EMAP_2012_Report_6_1.pdf (7.3 MB) - The Heritage Council

matting. Rush seeds were found in the basal fill of the well at Killickaweeny and it was
suggested that the slotted and pointed iron tool recovered at the site may have been used in
coiled basketry, with the rush or reed passed through the slot and the pointed end used to
bring it around and between the coils (Walsh 2008, 50).
In all, 52 sites produced tools related to sewing and cutting of cloth, potentially for the
manufacture of garments; a breakdown of the geographical distribution of theses given in
Fig. 8.4. Ten of these sites had evidence for this process only: three sites with just shears
(Grange West, Killanully and Moyne), one with both needles and shears (Nevinstown), and
six with needles only (Farrandreg, Knockea, Ninch, Rochfort Demesne, Sluggary and Sroove).
Breaking down the tools, twenty-one sites in all produced shears (complete or fragmentary);
those at Grange West, Killanully and Moyne had no other textile-related evidence, which
could suggest alternative uses for these tools. Sites with multiple shears include
Cahercommaun with five pairs, Lagore with six and Garryduff with seven; were all of these
for textile working, and if so, do the quantities imply significant presence of the
craft/workers?
Forty-five sites in all produced needles; just a single needle was recorded at 23 of these,
leaving 22 sites with two or more needles. Significant quantities were found at Castlefarm (at
least ten needles), Lagore (fourteen) and Knowth (34); interestingly, all of these sites are
located in county Meath, but it is unclear whether this represents a concentration of this
craftwork or more extensive excavations in this area. Only five of the sites with needles have
no other evidence for textile processes: these are Knockea and Sluggary (where the iron
needles could be pins), Ninch and Sroove with bone needles only, and Rochfort Demesne
with iron, bronze and bone needles.
Fig. 8.4: Distribution of sites with evidence for sewing (total sites: 52)
The presence of these tools show that various stages of processing, perhaps to the final
making of cloth and its formation into garments (suggested especially by needles), occurred
on particular sites. It is important to note that the processes could be separate: spinning
could be practised in- or outdoors, and accordingly, its tools need not be restricted to
settlement sites (O’Brien 2010, 16). Weaving, in contrast, would be a more stationary craft,
at least insofar as large wooden looms were concerned. As Hodkinson (1987) points out,
however, evidence for these is limited, and the possibility of the use of back-beam looms,
132