building technique was used in the smaller H9 on Carrowmore hill (Figure 17).
The only two rectilinear sites were both in Rathlackan, including the excavated site beside the court
tomb and the larger 7.5m by 6m H15 built with a double row of orthostatic slabs (Figure 12).
Three sites were similarly built with a curved wall against a straight field wall giving a semicircular or
D-shaped structure. All were very different sizes in separate field systems. The smallest H3 (4.5m by
2.5m, Figure 13) was in the Rathlackan system, the medium sized H20 (8.5m by 5m, Figure 19) was
on Seefin and the largest H10 (11m by 7.5m, Figure 16) was on Carrowmore hill.
The other three sites in the Rathlackan system are oval or egg shaped and are similar in being built
along the line of a field wall but with a gap in that wall to either side. The largest H12 (12.5m long
and 2.5 – 5m wide, Figure 11) may have been built with stones taken from the field wall as turf
cutting after the original survey revealed a layer of peat under some of the stones. Both H4 and H5
(Figures 14 & 15) are close to and on the same field wall as H3. Three of the round houses on
Carrowmore, H6, H8 and H11, are all connected to the ends of field walls.
149

There is no clear pattern to the distribution of the house sites. Three are within enclosures, the small
H13 and H16 in Rathlackan and the larger H7 on Carrowmore while a fourth, H14 in Rathlackan has a
curving wall to the west that might have been the remains of an enclosure (Figure 2). The 40m wide
circular enclosure on Seefin had no visible house but the existence of a structure under the 1m
depth of peat cannot be excluded.
Some houses are clustered together – H9 and H10 on Carrowmore are 10m apart although in
separate fields. In Rathlackan H17 and H18 round houses are also 10m apart, H3 H4 and H5 are in a
38m long row while H14, H15 and H16 are all within 50m of each other.
The majority are sited on flat land but the H17 and H18 pair and H7 and H8 are all terraced into
sloping ground. Of the six on Carrowmore four are on the terraced slopes and only two on the more
exposed higher ground.
Megalithic Monuments
A variety of megalithic monuments are located within the field system areas and many can be
directly related to the walls.
The Carrowmore – Rathlackan area has the greatest number and variety, including six court tombs,
three wedge tombs, a round cairn plus three other possible or unclassified sites (Figure 2). The six
court tombs are all on the lower plateau area. The pair of Lecarrowntemple sites, Ma16 and Ma17,
are in a peat free area and the furthest from the walls although there are uncertain remains about
400m to the North of them. Doonadoba Ma122 is also on peat free land on the lower slopes of the
Carrowmore hill. Castletown Ma109 has a long gallery with imbricated sides aligned N – S directly on
the line of a field wall. It is likely the wall continued towards the tomb but the land in the immediate
vicinity had been ploughed and reclaimed. The Castletown Ma107 site is a possible dual court tomb
aligned NNW – SSE and has a field wall directly connected. At the South end of the cairn the wall
joins at an aligned long regular set stone and the wall continues from midway on the east side of the
cairn. The Rathlackan tomb has the enclosure wall surrounding H13 attached to the North side of
the cairn.
Of the three wedge tombs Creevagh Ma120 is on peat free land to the east. Carrowmacshane
Ma126 is in very shallow peat and only a short stretch of uncertain wall was found close to the
tomb. While this might indicate robbing of the walls to construct the tomb the third wedge tomb
Carrowmore Ma125 has very well preserved walls close by including a curving wall less than 10m to
the E. To the N of the tomb the land had been reclaimed.
The Knockboha Site B round cairn (21.5m diameter and 3.5m high) is prominently sited on the East
shoulder of the hill overlooking the Rathlackan plateau but gradually rising ground restricts visibility
westwards. While it does not have any definite field walls within 300m the mature coniferous
forestry immediately to the South prevented any search and to the East the ground drops very
steeply to peat free land. The absence of walls to the N and W could possibly be explained as due to
robbing for the cairn.
Carrowmore Site A, sited just 50m from the highest point on the hill is a largely concealed uneven
cairn about 13m N – S by 10m E – W with the corner of a very large horizontal slab at least 2m long
150

supported by an orthostat visible under the peat at the Northwest end. It is possibly a megalithic cist
and is completely enclosed within a large rectilinear 7.2ha field.
Site C, just 100m SW of Rathlackan court tomb, is an uncertain site with a low irregular cairn about
6m N – S by 4m with some apparently set stones and some loose stone slabs up to 1m in size that
may have been disturbed from the monument. There is a gap in the adjacent section of a N – S field
wall which runs to the E of the site although the ends of the wall appear to curve in towards the
cairn.
Site E is located just 30m W of the field wall that incorporates the three house sites H3 H4 and H5
and is possibly a ruined megalith with a chamber 2.3m wide facing ENE. Other stones closer to the
site may be remnants of walls.
On Seefin hill there are two court tombs and two round cairns (Figure 4). The Ballinglen court tomb
Ma121 has a cairn at least 28m long and 11m wide aligned WNW – ESE with a probable court at the
W end. A field wall extends from the rear of the cairn in a SE direction. On the North side of Seefin
the Carrowkibbock Upper Ma108 court tomb is also aligned with an E – W field wall which seems to
end 120m from the tomb. The tomb has at least two chambers and a court at the E end while a
modern drain and fence cuts through the W end.
The round cairn, Aghaleague site A, is less than 10m Northeast of a long NW – SE field wall. No field
walls were noted within 60m of the second round cairn, Carrowcuilleen site B, but the deep uncut
peat in the vicinity could possibly conceal some.
Two court tombs are located within the Barnhill area (Figure 5). Land reclamation around the fine
Barnhill Upper court tomb Ma27 would have destroyed any walls closer than the N – S parallel that
ends just over 100m to the N. The closest wall to the mostly destroyed Aghaleague Ma26 court tomb
is 200m away but occasional isolated uprights in the vicinity may be wall remnants.
The only area of substantial field walls without any megalithic tombs nearby is Castletown and it is
surprising that there are no known megaliths in this low lying area between Bunatrahir Bay and
Downpatrick Head.
Discussion
All of the field systems with their associated house structures and megalithic monuments exhibit a
great variety of archaeological material and no doubt reflect intensive prehistoric activity in this area
over a prolonged period of time.
A precise date for the construction of the field walls is difficult to determine and individual walls may
have been built at different times even within the same system. This is evident at Castletown (Figure
6) where there were at least two phases of construction, one on the sub peat soil and a second on a
thin layer of peat. The date of the initiation of peat growth in this area has not been established. This
is also the only system, apart from the short stretch of wall in Knockaun that does not have any
associated megalithic tombs. The Cabintown Site A (Figure 8) is difficult to categorise, being too
irregular in shape to be regarded as a stone circle and it is unlikely to be the remains of a walled
enclosure as the stones used are much larger than in any of the field walls in the vicinity. The only
151

other associated monuments in this system are the two large circular house sites which could be
comparable to the middle Bronze Age Belderg Beg site.
On Seefin the field systems are more likely to be Neolithic in date, not only because of the two
associated court tombs. On the south side of the hill a number of pine tree stumps are visible in the
base of the peat and are clearly later than the field walls beneath. To the south of the hill the peat
with the pine stumps extends across a broad level area where there are no field walls evident. The
depth of peat beneath the trees becomes progressively deeper up to 1.8m. Two pine trees from
each area have been dated. In Annaghmore a tree directly on top of a wall was dated to 3330-2870
cal BC (UCD-C26, 4350±60BP), and a second tree in the base of the peat just 3m from a wall was
3340-2920 cal BC(UCD-C50, 4440±60BP), Caulfield et al 1998. An identical date to this was obtained
for a tree further to the south in Annaghbeg that grew on 1.8m of peat (UCD-C24), while a second
tree on 1.4m of peat was 2470-2050 cal BC (UCD-C38, 3820±60BP). This indicates the peat was
established in this area by middle Neolithic times. While the court tombs are on the hill sides the
two similar round cairns are more prominently sited although neither is on the highest point of the
hill. It would seem that, along with the similar Knockboha cairn on Carrowmore hill, they were
deliberately sited to be visible from mutually exclusive areas. The dating of such cairns is
problematic although O’Sullivan and Downey (2011) argue that a significant number could be
classified as Passage Tombs. The central depression on the top of the Carrowcuilleen cairn Site B
could indicate a collapsed chamber. The Aghaleague cairn Site A however has a surrounding ditch
2.0 – 2.5m wide and at least 1.25m deep which was located by probing.
In Barnhill the only associated monuments are two court tombs while in the Carrowmore –
Rathlackan area the greater variety of associated monuments indicates a more complex landscape.
As elsewhere it is difficult to date the construction of all the field walls but the association with both
court and wedge tombs could indicate use from at least the middle Neolithic into the Bronze Age.
The excavations at the Rathlackan court tomb have shown ample artifactual and radiocarbon
evidence for middle Neolithic activity with earlier activity hinted at by the presence of two sherds of
an early Neolithic carinated bowl from the court. The house structure beside the tomb was dated to
the late Neolithic from charcoal on the well preserved hearth and similar dates came from the court
and rear chamber. The enclosure wall surrounding the house and built onto the side of the tomb
may also have been built at this time. Use of the tomb in the Early Bronze Age was indicated by
sherds of a Vase Urn in the rear chamber and a Cordoned Urn in the front chamber. However
whether the surrounding fields were continuously used and inhabited throughout this long period is
not yet clear. It is likely there were alterations to the field walls over time for example the wall
extending from the Castletown Ma107 court tomb would seem to have been built after the tomb
and prior to the N-S wall to the west of the tomb.
The great variety in shape and size of the seventeen house structures in this area no doubt reflects
varying functions as well as dates. The only secure dating evidence is for the excavated H13 which
gave two late Neolithic dates of 2880-2490 cal BC (Beta-48102) and 2870-2450 cal BC (Beta-63836).
Because of its unique small square shape, absence of artifacts and very high quantity of charcoal this
site may have had a particular function in relation to activities associated with the tomb rather than
as a regular dwelling site. Two other sites within enclosures and three round houses attached to the
ends of field walls are likely to be contemporary with those walls. The six free standing structures
are difficult to stratigraphically relate to the walls. Two structures are built against a long field wall
152

and with different building techniques, possibly indicating a later construction date to the field wall.
One of these, H10, is built in the corner of a large field on the upper slopes of Carrowmore and it is
overlain by a cairn 5m diameter and 0.8m high that may be a clearance cairn, (Figure 16). The three
remaining house sites may also be later than the field walls as they may be built with stones robbed
from those walls. The unusual egg shaped H12 (Figure 11) has a thin layer of peat under some stones
and the H5 site (Figure 15) is comparable in shape and size to the structure in Trench 25 of the Céide
Visitor Centre site.
The overall variety of field walls, house structures and other monuments in this area no doubt
indicates a complex history of activities over a long period of time from at least the middle Neolithic
into the Bronze Age.
153

References
Aldridge, R.B. 1961. Some Megalithic and other sites in Counties Mayo and Sligo. Journal of the
Galway Archaeological and Historical Society, 29, 83-90.
Aldridge, R.B. 1965. Megalithic and other sites in Counties Mayo and Galway. Journal of the
Galway Archaeological and Historical Society, 31, 11-15.
Byrne, M.J.B. 1986. The Pre-Bog Archaeology of the Ballycastle-Palmerstown Area of North
Mayo, Volumes 1 & 2, Unpublished MA Thesis, UCD.
Caulfield, S., O’Donnell, R. G. and Mitchell, P. I. 1998. 14 C Dating of a Neolithic Field System at
Céide Fields, County Mayo, Ireland. Radiocarbon 40: 629-640.
De Valera, R. 1951. A Group of ‘Horned Cairns’ near Ballycastle, Co. Mayo. Journal of the
Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland, 81, 161-197.
McAfee, P. 1997. Irish stone Walls History Building Conservation, Dublin.
O’Sullivan, M. and Downey, L. 2011. Summit Cairns. Archaeology Ireland, Vol 25, No. 3, 20-23.
154

Survey Illustrations:
Figure 1: Overall location map of all walls and tombs.
155

Figure 2: Carrowmore – Rathlackan walls with houses, tombs and other sites.
Figure 3: 3D model with 2x vertical relief. Facing south, showing Carrowmore (right) and Rathlackan
(left).
156

Figure 4: Seefin walls with associated sites.
157

Figure 5: Barnhill walls
Figure 6: Castletown walls
158

Figure 7: Walls from the study area: left - wall with spaced boulders at Seefin; top right - double wall
at Queen’s Grave; bottom right - gap at Carrowmore
159

160

Figure 8: Cabintown Site A.
161

Figure 9: Ballymachugh H2,
Figure 10: Rathlackan H13 post excavation
162

Figure 11: Rathlackan sites H12
Figure 12: Rathlackan H15,
163

Figure 13: Creevagh H3,
Figure 14: Creevagh H4,
164

Figure 15: Creevagh H5,
Figure 16: Doonadoba H10,
165

Figure 17: Doonadoba H9,
Figure 18: Beltra H16
166

Figure 19: Carrowkibbock Upper H20.
167