10.01.2014 Views

Neolithic and Bronze Age Landscapes of North Mayo: Report 2011

Neolithic and Bronze Age Landscapes of North Mayo: Report 2011

Neolithic and Bronze Age Landscapes of North Mayo: Report 2011

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

other associated monuments in this system are the two large circular house sites which could be<br />

comparable to the middle <strong>Bronze</strong> <strong>Age</strong> Belderg Beg site.<br />

On Seefin the field systems are more likely to be <strong>Neolithic</strong> in date, not only because <strong>of</strong> the two<br />

associated court tombs. On the south side <strong>of</strong> the hill a number <strong>of</strong> pine tree stumps are visible in the<br />

base <strong>of</strong> the peat <strong>and</strong> are clearly later than the field walls beneath. To the south <strong>of</strong> the hill the peat<br />

with the pine stumps extends across a broad level area where there are no field walls evident. The<br />

depth <strong>of</strong> peat beneath the trees becomes progressively deeper up to 1.8m. Two pine trees from<br />

each area have been dated. In Annaghmore a tree directly on top <strong>of</strong> a wall was dated to 3330-2870<br />

cal BC (UCD-C26, 4350±60BP), <strong>and</strong> a second tree in the base <strong>of</strong> the peat just 3m from a wall was<br />

3340-2920 cal BC(UCD-C50, 4440±60BP), Caulfield et al 1998. An identical date to this was obtained<br />

for a tree further to the south in Annaghbeg that grew on 1.8m <strong>of</strong> peat (UCD-C24), while a second<br />

tree on 1.4m <strong>of</strong> peat was 2470-2050 cal BC (UCD-C38, 3820±60BP). This indicates the peat was<br />

established in this area by middle <strong>Neolithic</strong> times. While the court tombs are on the hill sides the<br />

two similar round cairns are more prominently sited although neither is on the highest point <strong>of</strong> the<br />

hill. It would seem that, along with the similar Knockboha cairn on Carrowmore hill, they were<br />

deliberately sited to be visible from mutually exclusive areas. The dating <strong>of</strong> such cairns is<br />

problematic although O’Sullivan <strong>and</strong> Downey (<strong>2011</strong>) argue that a significant number could be<br />

classified as Passage Tombs. The central depression on the top <strong>of</strong> the Carrowcuilleen cairn Site B<br />

could indicate a collapsed chamber. The Aghaleague cairn Site A however has a surrounding ditch<br />

2.0 – 2.5m wide <strong>and</strong> at least 1.25m deep which was located by probing.<br />

In Barnhill the only associated monuments are two court tombs while in the Carrowmore –<br />

Rathlackan area the greater variety <strong>of</strong> associated monuments indicates a more complex l<strong>and</strong>scape.<br />

As elsewhere it is difficult to date the construction <strong>of</strong> all the field walls but the association with both<br />

court <strong>and</strong> wedge tombs could indicate use from at least the middle <strong>Neolithic</strong> into the <strong>Bronze</strong> <strong>Age</strong>.<br />

The excavations at the Rathlackan court tomb have shown ample artifactual <strong>and</strong> radiocarbon<br />

evidence for middle <strong>Neolithic</strong> activity with earlier activity hinted at by the presence <strong>of</strong> two sherds <strong>of</strong><br />

an early <strong>Neolithic</strong> carinated bowl from the court. The house structure beside the tomb was dated to<br />

the late <strong>Neolithic</strong> from charcoal on the well preserved hearth <strong>and</strong> similar dates came from the court<br />

<strong>and</strong> rear chamber. The enclosure wall surrounding the house <strong>and</strong> built onto the side <strong>of</strong> the tomb<br />

may also have been built at this time. Use <strong>of</strong> the tomb in the Early <strong>Bronze</strong> <strong>Age</strong> was indicated by<br />

sherds <strong>of</strong> a Vase Urn in the rear chamber <strong>and</strong> a Cordoned Urn in the front chamber. However<br />

whether the surrounding fields were continuously used <strong>and</strong> inhabited throughout this long period is<br />

not yet clear. It is likely there were alterations to the field walls over time for example the wall<br />

extending from the Castletown Ma107 court tomb would seem to have been built after the tomb<br />

<strong>and</strong> prior to the N-S wall to the west <strong>of</strong> the tomb.<br />

The great variety in shape <strong>and</strong> size <strong>of</strong> the seventeen house structures in this area no doubt reflects<br />

varying functions as well as dates. The only secure dating evidence is for the excavated H13 which<br />

gave two late <strong>Neolithic</strong> dates <strong>of</strong> 2880-2490 cal BC (Beta-48102) <strong>and</strong> 2870-2450 cal BC (Beta-63836).<br />

Because <strong>of</strong> its unique small square shape, absence <strong>of</strong> artifacts <strong>and</strong> very high quantity <strong>of</strong> charcoal this<br />

site may have had a particular function in relation to activities associated with the tomb rather than<br />

as a regular dwelling site. Two other sites within enclosures <strong>and</strong> three round houses attached to the<br />

ends <strong>of</strong> field walls are likely to be contemporary with those walls. The six free st<strong>and</strong>ing structures<br />

are difficult to stratigraphically relate to the walls. Two structures are built against a long field wall<br />

152

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!