AR01049_Christian_Landscapes_Final_Report_2_10.pdf - The ...

Making Christian Landscapes 

Settlement, Society and Regionality in 

Early Medieval Ireland 

PART 2 of 2 

Report for the Heritage Council, 

December 2010 

Principal Investigators: Tomás Ó Carragáin and John Sheehan, 

Archaeology Department, University College Cork 

Associate Investigators: Sam Turner, Paul MacCotter, Gill Boazman, Bernadette 

McCarthy, Aidan Harte, Nick Hogan, Anne Connon, Tara O’Neill, Frank Coyne, Tony 

Cummins, Vincent Ronan and Hugh Kavanagh 

Funded by the Heritage Council through the Irish National Strategic 

Archaeological Research (INSTAR) Programme, 2008-2010


2010 INSTAR Report 



This chapter comprises accounts of the various MCL case studies (except for Rosscarbery, Co. 

Cork and some of the Galway case studies). Each section outlines the reason for selecting the 

area in question, the nature of the evidence and the patterns that have emerged from the 

research. These accounts are relatively short overviews rather than definitive analyses, for in 

most cases research is ongoing and will be published before long in various monographs as 

outlined above (Section 1.5.2). 

Chapter 5 

Case Studies 

5.1 Corcu Duibne, Co. Kerry 

The whole of the regional kingdom of Corcu Duibne, encompassing the Iveragh and much of 

the Corkaguiney peninsulas, was studied by the Making Christian Landscapes team. This 

discussion focuses primarily on Uí Rathach, the western part of the Iveragh peninsula, which 

was the western of two parts of the local kingdom of Áes Irruis Deiscert (‘the people of the 

southern peninsula’), one of the three principal sub-divisions of Corcu Duibne (MacCotter 

2008, 118; 2009, 51). This is an economically marginal, mountainous landscape with extensive 

bog cover in the lowlands. In the early medieval period Uí Rathach was the western of two 

parts of the local kingdom of Áes Irruis Deiscert (‘the people of the southern peninsula’), one 

of the three principal sub-divisions of the regional kingdom of Corcu Duibne, which also 

encompassed much of the Corkaguiney peninsula (MacCotter 2008, 118; 2009, 51). Viking 

Age and later documents suggest that the local kings were based around Valentia Harbour, and 

it is possible that the large (and partially excavated) cashel of Cahergal was one of their 

residences. 

In many of Ireland’s landscapes, the very earliest stratum of Christianity is elusive, but here it 

is represented by ogham stones, as well as by the minor ecclesiastical site of Caherlehillan, 

located in a remote mountain valley in the northeast of Uí Rathach. This site was established on 

virgin ground in the later fifth or early sixth century, making it the earliest church site 

excavated in Ireland to date (Sheehan 2009). It consisted of a curvilinear enclosure about 30m 

in diameter within which was a domestic zone in the western half (represented by curvilinear 

wattle houses, evidence for craft activity and food storage and several sherds of B-ware from 

the east Mediterranean), and a post-and-wattle church, cemetery, outdoor shrine and cross-slabs 

115 

116





in the eastern half. This arrangement is typical of the vast majority of early ecclesiastical sites 

in Uí Rathach, and Caherlehillan and shows that the template was already clear in the minds of 

the first or second generation of Christians there. The earliest ogham stones found at some sites 

possibly indicate that they originated as ‘undeveloped’ burial grounds. We can be confident, 

however, that other closely-dateable monuments such as cross-slabs and stone shrines were 

erected in fully-developed ecclesiastical settlements, and can therefore conclude that the vast 

majority of such sites were established between c.500 and 800 (Ó Carragáin 2009, 330-31). 

Especially from the eighth century onwards, their sod or wattle churches and domestic 

buildings were replaced by buildings of drystone construction that often survive. Doubtless 

some sites were short-lived, but all of the examples excavated to date were operating during the 

eighth century, which may represent a high point in the density of churches in the landscape. 

As well as some sites of probably local importance (below), there were two regionally 

important establishments: Inis Úasal and Skellig Michael. Inis Úasal (‘noble island’) is an 

island on Lough Currane at the south of Uí Rathach. This was the principal foundation of St 

Fíonán Cam, whose floruit was probably in the approximate period 560-640. According to his 

genealogy, he was related to the local Áes Irruis Deiscirt kings, and by c.800 he had been 

recognised as the chief saint of the whole of Corcu Duibne (MacCotter 2009, 75-76). The core 

estate of Inis Úasal, encompassing most of the land around the lake, can be reconstructed, at 

least approximately, through a combination of documentary, toponymic and archaeological 

evidence (Ó Carragáin 2003a, 134-41; now revised in MacCotter 2009, 151-57). In places it is 

delimited by boundary cross-slabs that may well be eighth century. There are hints that it was 

originally a royal estate, the rump of which survived at the southwest of the lake at Ightercua. 

To the northwest, the estate of Glanhurkin also seems to have belonged to Inis Úasal, though it 

may not have been acquired until the Viking Age. Between the two was the estate of Skellig 

Michael, preserved as the parish of the Augustinian house of Ballinskelligs, which was 

probably built on the site of Skellig Michael’s mainland base (Ó Carragáin 2003a, 141-42; 

MacCotter 2009, 85-89, 157-58). Skellig Michael may be a relatively late (eighth-century?) 

foundation. There is no documentary or archaeological evidence for a church there before the 

eighth century, and it is possible that its founder (who seems to have been called Suibne), was 

associated with or inspired by the eighth-century ascetic Céli Dé (servants of God) movement. 

Céli Dé foundations are among the last significant monasteries founded in Ireland during the 

early medieval period. 

117 

118





Fig. 5.1: The three tríchas or sub-kingdoms of Corcu Duibne: Áes Irruis Tuascirt, 

Áes Coinchinn, and Áes Irruis Deiscirt. 

Fig. 5.2: Early Medieval sites in northwest Iveragh. 

119 

120





Fig. 5.4: The suggested extent of the Inis Úasal ecclesiastical estate. 

Fig. 5.5: Cross-slab on the boundary between Termons and Spunkane townlands. 

Fig. 5.3: Early medieval sites in southwest Iveragh. 

121 

122





Thus, by 800 a significant portion of the land in Uí Ráthach was owned by its mother churches. 

Some of the minor churches on these estates may pre-date their formation, but the majority 

may have been founded as out-farms. There are four or five examples quite evenly distributed 

within the core Inis Úasal estate (Ó Carragáin 2003a, 134-41; Ó Carragáin 2008, 259-264, 272- 

76; 2009, 263-269). Perhaps some were run by ecclesiastical families headed by married priests 

while others were run directly by members of the Inis Úasal monastic community. They all 

seem to incorporate burial grounds, suggesting that, even within ecclesiastical estates, a 

significant proportion of the population was buried away from important churches in the pre- 

Viking period. The even distribution of these sites suggests that the agricultural economy of the 

estate was carefully managed, and the surviving elements of the medieval field system have 

been identified through survey and HLC. There is a particular concentration of possible 

medieval fields around Dromkeare, which may have been the most important of the four outfarms. 

Certainly it seems to have had a special role within the estate. It is located on the banks 

of the Cummeragh, the main river flowing into Lough Currane, and just outside its enclosure 

are the remains of a probable early medieval mill-race and horizontal mill. Probably this was 

where the crops produced on the estate of Inis Úasal were processed. The many ringforts and 

other ‘secular’ settlements on the estate must represent the dwellings of the more affluent laytenants 

of Inis Úasal, the individuals referred to in the early sources as manaig. The law tracts 

make clear that the status of these individuals could vary considerably (Etchingham 1999, 

Chapter 9), so it is not surprising to find evidence that some of them lived in ringforts. 

The density of minor church sites is almost as dense in the non-ecclesiastical estates of Uí 

Ráthach, demonstrating the crucial role of minor secular landowners in the Christianisation of 

the landscape. In a few cases, the name of the family is possibly preserved in the townland 

name (Cill Ó Luaigh, Cill Ó an Chathaigh, Cill Ó gCnáimhín and Cill Ó gCróin) (Ó Cíobháin 

2009, 93); if so, it is telling that these are very obscure kin-groups that seem to have sunk into 

obscurity at an early period. At Caherlehillan the church site is just next to an impressive 

cashel, which may be the residence (or the Viking Age successor of the residence) of the family 

that founded the site. This proximity, coupled with the fact that children were buried at the 

church site (no bones survived), hint that the church may have been run by an ecclesiastical 

branch of this family (Sheehan 2009). By contrast, only males were buried in the early 

medieval cemetery on Illaunloughan, suggesting that this was a minor island monastery (White 

Marshall and Walsh 2005, 84). Another island establishment, Inisdaslevoc (more commonly 

known as Church Island), with its tiny sod-built church and single round house, may also have 

begun as an eremitical establishment. It must have had close links to the local kings from the 

outset, however, since it was at the heart of the Ballycarbery royal estate. In contrast to 

Illaunloughan, women were buried there as well as men. In the eighth and ninth centuries, 

perhaps in part as an expression of their relative independence, several of these minor sites 

outside the Inis Úasal estate invested in stone reliquary shrines for the bones of their founders. 

Tellingly, no such shrines are to be found at minor church sites on ecclesiastical land (Ó 

Carragáin 2003a). 

Non-ecclesiastical burial must also have been common, for most ecclesiastical cemeteries seem 

to have been for a single family or small group of religious. While no cemetery settlements 

have been identified in the area, some of the burial grounds in ringforts may have originated as 

family cemeteries in the early medieval period (though most probably originated later on as 

burial grounds for unbaptised children). There is also a modest number of cairns, mounds and 

barrows, some of which might be early medieval, but none has been excavated. Only a 

minority are on estate or townland boundaries. The best example of this is the large cairn with 

cross-inscribed ogham stone on the summit of Drung Hill, which marks the northeastern border 

of Uí Rathach. This was the óenach or assembly site of the local kingdom, and probably for the 

whole of Corcu Duibne; Drung derives from the same root that gives us ‘throng’ in English 

(MacCotter 2009, 62). Uí Ráthach is an area rich in ogham stones, but an unusually high 

proportion of them occur at ecclesiastical sites (62% versus 37% of those in Ireland as a 

whole). Those in non-ecclesiastical contexts were probably boundary or burial markers or both. 

The western boundary of the Ballycarbery royal estate is marked by a number of monuments, 

including prehistoric standing stones, a church site and an isolated ogham stone with an 

incomplete inscription that reads ANM CALUMANN MAQ[…] (The Soul of Columann Son 

of…). The formula used indicates that it is a relatively late example, probably seventh century, 

commemorating a Christian. Calumann is a variant of Colmán, a name which occurs only once 

in the Corcu Duibne genealogies in a late seventh century context. We do not know if he was a 

king of Corcu Duibne, but this is made less likely by the fact that, if he had any descendents, 

123 

124





they are not recorded. Nevertheless, it is not beyond the bounds of possibility that the 

Canburrin stone was erected to commemorate this figure, on the boundary of the royal estate 

(Ó Carragán 2009, 256-57). In nearby Cloghanecarhan is an ecclesiastical site with a late sixth- 

/ early seventh-century ogham stone commemorating the descendent of Carthan (MAQI MAQI 

CARATTINN). Carthan may have been the founder of the ecclesiastical site, but in the absence 

of a cross on the ogham stone and an ecclesiastical toponym in the townland name we cannot 

rule out the possibility that he was someone commemorated in a non-ecclesiastical cemetery 

which later became an ecclesiastical site. 

The most striking pattern evident in Viking Age Uí Rathach is the abandonment of a significant 

number of minor ecclesiastical sites. Caherlehillan seems to have been abandoned in the eighth 

century while on Illaunloughan permanent occupation ceased in the ninth century (Sheehan 

2009; White Marshall and Walsh 2005, 37). The absence of Viking Age features – such as 

cross-slabs and rectilinear domestic buildings – at many of the unexcavated minor sites is also 

suggestive, considering the unusually conspicuous archaeology of the area. By analogy with 

other areas, it seems likely that many non-ecclesiastical cemeteries also ceased to function at 

this time. In contrast, the regionally important establishments of Skellig Michael and especially 

Inis Úasal consolidated their positions during this time. Inis Úasal, for example, features a 

number of monumental tenth- to eleventh-century cross-slabs and in the twelfth century it 

acquired one of only two Romanesque churches in the area. Both sites retained a monastic 

component; for example one of the slabs on Inis Úasal commemorates a man who is described 

as an anchorite (AI 1058). We do not know the fate of the minor church sites within its estate at 

this time; perhaps some of them continued as settlements but lost their ecclesiastical/burial 

functions. 

During the Viking Age, such locally important may have acquired relatively large drystone 

churches or even larger churches of wood, but archaeologically speaking they are victims of 

their own success: they usually went on to become parish centres and their churches were 

replaced in the twelfth century (as at Killemlagh) or more usually later. Even their curvilinear 

enclosures were usually obliterated as their graveyards expanded. There are a few exceptions, 

however. One is Church Island, which in the seventh century had a tiny sod-built church and 

may have been eremitical in character. This was superseded by an unusually large drystone 

church with sculpted finial, as a result of recent re-excavation, we know was built in the tenth 

or eleventh century (Hayden 2008). Despite its island location, it was quite accessible and may 

have had a pastoral role before the formal establishment of parishes. Certainly its church was 

built to accommodate far more than could have lived on the island (thirty or more). Also, while 

a very modest number of burials was associated with the earlier church, the rate of burial seems 

to have risen exponentially thereafter. The prestige of the site in this regard must have been 

bound up with its status as a royal chapel at the heart of the principal estate of the kings of Áes 

Irruis Deiscirt who, especially from the mid-tenth century, emerge as the kings of the whole of 

Corcu Duibne (MacCotter 2008, 135). Doubtless these kings were involved in commissioning 

the fine new drystone church, which among other things may have served as a royal chapel. 

Elsewhere in Uí Rathach a number of locally important church sites continued in use and must 

have benefitted from the additional patronage and burial revenues that accrued as a result of the 

decline of nearby sites. Interestingly, a number of these sites, such as Killinane and Killemlagh, 

are alluded to in the twelfth-century Life of Fionán, even though they are outside the core Inis 

Úasal estate (Mac Cotter 2009, 76). Either their continued success was facilitated by longstanding 

associations with Inis Úasal, or else such associations were fabricated ex post facto. 

125 

126





5.2 Fir Maige, Co. Cork (Paul Mac Cotter with a contribution by Tomás Ó 

Carragáin) 

This study focusses on a part of Munster for which an unparalleled range of historical source 

material survives which allows us to gain unique insights into the secular and ecclesiastical 

structures and arrangements of an Irish territory over a period of several centuries. The 

immediate diachronic range involved, approximately the period 1000 to 1250, spans arguably 

the greatest fault line of all in Irish history, that of the Anglo-Norman invasion. This study thus 

offers special insights into the functioning of the fundamental secular administrative and 

ecclesiastical pastoral units of a typical Irish territory both before and after the Anglo-Norman 

invasion. It is also possible, however, to attempt a full historical survey of the origins of the 

secular and ecclesiastical estates concerned. The ‘star’ of this particular show is a 

topographical tract, Críchad an Chaoilli, discussed below. The ‘support cast’ of materials 

which enable us to elucidate fully the treasures of this document form principle two categories, 

hagiography and genealogy. An additional member of this ‘support cast’ is the extensive 

material from the early Anglo-Norman period, study of which facilitates a suitable dénouement 

for the work in hand. 

Críchad an Chaoilli is a topographical tract dealing with the kingdom of Caoille or Fir Maige, 

whose extent is now represented by the area of much of the baronies of Fermoy and of 

Condons and Clangibbon, in Co. Cork, as well as by small neighbouring portions of Counties 

Limerick and Waterford (O’Keeffe 1931). Críchad is based on an original which can be dated 

to the period 1138 × 1151, while containing earlier material (MacCotter 2010, 265). Críchad 

forms part of a small corpus of such material, but differs from its fellows in being significantly 

more detailed and in containing material not found in the others. (These concern lands in west 

Cork, Mayo and Galway). Críchad lists bailte (the original baile was the Gaelic estate), their 

sub-denominations, and their allodial proprietorial families. Bailte are in turn grouped into 

túatha. The ruling families of each túath are also named. Uniquely, however, Críchad also 

names the dedicated church of each túath where its burials must occur, and names the 

hereditary ecclesiastical families of these churches. Furthermore, in the nomenclature of its 

túatha, their families, and the comments of its author Críchad provides material of value in the 

task of reconstructing the earlier history of its túatha. As such this document is unique in that it 

127 

gives a high degree of social, communal and ecclesiastical information about an Irish localkingdom 

during the first half of the 12 th century, information which is not available in any 

other source or for any other district. While the few other similar documents concentrate on the 

secular túatha arrangements Críchad adds a unique layer of ecclesiastical information as well 

as secular historical narrative data of a more substantial nature than found in these others. 

Again, the sheer density of its toponymy is remarkable in comparison to its fellows. 

Críchad presents a number of possibilities for the historian and archaeologist. Its density of 

placenames is such as to provide an opportunity to reconstruct approximately accurate maps of 

its túatha. Of the 180 or so place-names recorded in Críchad approximately two-thirds can be 

definitely identified and another dozen and a half tentatively identified. These identifications 

are based on the work of Power (1932), Ó Buachalla (1966) and MacCotter (2008, 266-9), 

where they are summarized. 

This mapping in turn allows the question of the spatial relationship between these túatha and 

the subsequent pattern of Anglo-Norman manors in the cantred of Fermoy to be examined. 

(Fermoy was the direct spatial successor to the Gaelic kingdom of Fir Maige.) It is perhaps 

surprising that no study of this spatial relationship has been attempted so far for Fermoy with 

its uniquely detailed toponomy. Before such a comparison can be made, however, it is 

necessary to first reconstruct the manorial structure of Fermoy. Once again we are extremely 

fortunate in that the eclectic nature of source-material survival has been kind to Fermoy, and an 

untypically substantial body of evidence remains for its manors and fees, dating to the period 

down to c.1370. Once the manors are mapped (using a methodology described below), it is 

then possible to carry out such a comparison. This comparison contributes to the question of 

the principles involved in Anglo-Norman manor creation in Ireland, although a full treatment 

of this subject is for another forum. From our perspective the correlation between Angl- 

Norman manors and the earlier túatha as indicated by placenames in the Críchad is especially 

important. The conclusion to be drawn from this study is that, by and large, in Fermoy Anglo- 

Norman manors appear to have been formed by using the templates of individual bailte or of 

several bailte together. Thus several manors will be found in the area of a single túath. 

128





Something must be said here of the methodology of estate reconstruction. The core dynamic of 

this discipline arises from a simple principle, namely that when the Anglo-Norman colonists 

arrived in Ireland in the late twelfth century they adopted, with little change, a pre-existing 

indigenous administrative system with ancient roots, and duly preserved significant elements 

and spatial or areal outlines of that system for a considerable period afterwards (MacCotter 

2008 passim). Therefore, access to this ‘High-Gaelic’ spatial system occurs via a 

reconstruction of the system in operation in the ‘High-Norman’ period. This can be done in 

two stages, directly by access to the surviving records from the Anglo-Norman period, and less 

directly by reference to the greater volume of records from later periods which can be shown to 

preserve faithfully the spatial outlines of divisions whose roots can be traced back to the Anglo- 

Norman period. In the course of this work Paul Mac Cotter has shown how the various 

categories of spatial divisions inter-relate and inform each other. In particular, he has 

discovered principles with a wide and sometimes even general application from the study of 

particular regions where significant quantities of source material remains, for such evidential 

survivals are local and eclectic. In this way a hierarchy of spatial divisions has come to be 

recognized, classified and reconstructed. Units studied include the Gaelic units of trícha cét, 

túath and baile biataig, the colonial units of vills, villates, manors and cantreds, and the 

ecclesiastical units of parish, rural deanery and rural rectory. 

The basic economic and fiscal ‘estate’ of pre-Invasion Gaelic Ireland was the baile (biataig), 

which has been described as ‘the taxable unit of landholding, the economically independent 

estate of twelfth-century Ireland, the fundamental property unit of the lineage group, the 

mechanism by which property was allocated among the families of the sept’ (MacCotter 2008, 

23). These estates were then grouped into larger units, which are best called late-túatha (to 

distinguish them from other concepts of the term ‘túath’). The late-túath was ruled by a taísech 

tuaithe or ‘túath leader’, often the hereditary leader of an aristocratic cenél, although sometimes 

merely a maer or steward appointed by the local king. This office holder seems to have born 

functions such as tax or tribute collection and leadership of the local military levy. Where such 

units have been reconstructed anterior to the present study we find a size range for bailte in the 

region of 700 to 7,000 acres and for late-túatha between 9,000 to upwards of 90,000 acres. In 

each the average size tends to the lower end of the scale: thus, for bailte an average size of a 

little above 2,000 acres can be suggested. Here we can speak of the baile as the estate and the 

late-túath as the district (for want of a better term). Government, in medieval as well as 

modern times, has always discharged its functions by means of a hierarchy of spatial units at 

the bottom of which we find divisions such as the 19 th century district electoral division and 

poor-law union and the earlier (civil) parish which, in both Late Medieval and Early Modern 

times, has possessed civic as well as ecclesiastical functions, usually shared with the manor and 

its court leet. In Ireland such ‘district’ administrative units were the heirs to the earlier latetúath. 

Baile and late-túath are well-evidenced in records of 11 th and 12 th century Ireland. The 

baile seems to originate during the first years of the 11 th century through some form of reorganization 

of an older estate system while evidence for the late-túath is (as shown in the 

present study), earlier by several centuries. Finally, we should note the existence of a third 

spatial unit of pre-Invasion Ireland in the category of estates and districts: the ecclesiastical 

estate, the landed property of an important church. Such estates seem to be broadly similar in 

size to their neighbouring late-túatha. 

The key to a methodology of reconstruction for such estates and districts lies in understanding 

the relationships between the various spatial units of both pre- and post-Invasion Ireland. We 

know several useful things about these. In the rich agricultural lands of eastern Ireland the 

indigenous baile often becomes the small colonial parish. Larger parishes are often based on 

single late-túatha or on divisions of these, usually halved but sometimes further sub-divided. 

In many cases, of course, the parish is merely the ecclesiastical equivalent of the secular manor, 

and so we should often think in terms of ‘parish/manor’, although here, as throughout 

consideration of this complex subject, such a concordance is merely one of a number of 

variants one observes. One such variant concerns rectories. Where the boundaries of these 

agree with those of parishes nothing further need be said, but where rectory and vicarage do not 

coincide the bounds of the rectory are a much better guide to otherwise hidden secular 

boundaries than are those of the vicarage. This is because during the first years of the Anglo- 

Norman colony lords actually owned the ecclesiastical benifices (tithes and rights of 

advowson) of their property, and so the rectory will be the spatial equivalent of the actual estate 

or manor. In this way, for example, we sometimes find a single parish composed of two or 

more rectories, and here we must look for several secular estates even though there is only one 

129 

130





parish and vicarage. Sometimes such boundaries will preserve the memory of manors while in 

other cases we find rectories preserving the extent of bailte. Again, this reminds us that where 

such differences exist the parochial (or vicarial) boundaries may have been drawn primarily 

with pastoral concerns in mind and bear little relationship to any secular landholding pattern. 

Yet another useful indicator is that of the early-modern unit of productivity assessment, the 

ubiquitous quarter or ceathramh. These were certainly the descendants of the quarters of the 

13 th and 14 th centuries, in turn actual quarters of the unit known to the colonists as the villate, 

the direct descendant of the baile (biataig). While some corruption and alteration in 

mensuration practices had occurred in the interim there is certainly a direct relationship 

between the quarters of both periods and their original whole, the baile estate. Finally, for 

ecclesiastical estates we have the Late Medieval pattern of prebends and rectories in possession 

of major capitular dignitaries and canons which, in almost all cases, preserve the outline of 

diocesan estates which were, in turn, the descendants of the earlier, pre-diocesan ecclesiastical 

estates spoken of above. 

Críchad allows us to examine this process in the kind of detail not possible elsewhere. The 

most striking point which emerges as this work has progressed is the similarities and 

interrelationships between the secular túath estates and the ecclesiastical tearmonn estates in Fir 

Maige. The secular history of both kingship and túath structure in Fir Maige can be 

reconstructed from the annals, Críchad, genealogies and other sources, enabling a diachronic 

account of both kingdom and its sub-divisions to be given over a six-century period. This can 

then be related to a similar descent of the three major ecclesiastical estates within the territory. 

Remarkably and untypically, detailed hagiography exists for each of these, thus allowing a 

similar reconstruction to take place in this sphere. It is therefore possible to reconstruct an 

approximate landholding and estate-development account for both secular and ecclesiastical 

landholdings here down to the 13 th century, with a corresponding insight into how both relate to 

each other, and in turn draw comparisons with the lesser amount known from the other study 

areas. 

Another question which Críchad, with its wealth of detail, assists with is that of the origin and 

development of the Gaelic túath (or better, late-túath), a subject hitherto largely unexplored. 

This question is closely related to that of the origin of the ecclesiastical estate in Fir Maige. A 

further value of Críchad lies in its usefulness for throwing light on the question of parish 

formation, given the pre- or better, proto-parochial structure it reveals in Fir Maige, and the 

comparing of this structure with the subsequent parish structure which emerges during the 

Norman settlement. Clearly this aspect of the study has value for the ongoing study of the 

questions of parish formation and pastoral development in Ireland. This examination of 

Críchad has been undertaken as part of the Making Christian Landscapes project. This project 

had already seen detailed work on the early ecclesiastical and secular aspects of several special 

study areas. A guiding principle of this project has been that the ecclesiastical cannot be studied 

in isolation from the secular as both systems were deeply intertwined and interrelated, and 

aspects of each has direct implications for the other. Our research attempts to describe the 

entire structure of the early Irish Church in each study area while at the same time reconstruct 

the surrounding secular society in which this Church is embedded, and observe the many ways 

in which both Church and Society interrelate. 

Turning exclusively to matters of Church, a number of studies are possible with Críchad, 

noting especially the high density of toponyms, where many ecclesiastical toponyms occur in 

purely secular contexts. When the ecclesiastical detail in Críchad is compared to Paul 

MacCotter’s detailed reconstruction of the Anglo-Norman ecclesiastical system in Fermoy and 

also to the archaeological record, the following comparisons can be made. 

1. Pre-Invasion origins of Anglo-Norman parish churches, monastic foundations and chapels 

of ease (if any). 

2. Comparison of the proto-parish structure as found in Críchad and the subsequent parish 

structure here. 

3. The relationship of ecclesiastical toponyms with the results of 1 and 2 above. 

131 

132





4. Full classification of all ecclesiastical sites in Fir Maige (status, toponymy, archaeology, 

occurrence in Críchad, churches and church sites, evidence of burial usage only, evidence of 

early origin, evidence of dedications, etc.) 

These comparisons or surveys enable a detailed picture of the Early Church in Fir Maige to 

emerge. We gain some idea of the number of major and minor church establishments in 

existence, as well as something of the nature of pastoral care here. Certain principles emerge 

from this research. For example, of the 14 proto-parish churches indicated in Críchad eleven 

subsequently became colonial parish churches. This suggests that most túath-churches retained 

parochial status under the Anglo-Normans. This principle can tentatively be applied to other 

areas such as Corcu Duibne. Many of the Anglo-Norman parish churches in Corcu Duibne do 

not demonstrate archaeological evidence of pre-Norman age and this is usually attributed to 

removal of any older structure at the time these new and much larger churches were being built. 

Another figure from Fermoy may be considered. In the cantred there were a total of 45 parish, 

rectory and chapel of ease churches datable to the colonial period. Of these at least 23 can be 

shown to have had pre-Invasion origins, while another 16 were located in non-ecclesiastical 

toponyms occurring in Críchad. This suggests that the majority of colonial churches were built 

on sites earlier occupied by pre-Invasion churches. The relevance of the emergence of such 

principles has clear application in other study areas. Therefore a region like Fermoy, from 

where documentary evidence is plentiful just as archaeological evidence is scarce, can be used 

to shed light on a region like west Kerry, where the opposite is the case. The same may be said 

in reverse in the case of archaeological evidence. 

Fig. 5.6 The Anglo-Norman manors of Fir Maige. By and large, these appear to have been 

formed by using the templates of individual bailte or of several bailte together. Thus 

several manors will be found in the area of a single túath. 

133 

134





Fig. 5.8 Brí Gobann, on the outskirts of the town of Fermoy, was one of the most 

important churches in Fir Maige and controlled a large ecclesiastical estate. The medieval 

parish church incorporates part of a pre-Romanesque church with antae. 

Fig. 5.7 Ecclesiastical sites (top) and other early medieval settlement archaeology (bottom) 

in the Fir Maige study area. 

135 

Fig. 5.9 Two of the local kingdoms of Fir Maige, Co. Cork (Uí Chuscraid and Uí 

Chuscraid Sléibe). Shaded grey are the ecclesiastical lands of the two principal 

foundations of St Molaga (Tulach Mín Molaga and Áth Cros Molaga – represented by 

grey lozenges). Various minor churches and settlements are also visible. 

136





The rest of this section comprises an example of ecclesiastical estate reconstruction in Fir 

Maige. The ecclesiastical tearmonn of Saint Molaga was the second tearmann in the eastern 

moiety of Fir Maige. It had two major churches: Aghacross and Labbamolaga, the latter the 

church known as Eidhnén Molaga in Críchad. Críchad names the church of Eidhnén ‘with its 

tearmonn’ as the church of Uí Chuscraid Sléibe, and Áth Cros that of the neighbouring túath of 

Uí Chuscraid. It names the ecclesiastical families of Áth Cros as Uí Chorcráin, Uí Chennsáin, 

Uí Óengusa, Uí Muircheartaig and Uí Duibhedaig, and those of Eidhnén as Mag Fhloinn and 

Ui Chuscráin (O’Keeffe 1928, 174-5). Uí Óengusa were also associated with the church of 

Kilworth. 

Fig. 5.10 Labbamolaga (Tulach Mín) from the air showing the early ecclesiastical 

enclosure surrounding the site. 

Molaga (Mo Laca) is another saint to be commemorated in a written life (O’Keeffe 1931). 

Betha Molaga has been dated to the period 1114 × 1119 by Herbert (2004, 136-7) and is clearly 

a work emanating from the church of Tulach Mín, one of two chief churches associated with 

the saint in the life. The location of this church has rather strangely confused previous 

commentators; there can be little doubt but that O’Hanlon and Ó Riain (1977, 140) are correct 

in identifying Tulach Mín with the church of Templemolaga in Labbamolaga, the traditional 

burial place or ‘bed’ of the saint. An early 13 th century reference confirms this identification 

(below). The second church associated with the saint in the life is Áth Cros, and both churches 

are also associated with the saint in the 12 th century revision of Cath Almaine (Ó Riain 1978, 

184-6). An annal of 1164 records the slaying of the comarba (‘successor’: important church 

head) of Molaga, but his church is not mentioned. 

Fig. 5.11 The pre-Romanesque shrine-chapel at Labbamolaga (Tulach Mín). 

These references suggest a chronology, for the life makes no mention of any division of the 

saint’s tearmonn, which is treated as a single unit, and there is even a statement of its 

boundaries. Unfortunately most of the places mentioned in this cannot be identified. The 

situation reflected in Críchad, where the estate has apparently been divided into two divisions 

around both churches, each in neighbouring túatha, is also the situation found to prevail in the 

colonial period. Given that the earlier monastic estates seem to have descended intact into the 

cross-lands of the later dioceses, it is interesting to note that the tearmonn-lands of Molaga 

formed two distinct but adjoining episcopal estates, the manor of Aghacross and the knight’s 

fee of Neynan Molag (from An Eidhnén). The area of these corresponds to the conjoined civil 

137 

138





parishes of Aghacross and Templemolaga. One axis of the estate as given in the life (O’Keeffe 

1931, 17) shows the tearmonn bounded by Darach Mochua (Darragh, Co. Limerick) and the 

Uinnsinn (the river Funcheon). These are precisely the boundaries of the manor of Aghacross 

on a north to south axis, and show beyond doubt that the tearmonn as illustrated in the life 

comprises the area of both later ecclesiastical fees here, just as the life treats the tearmonn as a 

single unit. It is also remarkable that the toponymy matches these developments. Both the life 

and Cath Almaine speak of the church of Tulach Mín while Críchad and the colonial records 

speak of the same church as Eidhnén Molaga. Elsewhere a date of 1138 × 1151 has been 

suggested for Críchad’s composition (MacCotter 2008), and, given Herbert’s dates for Betha 

Molaga, it seems likely that Molaga’s tearmonn was divided sometime between 1119 and 1151, 

an event which must relate to the contemporary division of the single túath of Uí Chuscraid 

into two new túatha. 

What of the earlier history of these lands? The betha of Molaga is an accomplished literary 

compilation whose concern with matters dating to the time of its composition is transparent. 

However, it also contains material of some antiquity. Its content may be summarised as 

follows. The name Mo Laca is an hypochoristic (a ‘pet’ or affectionate form) version of the 

saint’s full name, Láichín. His genealogy derives him from Uí Chuscraid of Fir Maige and his 

place of birth is given as Liathmhuine (in Uí Chuscraid). The narrative then moves on to the 

saint in adult life, showing him in possession of his chief church of Áth Cros and already 

associated with Cathal mac Áedha, the king of Munster (+ 628), where the saint is involved in 

naming the king’s newborn son (and eventual successor), Cú-cen-Mathair (+ 666). Later, 

Molaga cures Cú-cen- Mathair from what seems to be a depression, and is rewarded by having 

his lands freed from imposition and granted other benefits. A number of witnesses to this act 

are recorded, historical characters whose obituaries occur during the period 641-686, while a 

number of other historical characters are brought into contact with the saint, with an obituary 

range of 628-663. Then Áth Cros is destroyed by druids through the neglect of the local king, 

Cuanu mac Cailchín (+ 646). Molaga departs Fir Maige in high dudgeon and engages in an 

ecclesiastical career which sees him visiting Ulster, Connacht, Scotland and Wales during 

which he performs many miracles, even to raising people from the dead. In Dublin he cures its 

king and is rewarded with a grant of the baile of Lann Bechaire (near Balbriggan) and in Wales 

he visits Saint David. Eventually, the people of Fir Maige send delegations to the saint, now 

resident in the monastery of Clonmacnoise, pleading for his return, for the land of Fir Maige 

has been cursed since the saint’s departure. Various delegations fail until at last the saint 

repents upon a visit by a delegation of women from Fir Maige who bear their breasts in 

supplication to him. Molaga then returns to Fir Maige, and all live happily ever after, as it 

were. 

The betha was, of course, written five hundred years after the saint is said to have lived. Ó 

Riain (1977, passim) dismisses the betha as beyond historical verification and instead points to 

the probable derivation of the saint’s name, Láichín, from Lug, the chief god of the Celtic 

pantheon. In this context attention is drawn to the prehistoric stone monuments adjacent to the 

church of Templemolaga as an implicit pagan worship site, as well as to the role of Lug as 

ancestor-deity to several adjacent peoples. Additional attention is drawn to the phenomenon of 

cult diffusion, where the memory of an originally singular saint has fractured into that of 

several ostensibly unrelated saints who, upon examination, demonstrate several common 

features. In this instance Molaga is linked with a second Molaga of the Dál Cais whose church 

was at Singland near Limerick. In the present context attention is drawn to various saints 

called Molaga, Lóchéne and Laichtín in Cork, Limerick and Leix, and the association of at 

least one of these with August 1, the feast of the god Lug, Lugnasad. 

What are we to make of all of this? While several of the episodes enumerated in the betha are 

anachronistic and so certainly fictitious, the bulk of them relate to the first half of the seventh 

century, and can be dated by the relevant obituaries to the period 628- 670. The association 

between Molaga and Lann Bechaire in Fingal is found in the early ninth-century martyrologies, 

while dues accrue to Molaga from Ciarraige Cuirche, suggesting some link with the church of 

Lismore, as in the case of Brí Gobann. Clearly, the origins of these linkages lie several 

centuries before the date of the betha’s composition. The betha makes no mention of the donor 

of the saint’s tearmonn lands, and shows a marked antipathy to the lineage of the saint, Uí 

Chuscraid, while at the same time heaping praise on that of Eóganacht Glennomnach. On the 

face of it this seems to reflect the political situation at the time of the betha’s composition, and 

may well reflect the weak situation of Uí Chuscraid at that time. Given that the tearmonn lands 

139 

140





of Molaga appear to lie securely within the earlier territory of Uí Chuscraid, one suspects that 

the original donor was of this lineage. Yet it needs be born in mind that Uí Chuscraid appear to 

have fallen from power in Fir Maige at a period which may perhaps begin as early as the later 

years of the saint’s floruit as given by the betha’s chronology. While Ó Riain’s arguments are 

attractive it is safer, given our present state of knowledge, to accept Molaga as an historical 

figure whose connexion with Lug is merely etymological. 

The history of this tearmonn cannot be viewed in isolation but must relate to its secular context. 

Molaga’s kin, the Uí Chuscraid lineage of Fir Maige, appear to have replaced an earlier lineage 

here circa 600 only to be themselves replaced by Ui Chongangairm, probably towards the end 

of the seventh century or early in the following. The saga material and annals concerning the 

Uí Chuscraid kings clearly locate their powerbase within the area of the later tuatha of Uí 

Chuscraid as extended in Críchad. Clearly both túatha bearing their name at this time (Uí 

Chuscraid and Uí Chuscraid Sléibe) must represent their original túath: both túatha lie adjacent 

and, significantly, the ecclesiastical estate of the Uí Chuscraid saint, Molaga, was divided 

between both túatha. When this single túath split into two is unclear, but the description of Uí 

Chuscraid Sléibe as fonn timchill offers a clue. All previous commentators have chosen to 

regard this as a technical term giving the meaning of ‘border land’ but Paul MacCotter has 

shown elsewhere that in fact the reference is to lands in dispute between the tríchas of Fir 

Maige and its northern neighbour, Fonn Timchill, probably as part of a much greater dispute 

between the two kingdoms of Munster, Desmumu and Tuadmumu, nd their Meic Carthaig and 

Uí Briain kings (MacCotter 2008, 269-71; 2004, 50-62). Críchad lists no families in its baile 

list for Uí Chuscraid Sléibe, suggesting that the territory may already have been lost to Fir 

Maige at time of composition of the original. Yet this is far from certain: that the Anglo- 

Norman lords of both Fermoy and Natherlach (in Fontymkyll) divided up the area of this túath 

evenly between them indicates that the Uí Caím lords of Fir Maige must still have exercised 

some overlordship of at least part of this disputed territory down to the Invasion. It may well 

be that the túath was divided between the Uí Chaím kingdom of Fir Maige and the Uí Briainheld 

territory of Aherlow at the time of the invasion, and that the subsequent border between 

both successor colonial lordships reflects this earlier status quo. In all of this it is clear that Uí 

Chuscraid Sléibe must have existed since before any Uí Briain agression began here. The 

establishment of a significant Uí Briain presence around Aherlow and Duntryleague is at least 

as old as the 1050s, while the establishment of a significant border here between Desmumu and 

Tuadmumu dates to the years after 1118. The slaying of the Eóganacht Glennamnach king, 

Finguine Ua Finnguine, at the hands of the king of Déisi Muman in 1057 may also offer some 

dating assistance here, for another important polity in An Fonn Timchill were In Déis Becc, 

who, although living in a discrete section from the main Déisi territory, gave several kings to 

the latter. These references suggest that Uí Chuscraid Sléibe may have been created by 

division from Túath Uí Chuscraid as early as the 1050s. As against this the evidence 

concerning the tearmonn lands of Saint Molaga would rather suggest a date during the first half 

of the 12 th century. In summary, we should note the parallels between the secular and 

ecclesiastical sources here, both of which combine to suggest that the secular and ecclesiastical 

estate structure of Fir Maige appears to derive from an earlier situation which can be 

chronologically dated to the first half of the seventh century. 

The importance of Molaga’s two churches is also indicated by the archaeological record, for 

Labbamolaga is delimited by a large curvilinear enclosure and significant Romanesque and 

pre-Romanesque remains survive there, while the ruined church of Aghacross also incorporates 

Romanesque elements. (Note that these are represented by grey lozenges in Fig. 5.9.) The 

presence at Labbamolaga of a shrine-chapel housing the grave of the saint suggests, perhaps, 

that this was his considered to be his principal establishment, at least at the time this was built. 

The building belongs to a small group of shrine-chapels that seem to be among the earliest 

extant mortared stone buildings in Ireland; it may have been constructed in the ninth century or 

perhaps the tenth (Ó Carragáin 2010, 66-67). The presence of monumental early medieval 

cross-slabs confirms the prestige of Labbamolaga as a place of burial due to the presence there 

of saintly remains. There are no cross-slabs at Aghacross or indeed anywhere else in the Fir 

Maige study area. Perhaps Aghacross grew in importance in the final centuries of the early 

medieval period. This would explain its equal treatment in the early twelfth-century 

hagiography and its fine mid-twelfth-century Romanesque church. It has some advantages over 

Labbamolaga, not least its relatively low-lying and central location on the banks of the 

Funshion, which contrasts with the hilly terrain in which Labbamolaga is situated. The trend 

seems to have continued thereafter, for while the churches at Labbamolaga were left largely as 

141 

142





they were in the twelfth century, the Romanesque church at Aghacross was greatly enlarged in 

the late medieval period. 

As noted above, it appears that there was a single ecclesiastical estate of Aghacross / 

Labbamolaga until around the later eleventh or twelfth century, contained within a single tuath 

of Uí Chuscraid. Apart from Molaga’s two important establishments, located at opposite ends 

of this long estate, there is no evidence for early church sites within it, though the probable 

minor site of Baunnanooneeny may have been on its eastern boundary. In this regard the estate 

contrasts markedly with that of Inis Úasal in Corcu Duibne with its many minor churches 

(Section 5.1). There are, however, several ‘ecclesiastical’ ringforts within the estate, most of 

them univallate. There are only two bivallate ringforts in the estate and it may not be 

coincidence that one is the ringfort closest to Labbamolaga, while the other is the one closest to 

Aghacross. These ringforts could represent the principal Uí Chuscraid residences in these 

subdivisions of their kingdom prior to the establishment of the ecclesiastical estate (which 

apparently occurred in the seventh century). They may have remained in use, or otherwise they 

may have been built, when the estate was established, in which case they might express the 

close association between Molaga’s churches and the local elite within this kingdom. We will 

see further evidence of such ‘twinning’ of important secular and ecclesiastical sites in the 

Southern Uí Fáeláin case study (Section 5.3). 

important church of Brí Gobann, which dwarfed that of Aghacross / Labbamolaga. It will be 

particularly interesting to compare these three territories of varying character, and our analysis 

of the latter two will be enhanced by the fact that a number of early medieval sites within them 

have been excavated. 

The density of church sites outside the ecclesiastical estate is similar to that within it, but the 

sites in question are generally very minor. They are sited in a variety of locations, including 

three – Killaclug (‘the church of the bell’), Killee and Kilbehenny – on the southern boundary 

of Uí Chuscraid. In most cases there is no early history relating to these sites. One exception is 

Kilmaculla, another boundary church, this time on the western boundary of the kingdom. The 

eponymous saint, Mochuilla, is mentioned in hagiography and genealogy, and his 

establishment must therefore have been of some importance. No church survives, and the site 

did not become a parish centre, but it is surrounded by an oval enclosure 90m x 60m. Unlike 

Molaga’s establishments, however, Kilmaculla does not appear to have controlled a substantial 

ecclesiastical estate. Bordering Uí Chuscraid to the southwest was the local kingdom of the 

kings of Fir Maige, the Eóganacht Glennomnach, while to the southeast was the estate of the 

143 

144





5.3 Southern Uí Fáeláin, Co. Kildare 

The landscape of the southern portion of the Laigin (Leinster) kingdom of Uí Fáeláin is 

characterised by rich pasture and relatively low rainfall. There are some low hills, especially at 

the south, and it is drained by the River Liffey wending its way west and then northeast 

towards Dublin. During the seventh century the Uí Dúnlainge established themselves as 

overkings of the Laigen, supplanting the Dál Messin Corb. In the eighth century their regional 

kingdom of Mag Liphi (corresponding roughly to modern-day County Kildare) fragmented into 

three, including the kingdom that by the tenth century was named for a segment of the Uí 

Dúnlainge: the Uí Fáeláin. Before the tenth century Uí Fáeláin was itself an over-kingdom 

containing within its bounds several subservient kingdoms which were subsequently demoted 

to the status of districts or were absorbed entirely. Paul MacCotter (2008, 323-360) has 

reconstructed the likely extents of these subdivisions as they were in the twelfth century. Given 

the political transformations of earlier centuries, we must be cautious in our use of this 

territorial framework. Nonetheless, at least some of the borders seem to have their origins in the 

pre-Viking period (if not before), even if ownership of the estates changed over time. Our case 

study incorporates the southernmost three subdivisions of the kingdom of Uí Fáeláin and, at the 

west, the ecclesiastical and royal estate of Kilcullen, which was in the adjoining Laigen over 

kingdom of Uí Muiredaig. The diverse character of these four estates makes this a particularly 

interesting case study. 

the royal estate and (no-longer-extant) fortress of Naas, which they had probably taken from 

their Dál Messin Corb predecessors. Its associated church that was reputedly the burial place of 

nine kings of Leinster (MacCotter 2008, 353). Just to the northeast of the case study area is the 

hill of Allen, another fortress and/or royal assembly site, while within the area was the royal 

burial and assembly site of Carmun Liphi, as well as Dún Ailline, an Iron Age hilltop 

inauguration site identified in early medieval sources as the ancient capital of Leinster (below). 

The first of the four estates to consider is Connul at the northwest. Its earliest associations are 

with a segment of the Dál Messin Corb and with Conláed, the first bishop of Kildare 

(traditionally died c.520), who is given a Dál Messin Corb filiation in the genealogies. The 

hermitage of his mentioned in a seventh-century Life of Brigit is probably Old Connell at the 

centre of Connul, a site also associated with two female followers of Brigit (MacCotter 2008, 

349). There is no archaeological evidence of the site’s early medieval origins. Kildare, the most 

important church in Leinster, is just six kilometres to the west and it owned a modest portion of 

Connul in the high medieval period and probably long before. Indeed, the Kildare portion may 

Though some, like Kilcullen, are on higher ground, ecclesiastical sites in the area exhibit a 

strong bias in favour of riverside locations, occurring at 1-3km intervals along the banks of the 

river Liffey. No evidence was found to support the theory that ecclesiastical sites tend to be 

located on borders. While Killashee is near the border of its estate, most of the important sites, 

such as Old Connell and Kilcullen, are located at the centre of their respective estates, and 

minor ecclesiastical sites also tend to be away from important boundaries. In this regard, the 

distribution of ecclesiastical sites is complementary to that of non-ecclesiastical burials, which 

in this area are represented primarily by barrows, ring-ditches and mounds of late prehistoric 

and/or early medieval date and are almost all on or near boundaries. There is a considerable 

concentration of important royal sites, assembly sites and burial grounds in the area. 

Immediately to the north of the case study area was the principal centre of Uí Fáeláin power, 

145 

146





Fig. 5.12: The Kingdom of Uí Fáeláin and its Sub-divisions with the study area at 

the southern end of the kingdom highlighted. 

Fig. 5.13: Churches and non-ecclesiastical burials in the study area. 

147 

148





Fig. 5.15: Coghlanstown with its impressive ecclesiastical enclosure as depicted on 

the 1st Edition OS map. 

Fig. 5.14: Composite plan of Corbally excavations from 2003 to 2007 (ring-ditch at 

lower right from pre-2003 excavations) 

Fig. 5.16: Coghlanstown parish church is largely fifteenth-century. 

149 

150





Fig. 5.19: High cross at Kilcullen. 

Fig. 5.17: Aerial view of Killashee ecclesiastical complex. 

Fig. 5.18: Athgarvan Graveyard. 

Fig. 5.20: 1st Edition OS maps with modern contours added showing the hills Old 

Kilcullen (red dot) and Dún Áilinne and how the symbiotic relationship between 

ecclesiastical and royal authority within this estate is expressed in the unusual 

shapes of the townlands (red borders) which ensures that the church of Kilcullen 

has a tenurial and symbolic stake in both of these sacred hills. 

151 

152





well have been eroded by the twelfth century, for the Uí Fáeláin kings seem to have developed 

interests in the area. It seems likely that some modus operandi developed to accommodate 

these secular and ecclesiastical interests. One of the great routeways of early Ireland, the Slíge 

Dála, traversed this territory and probably crossed the Liffey at the ford of Athgarvan within 

Connul (Ó Murchada 2002, 67). Though definitive evidence is lacking, it is likely that the 

prependal parish church of Athgarvan, which overlooks the ford at the west, is early in origin. 

It is the only church site now evident within the Kildare portion of Connul (MacCotter 2008, 

390). Directly across the river is Rosetown Rath, the only impressive secular settlement in 

Connul. Now much overgrown, the surviving remains and early records indicate that it was 

bivallate and 110m across. It is possible that there was a similar juxtaposition at Old Connell, 

where the nearby Anglo-Norman motte may supersede the royal residence mentioned in a 

tenth-century saga (ibid. 350). This twinning of sites expresses the symbiotic relationship 

between ecclesiastical and secular powers within Connul. 

Two non-ecclesiastical burial grounds have been excavated in the southwest part of Connul, 

which was owned by Kildare. At Greenhills sixteen inhumations were excavated, two within a 

ring ditch; of the two radiocarbon dated, one was fourth-century (i.e. Late Iron Age) while the 

other was fifth-century (Keeley 1991). Several burials focused on ring ditches have been 

excavated in nearby Corbally by Aegis Archaeology. In one case a ring ditch was later 

enclosed within a larger enclosure which soon after was replaced (probably in the sixth or 

seventh century, by an enclosure 50m across (Coyne 2010, 83). Twenty-two interments were 

excavated inside this enclosure ranging from AD 330-540 to 770-1020 (Coyne 2010). Limited 

occupation evidence (e.g. cereal-drying kilns, a possible house) have also been excavated, but 

given the dispersed nature of the burial and occupation evidence this site does not suggest itself 

as a ‘cemetery settlement’; rather it seems to form part of a much more extensive complex. Ó 

Murchadha (2002) and MacCotter (2008, 357-60) have made a strong case that these mounds 

represent the royal cemetery of Carmun Liphi / Carn Ailbhe, the burial place of Cathair Már, 

legendary ancestor of the Laigen, which is listed in several texts as one of the great royal 

cemeteries in Ireland ‘before [the time of] belief’ (ría cretim). Every three years, coinciding 

with the festival of Lughnasa, Óenach Carmain, perhaps the most important assembly in 

Leinster during the early medieval period, was held there: the people and their rulers met to 

deal with matters genealogical, legal, commercial and recreational. Assuming this is correct, 

these two townlands at least, indeed possibly the parishes of Carnalway and Coghlanstown, 

may have been royal land. The Corbally burials may represent ‘overspill’ from this complex 

into ecclesiastical land in the adjoining estate of Connul. This hints that the activities being 

carried out there were sanctioned, or at least accepted, by ecclesiastical authorities. The 

implications of this will be considered below (Chapter 6). The location of Carmun Liphi near – 

and possibly extending over – the boundary between two subdivisions of Uí Fáeláin is typical 

of such sites. It is also near the more important boundary between Uí Fáeláin and Uí 

Muiredaig, reflecting its importance for all the kingdoms of Leinster. Concommitantly, the 

importance of Carmun Liphi may have something to do with the fact that it was as close to Dún 

Áilinne, the symbolic capital of Leinster, as one could be within the kingdom of Uí Fáeláin: 

Dún Áilinne is situated just 3km to the southwest of Greenhills, in the adjoining kingdom of Uí 

Muiredaig (below) and was revered by the Uí Fáeláin as much as by the other royal kin-groups 

of Leinster, the Uí Muiredaig and the Uí Dúnchada. 

To the north of Carmain is Killashee, the church of bishop Auxillius, who may well have been 

a Continental or British disciple of Palladius (mid fifth century), though in seventh-century 

documents he was claimed as a disciple of Patrick (Charles-Edwards 2000, 233-4, 237-9). The 

early medieval origins of the site are indicated by a souterrain 75m from the site of the parish 

church and a holy well; the nearby mill could possibly have replaced an early one. The parish 

probably approximates to an early ecclesiastical estate, which may well have been founded as a 

result of a royal grant given that it is bounded by Carmain Liphi to the south and the capital of 

Naas to the north (MacCotter 2009). Its strategic location suggests that Auxillius managed to 

convince the Dál Messin Corb predecessors of the Uí Fáeláin to make an investment in the new 

religion. Initially the site was associated with allies of the Dál Messin Corb (the Uí Bairrche), 

but by the ninth century, if not before, its coarbs were generally allies of the Uí Fáeláin (most 

notably the Uí Chétig: AU 828, 871). The likely ecclesiastical estate of Killashee seems to have 

been quite different in internal organisation from Inis Úasal or Kilcullen (below), in that there 

are no likely subsidiary churches within it. Up to eight ringforts are, however, recorded within 

the estate on the first edition OS maps: an unusually large number in a region of relatively low 

153 

154





ringfort density (though in part at least this is because of poor survival due to intensive 

agriculture). 

To the south was the secular territory (‘late túath’) of Uí Athechda. This group may not have 

taken control of the area until the eighth century, but what became their principal church, 

Domnach Mór Ua nAthechda, is probably a fifth or sixth-century foundation, and was also 

known as Domnach Mór Aband Liphi (‘the big church of the River Liffey’) (Plummer 1925, 

68; Nicholls 1985, 202; MacCotter 2008, 356). Domnach is an early borrowing from the Latin 

dominucum and seems to denote relatively important early (fifth- or sixth-century) pastoral 

churches, often associated with particular secular groups (Flanagan 1984; Charles Edwards 

2000). The presence of such a significant early foundation so close to Killashee is stricking. 

The only archaeological evidence for the early origins of the site are possible traces of a 

curvilinear enclosure averaging 175m in diameter. 

Finally, at the southwest of our study area is the royal/ecclesiastical estate of Kilcullen. By the 

Viking age, if not before, it was outside Uí Fáeláin in the adjoining over-kingdom of Uí 

Muiredaig. The church of Kilcullen was founded in the sixth century by Mac Táil of the Uí 

Bairrche, the Laigen group that were also originally associated with Killashee (MacCotter 

2008, 352). There are relatively few ringforts in the estate, far fewer for example than in 

adjoining Uí Athechda or even in the ecclesiastical estate of Cill Usailli. We must treat the 

numbers now evident in the landscape with great caution, as many ringforts have probably been 

destroyed. Nonetheless, it is interesting that Kilcullen has an unusually high density of minor 

chapels of probably early origin (Kilgowan, Killinane, Bridingchapel, Gormanstown, 

Kinneagh). It is therefore possible that the church of Kilcullen decided that a relatively high 

proportion of settlements on its estate should be ecclesiastical in nature. The exact location of 

Kilgowan is unknown, but it survived as a chapel dedicated to St John the Baptist until 1504 

(McNeill 1950, 257). Non-ecclesiastical burials have been excavated in this townland on the 

lower eastern slope of a gravel hill close to a prehistoric standing stone, the Longstone. There 

were nine inhumations and possibly another sixteen as well as a ditch that may have partially 

enclosed the cemetery (Keeley 1991). They were not radiocarbon date so (unlike the Corbally 

burials) we do not know if they were contemporary with the nearby church. Somewhat like 

Connull, the estate of Kilcullen was shared by royal and ecclesiastical powers, in this case 

Kilcullen itself and the Uí Muiredaig kings. The twinning of ecclesiastical and royal sites 

evident in Connul is even clearer in Kilcullen. It is dominated on the one hand by the hill of 

Kilcullen with its round tower and high crosses and on the other by that of Dún Áilinne, the 

ancient capital of Leinster. Though by now apparently abandoned, and only rarely mentioned in 

the annals, it retained some of its symbolic and political importance. As the unusual shapes of 

some of the townlands within the estate make clear, Kilcullen’s portion of the estate 

encompassed the south part of the royal hill (the portion within Glebe North townland), but the 

summit and the north side (in the townland of Knockaulin), remained in royal hands. 

Interestingly, such twinning is not evident in the unitary secular túath of Uí Athechda or the 

unitary ecclesiastical estate of Killashee. 

While there is strong evidence that our four estates are pre-Viking in origin, if there were 

any changes in their extents during the early medieval period, the sources do not permit 

us to chart them in any detail. We can be confident, however, that their status changed 

during the Viking Age. For example, while in the pre-Viking period Uí Athechda was a 

sub-kingdom, in the tenth and eleventh centuries, like its counterparts throughout the 

country, it would have been demoted to the status of a district within a more unitary Uí 

Fáeláin over-kingdom. In the case of Connul, which seems to have accommodated royal 

and ecclesiastical interests from an early date, it is likely that the Uí Fáeláin kings 

increased their proportion of the estate at the expense of Kildare, though the latter 

retained some land including Corbally. 

As we have seen, the burials in Corbally probably represent overspill from the royal 

burial ground and assembly site of Carmun Liphi. Much remains to be clarified about the 

role played by such sites in the Viking Age. One might assume that in many cases their 

functions – including exchange, burial, settlement of disputes etc. – were by now fulfilled 

by ecclesiastical sites. Certainly it would appear that kings were now usually buried at 

ecclesiastical sites. Assemblies and inaugurations, however, were still commonly held in 

non-ecclesiastical contexts, including Drung Hill in Uí Rathach for example. A poem 

written in the second half of the eleventh century speaks of ‘Carmen, whose roads are 

155 

156





now overgrown with grass’ (Radner, Fragmentary Annals, 1978, 165). Such poetic 

descriptions of abandonment should, however, be viewed with some scepticism 

(MacCotter 2008, 259-60). We have two annalistic references to the óenach being held 

during the eleventh century, in 1033 and in 1079, and these may well have been recorded 

solely because the kings who summoned the óenach were both interlopers (AU 1033; 

AFM 1079). We now also have archaeological evidence that the complex was still in use: 

one of the Corbally burials has been dated to 770-1020, while a nearby sunken structure 

seems to be ninth or tenth century (Coyne 2010, 82-4). It is highly significant that this 

late ‘non-ecclesiastical’ interment took place on land owned by Kildare. This is one of 

the clearest indications identified to date that, even in the Viking Age, ecclesiastical 

authorities in Ireland were apparently prepared to accept the legitimacy of a diversity of 

burial practices. 

Our chronology for ecclesiastical sites is quite poor as none have been excavated and 

they lack closely dateable sculpture etc. In most cases we must rely on late medieval 

documentary sources to judge their fate during the Viking Age. In a striking contrast with 

Corcu Duibne, only one early ecclesiastical site seems to have fallen out of use by the 

later medieval period, and this is not a definite example: the townland name, Kilbelin, 

probably preserves that of an early church, but there are no ecclesiastical remains in the 

townland and no documentary evidence, early or late, for a church here. Otherwise all of 

the sixteen probable early church sites remained in use. For example, in the secular estate 

of Uí Athedchda Donaghmore, Coghlanstown and Carnalway became parish churches, 

while Gilltown, which may have started out as a proprietary church of the Ó Breslean’s 

(Inse Ó Breslean), became the chapel of a monastic grange c.1148 (MacCotter 2008, 384). 

parish that had been acquired by particular Anglo-Norman families (e.g. Killinane) or 

abbeys (e.g. Kinneagh, Gormanstown). In contrast to the various parish churches of Uí 

Athedchda, these chapels presumably did not have burial rights, and some of them (as 

speculated above in relation to the out-farms of Inis Úasal) may already have lost these 

rights to Kicullen in the Viking Age. The status of Kilcullen as the most important church 

in this case study area is illustrated by the presence there of ninth- or tenth-century 

scriptural crosses (Harbison 1992); the fact that it was raided in 938, 939 and 944 by the 

Vikings of Dublin (AU; AFM); and by the fact that it is the only site for which we know 

acquired a (no-longer-extant) mortared stone church (1037, AFM) and a round tower. 

These structures were probably eleventh century, and may have been built after 1018 

with the involvement of one or more Uí Muiredaig kings: at that date the kingship of 

Leinster shifts for a time from the Uí Fáeláin to the Uí Muiredaig (MacCotter 2008, 344). 

This provides a possible context for the aggrandisement of Kilcullen, sited as it was near 

the symbolic capital of Dún Áilinne, and near the boundary between Uí Muiredaig and Uí 

Fáeláin. The majority of mortared stone churches built around this time seem to have 

been royal commissions, and in this case that possibility is strengthened by the fact that 

they are rare in this part of Ireland (Ó Carragáin 2010, 118-40). Even sites with illustrious 

origins such as Killashee in southern Uí Fáeláin probably still had a wooden church in the 

eleventh century. 

Things were a little different in the Kilcullen estate which, though it had even more 

churches than Uí Athedchda, retained its integrity becoming a single large parish – 

unusually large for such a heavily colonised area. In part this may have been because of 

the importance of Kilcullen itself. Six of the eight ecclesiastical sites in the estate appear 

to be early medieval in origin and all of these were still operating in the later medieval 

period (MacCotter 2008, 393-6). Most of them were chapels serving the portions of the 

157 

158





5.4 Mag Réta, Co. Laois and Surrounding Kingdoms 

This case study is centred on the kingdom of Mag Réta in present-day Co. Laois. Due to recent 

motorway construction, it has one of the highest concentrations of excavated early medieval 

settlements in Ireland, including a number of ringforts and a number of important cemeteries, 

three of which will be considered here: Killeany, Parknahown, Bushfield-Lismore. These sites 

were excavated for the NRA by ACS Ltd, who have collaborated with us on this case study. 

Here we have a unique opportunity to compare and contrast a wide variety of sites within one 

landscape. They are not, however, in a single polity, for the study area spans the shifting 

boundary between Munster and Leinster and incorporates some or all of four kingdoms. 

Murchada 38-42). This was rebuilt in the ninth century by Gáethíne mac Cennéitig, whose son 

revitalised the flagging fortunes of the Laígis and achieved significant victories over the 

Vikings in the area (Kelly and Maas 1999, 123-60). Nonetheless, by the later tenth century the 

Osraige had extended their power northwards, beyond Áes Cinn Chuille, and took control of a 

significant portion of Laígis including Mag Réta. Killeany was at the southwest corner of the 

Laígis sub-kingdom of Cúl Buichle near its boundary with Mag Réta. Initially controlled by the 

Uí Crimthannáin, Cúl Buichle seems to have come under the ambit of the kings of Mag Réta by 

the eighth century. They made it their home territory in the tenth century when Mag Réta was 

taken from them (Connon 2009, 321-22). 

While the kingdom and sub-kingdom boundaries are clear, in most cases it has not proved 

possible to reconstruct the estates within them. The documentary record has, however, thrown 

up very interesting patterns. For example, it has been possible to map several of the churches 

named in the Laígse genealogies as the property of particular family groups, giving us new 

insights into the phenomenon of proprietary churches. It has also been shown that dedications 

to a particular saint tend to be confined to the saint’s alleged kingdom of origin. Another 

fascinating phenomenon to emerge is the fact that several churches dedicated to St Ciarán of 

Saighir are located on the boundaries of the kingdom of Osraige, implying that the boundaries 

of this kingdom do not just delimit dedications to a saint but appear to actually be delimited by 

them. These patterns and others are explored in a substantial journal article that has been 

prepared by Anne Connon as part of the Making Christian Landscapes project. In this section, 

however, the main focus will be on the excavated sites within the case study. The implications 

of the documentary research for our understanding of these and other sites will be considered in 

more detail in future publications. 

Parknahown was in Áes Cinn Chuille, a sub-kingdom of Osraige, a large buffer kingdom that 

was considered part of Munster until the mid-ninth century but thereafter came under the ambit 

of Leinster (Connon 2009, 311, 316; MacCotter 2008, 182). To the north is Bushfield-Lismore 

in Mag Réta, the home territory of the kings of Laígis and the most important of Laígis’ seven 

sub-kingdoms. The caput of Mag Réta was the royal fort of Ráith Baccáin, sited a short 

distance south of Bushfield-Lismore in the Rathdowney area (Connon 2009, 316-7; Ó 

Killeany, which was established in the sixth century, is the only one of the four cemeteries that 

may have been ecclesiastical. There is another possible ecclesiastical site in the townland so its 

‘cill’ name cannot be taken as conclusive evidence that it was ecclesiastical (Connon 2009, 

354-59), but this possibility is supported by the fact that, at 180m x 150m, its enclosure is 

markedly bigger than those of cemetery-settlements. No church was uncovered, but this may be 

because only one third of the site and about half of the inner cemetery enclosure was excavated. 

Little evidence for structures or hearths survived in the excavated area but there was plentiful 

animal bone, evidence for metalworking and a number of pre-Viking cereal drying kilns 

(Wiggins 2009a, 217-224). There may have been a watermill nearby on the River Gully (ibid.). 

At the centre was a 25m diameter burial enclosure with an entrance at the southeast, mirroring 

that of the main enclosure. Its ditch terminals overlapped to create an unusual ‘spiral shaped’ 

entrance which ensured that those entering the cemetery had to do so in a deiseal manner (i.e. 

following their right hand); this was considered propitious in early medieval Ireland. An 

unusual seventh-century burial, probably of a woman, was found in the passageway leading to 

the cemetery: 39 cut marks were identified on her bones, and she was the only burial in the 

cemetery to be buried prone (ibid. 210). A burial was also placed at the entrance to the larger 

enclosure. The burial enclosure measured c.25m internally and is slightly southwest of where 

the centre of the site is likely to be, on the highest point on the hill (ibid. 205, 209). There were 

67 burials in the excavated area, suggesting that there may have been about 200 in total. The 

population was mixed and, considering the length of time it was in use, it was probably a 

159 

160





family cemetery. Wiggins points out that the finds were quite modest, suggesting that the 

occupant were relatively poor and/or pious (ibid., 217). 

Assuming Killeany was a minor ecclesiastical site, those who founded it may have been 

seeking a certain degree of separation from secular society in this boundary zone. There are no 

extant secular settlements in its immediate vicinity, and (unlike Camlin and Parknahown), none 

were found near it during the construction of the motorway. The nearest known ringfort is two 

kilometres to the southeast, while the nearest early medieval settlement is the other likely 

ecclesiastical site in Killeany townland which is 1.5km to the northeast. It can be argued that 

this ties in well with the archaeology of the site, in particular the modest number of burials and 

the lack of evidence for a large congregational church: this was clearly not a proto-parish centre 

where significant numbers came to receive pastoral care. It may be that burial was largely 

reserved for those living at the site, and perhaps in a few unenclosed settlements nearby. That is 

not to say the site was entirely cut off from the world: it is not in some remote valley which 

saw little traffic, but near a number of routeways running between polities. The Down Survey 

County Map of Laois shows that it is near the junction of two early modern roads, not to 

mention the bridge across the Gully into Mag Réta at Gortnaclea. Its position in a boundary 

zone may have afforded it a balance between seclusion from secular society and the possibility 

of more long-distance, trans-tuath contacts with ecclesiastical sites, including perhaps 

Aghaboe, the most important foundation of St Cainnech (who also founded Kilkenny), a little 

over three kilometres to the south-south-west across the Gully, and Farraneglish Glebe, a cell 

of Aghaboe with associated nunnery, a little over two kilometres to the south. Its closest links 

were probably within Cul Buichle, however: especially with the other ecclesiastical site in 

Killeany which, given that it continued in use into the later medieval period, is likely to have 

been a more important of the two. 

The other two excavated cemeteries were definitely cemetery-settlements. In contrast to 

Southern Uí Faeláin, few or no early medieval burials unassociated with settlement have been 

excavated in the area. As has already been observed in other areas (Boazman 2008), the three 

cemetery settlements are not positioned close to boundaries and, while they vary somewhat in 

topographical position, they are on lower ground than the majority of ringforts in their 

vicinities. Parknahown was the largest and most complex of the three. It comprised a subcircular 

enclosure, 64m in internal diameter with an entrance at the south-east (O’Neill 2009a). 

A few postholes and pits (2 sigma: AD 250-540) suggest there may have been a settlement at 

the site before the enclosure was dug and burial commenced around 500. The cemetery was 

near the north side of the enclosure. Initially it was not formally seperated from the rest of the 

site, but after a time a boundary with an entrance feature was added at its west side (O’Neill 

2009a, 170, 285, 315). The site was enlarged slightly to the south in the seventh or eighth 

century. Burial continued until around 1100 or a little later and in its later stages at least it was 

probably used by more than one family. There was limited evidence for structures within the 

enclosure, but the abundant finds and large quantity of animal bones demonstrate that it was a 

place of habitation. There was some evidence for metalworking and cereal processing. It is 

notable that Parknahown 5 does not conform to the view of cemetery-settlements as places of 

‘dirty and dangerous’ activities put forward by Stout and Stout (2008). The range of finds from 

the site suggests some of those associated with it were of quite high status. Among the finds 

was a cross-decorated mount of eighth to tenth century date (O’Neill 2008, 311), supporting the 

possibility that at least some of them were Christian. 

In contrast to Killeany, there is a dense concentration of other settlements in the landscape 

around Parknahown. The burial commencement date of c.500 is based on a number of 14C 

ranges of c.420-600. It might, therefore, have been established in the late fifth century or the 

early sixth. This is an important point to consider, because it was probably in the first half of 

the sixth century that Aghmacart, one of the chief churches of Orsaige (AFM 1156), was 

established by St Tigernach of Clones (d. c.549) just a kilometre away across the River Goul 

(Carrigan 1905 II, 237; Connon 2009, 386-8). The proximity of the two sites, temporally as 

well as spatially, raises interesting questions about the relationships between cemetery 

settlements and ecclesiastical sites. If, as on balance seems likely, the cemetery-settlement 

came first, then it was a grand new establishment when Tigernach chose the area to build his 

church, and we must assume that he accepted its presence nearby, perhaps even within the 

lands granted to him, which may roughly correspond to its later medieval parish (Connon 2009, 

388). Another possibility is that Parknahown was established around the same time as 

Aghmacart, possibly with the involvement of ecclesiastics. 

161 

162





The early nunnery at Addergoole, less than a kilometre north of Parknahown, was reputedly 

founded by Croinsech and Créd, two virgins associated with Brigit (Carrigan 1905 II, 234-35; 

Ó Riain 1985, 113; Connon 2009, 388-9). To the south in Oldtown the site marked ‘Abbey’ on 

the Ordnance Survey maps may be the church in roughly this position on the Down Survey 

map (Connon 2009, 391). An early origin for it is suggested by the fact that it was within a 

ringfort-size (40m diameter) curvilinear enclosure. Closer still, in Parknahown townland, is a 

ringfort with an ecclesiastical placename, Rathkilmurray (the Ringfort of the Church of Mary) 

(Carrigan 1905 II, 237; Connon 2009, 391-2). It may have been an ecclesiastical site, for 

churches in ringforts seems to have been relatively common in this area, but it is more likely to 

have been ecclesiastical property: possibly it was owned by Aghmacart, or an unidentified 

daughter house of Aghmacart, for that site was dedicated to Mary in the high medieval period. 

This supports the possibility that the cemetery-settlement was also on ecclesiastical land. 

It seems clear that the cemetery-settlement was not the only kin-group cemetery in the area; it 

may be that during most of the early medieval centuries only a minority of families were buried 

at the ecclesiastical cemetery of Aghmacart. Some of the many ringforts in the vicinity may 

well have been residences of branches of the kingroup buried at Parknahown. However, we 

should not imagine that all of the possible ringforts in the area conform to the textbook image 

of ringforts as farmsteads for a single family. Neither of the two excavated in the townland fit 

this picture. One (Parknahown 2) adjoins a Late Bronze barrow which was possibly reused at 

this time and was surrounded by a new ditch so that it became an annex of the ringfort (O’Neill 

2009b, 36). There are no exact parallels for this arrangement but it may not be coincidence that 

the figure-of-eight is a recurring theme in late prehistoric contexts, especially at ceremonial 

royal sites such as Tara and Dún Ailinne. It seems possible that the group that constructed this 

ringfort were conscious of the symbolic language employed at these far more prestigious sites. 

The importance of the barrow for those who lived in the ringfort is underscored by the fact that 

the entrance to the ringfort is at the west, rather than the more usual east, so that those entering 

the site had to pass by the barrow in its annex. The ringfort seems to have been used from the 

fifth/sixth century to the eighth/ninth. At the interior was a semi-circular building, an irregular 

subdivision (possibly a hedge) and, at a break in this subdivision, two burials: one empty, the 

other containing the remains of a sixth or seventh-century adult male (ibid. 38). The proximity 

of this unique and, to later medieval eyes, unorthodox arrangement to a number of 

ecclesiastical sites illustrates the extent to which attitudes to burial were to change in 

subsequent centuries. Among the other features uncovered was a corn-drying kiln, but the 

modest amount of animal bone compared to the nearby cemetery settlement suggests that 

occupation was not intensive. While the other excavated ringfort, Parknahown 3, produced 

more animal bone, no other evidence for occupation was found leading the excavator to suggest 

that it was simply an animal enclosure (O’Neill 2009c, 24). 

The great variety of cemetery-settlements in this area is further illustrated by 

Bushfield/Lismore. It was in relatively low-lying ground, not near a water source but adjacent 

to the stretch of the Slíge Dala between Aghaboe and Roscrea. It was D-shaped in plan, with 

external dimensions of 95m by c.85m and two entrances: one at the north and the other, 

perhaps the principal one, at the southeast (identified only through geophysics). The townland 

name, Lismore, could possibly be a reference to this site, as there are no other large enclosures 

there (Wiggins 2009b, 158). It was a short-lived site probably established around the mid sixth 

century and falling out of used sometime around the middle of the seventh century (ibid. 137). 

Thus, it was quite a late establishment as cemetery-settlements go, and was not as successful in 

the long-run as the slightly earlier example at Parknahown. As the excavator points out, the 

short use-period is not consistent with the scale of the endeavour, suggesting that the site was 

intended to be used for longer but was abandoned prematurely. He further suggests that its 

abandonment ‘may well have been a result of political conflicts in the area particularly given 

location on a routeway’ (ibid. 8). In the northeast quadrant were 60 inhumations plus 21 

collections of disarticulated remains, giving 81 burials in total (ibid. 160). It seems likely that 

this was a family cemetery (a roughly equal number of men and women were represented) 

(ibid. 160), though 81 burials over a century seems quite a lot for one family. Perhaps the two 

larger groups of burials represent two branches of a single family, one of whom may have lived 

at the site, the other nearby. Iron working was carried out including secondary bloom refining 

and several charcoal pits with burnt bone may relate to this metal-refining work. The excavator 

suggests that ‘the site may have specialised in bloom refining and there may have been no 

“end-user” blacksmithing at the site at all’ (ibid. 165). A ring-gully at the centre could 

163 

164





potentially be a hut-like structure with a diameter of c.4.5m, but the large animal bone 

assemblage (along with some charred grain) is the ‘best evidence that people were actually 

living there’ (ibid. 162). Wiggins (ibid. 161-62) concludes that the lack of structural evidence 

was probably due to later ploughing and because ‘the inhabitants found the means of 

constructing dwellings in the enclosure with relatively light foundations that consequently have 

left little or no trace in the archaeological record.’ The most interesting find from the site was a 

lignite stylus: this raises the possibility that some of those associated with it were literate and 

therefore perhaps had links with ecclesiastics (Wiggins 2009b, Fig. 73). 

Fig. 5.21: The kingdoms within the ‘Mag Réta’ study. Mag Réta is the shaded area 

at the centre of the map (the southern part of Na Clanna). 

165 

166





Fig. 5.22: All sites in the southern portion of Clonenagh and Clonagheen with 

Killeany 1 labelled. 

Fig. 5.24: General plan of Killeany 1. 

Fig. 5.23: Killeany 1 from the south-east. 

167 

168





Fig. 3.112 Parknahown 5 

Fig. 5.26: The cemetery at Parknahown 5 showing enclosures, and Level 1 burials 

(i.e. burials not cut by other burials but of varying dates/phases) differentiated 

according to age. 

Fig. 5.25: Parknahown 5. 

169 

170





Fig. 5.28: Bushfield or Maghernaskeagh / Lismore 1. 

Fig. 5.27: Parknahown 5 in its landscape context. Brown symbols indicate ringforts. 

Dark bluc symbols indicate probably ringforts. Light blue symbols indicate 

enclosures with some indication that they may be early medieval in date. 

Fig. 5.29: Bushfield or Maghernaskeagh / Lismore 1, Co. Laois - plan of the NE 

quadrant (Zone C) showing burial groups. 

171 

172





There are no known ringforts in the immediate vicinity of the site. The nearest early medieval 

settlement is 400m to the northwest. This is the ecclesiastical site and later parish church of 

Lismore alias Kilkennybeg, ‘the little church of Cainnech,’ probably a daughter house of 

Aghaboe which is 4km to the east (Carrigan 1905 II, 131-2; Connon 2009, 375). Cainneach’s 

floruit was in the latter half of the sixth century. Assuming he himself founded Kilkennybeg, 

this may have been around the same time that the cemetery settlement was being established. It 

may be just coincidence, but it is worth noting that there quite a close correspondence between 

the establishment of Parknahown 5 (early sixth century) and Bushfield/Lismore 1 (mid sixth 

century) and the floruits of the likely founders of nearby ecclesiastical sites. In both cases the 

cemetery settlements were either established a little before the churches, or else at the same 

time as them. In the latter scenario, one wonders what role the emerging ecclesiastical power 

structures had in their establishment. 

Fig. 5.30: Bushfield or Maghernaskeagh / Lismore 1 it its landscape context. Crosses 

indicate ecclesiastical sites. Blue symbols indicate enclosures. Brown and beige 

symbols indicate ringforts. Red triangles are holy wells. 

While Lismore-Bushfield was abandoned in the seventh century, the other two cemeteries 

continued in use during the Viking Age. Incidentally, of the three ringforts recently excavated 

in the area, those in Parknahown produced little evidence for continued use after the ninth 

century (O’Neill 2009b; 2009c), suggesting some significant shifts in settlement patterns at this 

time. At Derrinsallagh, however, which was located between Lismore-Bushfield and Camlin, 

the ringfort ditch was still open in the tenth/eleventh century and there was abundant evidence 

for Viking Age and even later medieval occupation (Lennon 2009). 

At Parknahown the cemetery at the north side of the settlement was more comprehensively 

delimited by a sub-rectangular enclosure, 16m across, probably in the ninth or tenth century, by 

which time the ditch of the outer settlement enclosure was partially filled in. The excavation 

uncovered 425 in situ burials, but taking the unexcavated portion of the cemetery and the large 

number of disturbed burials into account, there may well have been 800 or more interments in 

total. Quartz pebbles were commonly found with the burials. Body position varied somewhat, 

but in many cases the position of the arms close to the body or crosses at the pelvis suggests the 

bodies were wrapped in a shroud (O’Neill 2009a, 311). About half the burials were infants, and 

these were particularly common in the upper levels. Adult burial continued throughout the 

173 

174





Viking Age, however. One of the later adults (990-1160) was prone and crouched, and may 

have been a suicide or some other socially excluded individual, but there were four other prone 

burials at the site not necessarily dating to its latest phases. Most of the late burials received the 

same level of care as one finds in the earlier burials (including for example the placement of 

quartz with the grave), so there is no compelling case that in its later phases the cemetery was 

reserved exclusively for the socially excluded. While the Church began to encourage 

churchyard burial from eighth century (O’Brien 1992), there is some evidence to suggest that it 

was only in the twelfth century (as a result of the Gregorian reform) that burial away from 

ecclesiastical cemeteries came to be seen as anathema (Ó Carragáin 2009). This suggestion 

would seem to be supported by the cemetery at Parknahown 5, which falls out of use around 

this time. Assuming a total burial count of 800 over 600 years this would suggest a burial every 

0.75 years if the rate of burial was steady. This is more than one would expect from a single 

family, but might about right for a few branches of an extended kin group. It would have been 

necessary to date more of the burials to determine whether the rate of burial changed over time. 

For example, did the site start off as a family cemetery with a slow but steady rate of burial, but 

evolve into a community cemetery (perhaps used especially for the unbaptised), in which case 

one would perhaps expect a faster rate of burial? Or else was it used by a number of families 

from the beginning, but with a slow decrease in the number of adults buried there in the Viking 

Age, as burial at the nearby ecclesiastical sites became more common? If so, it would be 

interesting to explore the factors that contributed to this trend. Is it possible, for example, that 

some adult women whose ancestors were buried at Parknahown were, by the Viking Age, 

being buried at the nearby nunnery of Adergoole, either because they had become nuns 

themselves or else because they were linked to this community through bonds of friendship and 

patronage? 

also date to this later period. The bulk of the dates, however, suggest that occupation tailed off 

somewhat in the tenth century. In part this may have been due to the annexation in that century 

of Mag Réta by the Osraige, from which time Killeany was not longer on an internal boundary 

within Laígis, but on the potentially more volatile boundary between Laígis and Osraige 

(above; Wiggins 2009a, 10). 

Is this abandonment, however, also part of a more general trend? Certainly there is more 

evidence for the abandonment of early medieval ecclesiastical sites in this area than in 

Southern Uí Fáeláin, though not as much as in Corcu Duibne. Of the thirty-nine possible early 

sites in the kingdom of Mag Réta there is evidence that twenty-eight became parish churches or 

chapels-of-ease. Even in the absence of documentary evidence it is sometimes possible to 

conclude this on the basis of antiquarian accounts of a church building, for there is no evidence 

for mortared stone construction in this part of Ireland before the twelfth century at the earliest 

(Ó Carragáin 2010, fig. 1). That still leaves eleven (28%) with no evidence for later medieval 

reuse. One example is Kyletilloge (possibly ‘the church of St Sillán’), which was known as a 

burial ground in the eighteenth century; there are traces of a possible ecclesiastical enclosure in 

the townland (Carrigan 1905 II, 66; Connon and Ó Carragáin 2009, 377-78). Another is 

Kilnaseer (‘the church of the craftsman’), the exact location of which is now lost, but was 

known locally as a burial ground in the early twentieth century (Carrigan 1905, ii, 62). 

Admittedly, this is an argument from negative evidence and the actual figure (which could only 

be ascertained through excavation) may well be lower. Having said that, there may well be 

other abandoned church sites, like Killeany, that disappear entirely. 

It was suggested above that the probable church site of Killeany was located near a boundary 

so that its inhabitants were somewhat removed from the the local population while maintaining 

links with ecclesiastical sites at both sides of the boundary. Such a location, however, also left 

the site exposed in changing political circumstances. In addition to the earlier examples, two 

eleventh- to twelfth-century cereal drying kilns were excavated indicating some continuing 

domestic activity (if not permanent occupation) at the site. Some of the undated burials may 

175 

176





5.5 Rathdown, Co. Dublin (Gill Boazman) 

This section comprises a summary of work on the half-barony of Rathdown which is 

being undertaken as part of an ongoing PhD project. The early medieval settlement 

pattern of the half-barony of Rathdown is distinguished by a high density of ecclesiastical 

sites, most of which have material or documentary evidence of being established in 

antiquity. The attraction of a fertile area adjacent to maritime connections with Wales 

and mainland Europe, is also manifest in the succession of stakeholders in the area, firstly 

Leinster kingroups, Scandinavians and finally the Anglo-Normans. However evidence of 

the ubiquitous monument of early medieval settlement, the ringfort, is scarce, only 

occurring on higher ground. The proximity of the area to the burgeoning town of 

Hiberno-Scandinavian Dublin leads to a consideration of the extent and nature of the 

Scandinavian influence on Rathdown. 

The outer limits of the study area run from Booterstown Strand then follow the Rathdown 

barony boundary to the parish boundary of Tallaght, continue on that boundary to 

Clondalkin, then swing arbitrarily south to one kilometer south of the Sally Gap. The 

extents turn eastwards then to join the sea two kilometers south of Greystones, thus 

including Delgany. This comprises the barony of Rathdown, which is divided by the 

modern county bounds of Dublin and Wicklow, and the parishes of Clondalkin and 

Tallaght in the barony of Upper Cross. 

The highland area of the Dublin and Wicklow mountains is a granite massif where the 

volcanic action of its formation has created many mineral deposits. These lie in the south 

west of the study area. The mountains are cut by deep river valleys. These rivers then 

drain out across the Dublin plain and the lowlands of Bray, to the sea at the east. These 

lower foothills and the plain extending around the edge of the mountainous area are 

limestone but the action of two glaciations has formed a band of tills in the study area 

which are formed of brown-grey podzolic soils suitable for arable production. 

The political history of the Rathdown area 

Origin legends of the Laigin suggest provenance from Gaul and Cornwall (Byrne 2001, 

132; Mac Shamhráin 1996, 45) and cult diffusion of saints from outside the study area 

such as Petroc and Mo Chonnoc attribute veracity to this legendary past. In the protohistoric 

period the earliest dynasts of the study area and possible overkings of Leinster, 

the Dál Messin Corb, are implied by only two annalistic references, to Finnchad and his 

son, Fróech, titled rí laigen in 492 (AU). Many early saints of the study area have Dál 

Messin Corb pedigrees. The antiquity of this early kin-group lent an essential element of 

legitimacy to later pedigrees, such as those of Cóemgen of Glendalough and the Uí 

Dúnlainge. 

The Dál Messin Corb were forced southeast into South Wicklow by two sub-divisions of 

the Uí Maíl, the Uí Chellaig Chualann and the Uí Briúin Chualann. Uí Máil dominance 

lasted until the death of Cellaig Chualann, 715, who was the last Uí Máil king of 

Leinster; the next mention of the Uí Máil is that of Toca obit 778 (AU) who has a title of 

reduced status: ‘King of Cualu’. Although the two branches of the Uí Máil continued to 

inhabit the territory, political power was seized by the Uí Dúnchada, a branch of the Uí 

Dúnlainge. The Uí Dúnchada had their seat at Lyons Hill, southwest of Clondalkin and 

provided abbots of Kildare until the last part of the tenth century. Like the Uí Máil 

before them they gradually moved west and then southwest as far as Delgany. Despite 

the longevity of their presence in the area and their provision of several kings of Leinster, 

their authority was constantly challenged by other more powerful kingroups (Mac 

Shamhráin 1996, 74). In addition the growing urban centre of Hiberno-Scandinavian 

Dublin presented a threat to Uí Dúnchada security from the ninth century onwards. 

Extents of secular territories 

The territory of Cualu: Uí Briúin Chualann 

The Uí Máil king Toca obit 778 (AU) is named King of Cualu. ‘Fir Cualu’ is mentioned 

as an entity in Lebor na Cert, an account of gifts and stipends between kings and their 

subject kings, which is dated to approximately the late eleventh century (Dillon 1962, 

177 

178





105). A lord of the Gilla Mo-Cholmóc ruling line of the Uí Dúnchada is named as ‘Lord 

of Feara Cualann’ in 1141 (AFM). Two references to ‘Hui Briúin Chualann’ in Félire 

Óengusso indicate Killiney and Tully which mark its northern limits (Stokes 1905, 20, 

65). The genealogy of Berchán of Shankill states he is from ‘Huu Briúin hi Cualaind’ 

(O’Brien 1976, 41). In 727 (AFM), a miraculous cow appeared at ‘Delginnis Cualann’. 

Thus Uí Briúin Chualann lay between Tully in the north and Delgany in the south. 

This is corroborated by Anglo-Norman documents which demonstrate that by the twelfth 

century the landholding of Meic Gilla Mo-Cholmóc, was probably coterminous with the 

ancient territory of Uí Briúin Chualann. In 1173 Strongbow granted to Walter de 

Riddlesford five knights’ fees of territory in ‘the waters of Brien and the land of the sons 

of Turchil’. Brien in this charter indicates part of the territory of Uí Briúin Chualann 

which was between the Dargle and the Glencullen Rivers (Scott 1913, 93,178; Brooks 

1951, 119; Price 1954, 72). The charter of confirmation by Strongbow to Abbot Thomas 

of Glendalough of the foundation’s possessions (c.1172-76) further confirms the 

association of the Uí Dúnchada with this designated area (previously Uí Briúin Chualann) 

as the possessions are said to be ‘in the land of Mac Gillamocholmoc’. The named 

churches cluster around the modern Wicklow/Dublin border (Boazman 2009, 4.4, 510). 

extent of Uí Chellaig Chualann is deduced by Nicholls to be Balally in Whitechurch 

(ibid., 411). 

As suggested by the above references certainly the north of Uí Chellaig Chualann was 

part of Uí Dúnchada territory from the early eighth century. However theyonly 

maintained a tenuous grasp. The Ua Ronáin, who held the abbacy at Clondalkin from the 

ninth century to the twelfth, were probably Uí Máil. The genealogy of ‘Ronan epscop’ of 

‘I Raith Ronan I nUib Cellaig Chualann’, too close to Clondalkin not to be related, is Uí 

Máil (O’Brien 1985, 42). Indeed the confirmation by Strongbow to Abbot Thomas of 

Glendalough possessions (c.1172-76) mentions only ‘Techdolaga’ (Templelogue) in Uí 

Chellaig Chualann as part of ‘the land of Mac Gillamochholmog’. Also the ecclesiastical 

estate of Tallaght probably accounted for a considerable amount of the previous Uí 

Dúnchada land in Uí Chellaig Chualann. 

Evidence of Hiberno-Scandianavian land-owning in the study area 

The first annalistic reference to the Torcaill family appears in 1093 (AI). Turcall mac 

Éola was killed with the king of South Wales by the Normans. The Meic Torcaill family 

were kings of Dublin from c.1126 to 1171. During this period the Meic Torcaill 

controlled a considerable amount of land in South Dublin and North Wicklow. 

Uí Chellaig Cualann 

This area lies to the west of the Two Rock Mountain ridge. Félire Óengusso refers to 

Kill St Anne’s in the Glenasmole valley as being in Uí Chellaig Chualann (Stokes 1905, 

123). Killininny and Kilnamanagh are mentioned as being in Uí Dúnchada (previously Uí 

Chellaig Chualann) and probably mark the north of the territory (ibid., 229, 255). One of 

the royal manors of the Anglo-Norman period was known as O Kelly, an anglicisation of 

Uí Chellaig Chualann (Mills 1894, 170). The manor lay south of Tallaght, along the 

northern slopes of the hills, across the opening of Glenasmole, and included Killininny, 

Ballycullen and Kilmacheth (ibid.). Nicholls suggests that Kilmakethe is Kilmashogue 

(1986, 410). This gives an eastern extent to Uí Chellaig Chualann. The north eastern 

The charter of Strongbow to Walter de Riddlesford in 1173, granting him ‘the land of 

Brien and the land of the sons of Torcaill’, suggests that the Uí Dúnchada did not control 

all the original territory of the Uí Briúin Chualann. A charter of 1202 in Alen’s Register 

confirms the lands of Holy Trinity, and names the pre-Norman land donors, five of which 

are of the Meic Torcaill family (MacNeill 1950, 28). The extent of this landholding 

approximates to the modern parishes of Tully and Kilgobbin (Boazman 2009, 4.4, 523- 

525). There is also scattered evidence for Scandinavian land holding in the modern 

county of Wicklow, for example Curtlestown, ‘Baile mhic Thorcaill’ in Glencree (Price 

1954, 74). 

179 

180





The ecclesiastical history of Rathdown 

Early saints 

There are a number of references to early saints of the Rathdown area in the 

Martyrologies of Tallaght and Óengus. These were associated with Tully, Killiney, 

Clonkeen,and Ballyman in the inner study area and Tallaght, Clondalkin, Kilnamanagh, 

Kill St Anne’s, and Killininny in the outer study area. Many saints, such as Becnat of 

Dalkey and Berchán of Shankill, with foundations in the Rathdown area have genealogies 

which attach them to the Dál Messin Corb lineage (Ó Riain 1985, 30, 42-44). Thus the 

early ecclesiastical history of Rathdown was of many small ecclesiastical sites founded in 

antiquity. 

towards Kildare rather than Glendalough (Gilbert 1854, 404). Its association with the 

céli Dé would have engendered autonomy and the annalistic reference to a steward in 865 

indicates a large ecclesiastical estate. It is thus likely that in this area Glendalough was 

claiming a libri confraternitatus rather than a libri possessionis (Mac Shamhráin1996, 171). 

The major ecclesiastical site of the area was Glendalough, thirty kilometres to the south 

of the inner study area, founded by Cóemgen in the late sixth century. The influence of 

Glendalough on Rathdown can be illustrated by dividing the area into three (Boazman 

2009, 4.4, 530-538). The core area of Glendalough influence was, almost certainly, the 

list of churches in the confirmation by Strongbow to Abbot Thomas in c.1172. These 

churches lie between Shankill and Glendalough in the very south of modern Co. Dublin 

and the north of Co.Wicklow (Boazman 2009, 4.4, 510). 

The second area includes Clondalkin, Kilnamanagh and Tallaght. Mochua of Cluain 

Dolcáin and Lochan and Enna of Kilnamanagh occur in a list of saints with Dál Messin 

Corb genealogies and in a litany of saints (Ó Riain 1985, 30, 42-44; Plummer 1925, 55). 

Cóemgen heads both lists which would insinuate that the listed establishments were 

affiliated to Glendalough (MacShamhráin 1996). There were contacts between 

Glendalough and these establishments in the earlier period, the relics of Cóemgen and 

Mochua were taken on comitatio in 790 (AU) but the Ua Ronáin family of Clondalkin, 

showed a tenacious independence, during the remainder of the millennium (Doherty 

1999, Boazman 2009, 4.4, 536). Tallaght is not mentioned in the lists of saints headed by 

Cóemgen but there was a connection with Glendalough as two of its abbots in the ninth 

and tenth centuries were co-abbatial with Glendalough. However Tallaght was 

established supposedly on land donated by the Uí Dúnchada who would have looked 

Fig. 5.31: Affiliation of ecclesiastical sites in Rathdown to Glendalough. 

181 

182





In the third part of the study area, the centre, the affiliations of ecclesiastical sites seem to 

be independent of Glendalough. Tully, Stillorgan and Clonkeen have documentary 

evidence of connections with Kildare, through the aegis of the Uí Dúnchada, although 

Clonkeen also has connections with the Uí Chennselaig and therefore Ferns. Also as will 

be explored below, Tully was almost certainly, a Hiberno-Scandinavian estate, towards 

the end of the millennium. Rathmichael as well, has considerable evidence of Hiberno- 

Scandinavian influence in the late eleventh and early twelfth century. The pedigree of 

the saints of Killiney is Corca Loígde (Co Cork). In the outer study area there are further 

connections with Ferns at Stamoling, Bishop Sancton of Kill St Anne’s has a British 

pedigree, and Kilcroney in Wicklow is genealogically associated with the Uí Néill 

(Boazman 2009, 4.4, 541-544). 

Hiberno-Scandinavian Dublin and Christianity 

The conversion of the Scandinavians of Dublin was no doubt encouraged by the baptism 

of two of their leaders, Sitric and Amlaib Cuáraín in the tenth century (Abrams 2010, 3). 

After Clontarf, the focus of the Hiberno-Scandinavian kings of Dublin changed to the 

Christianisation of their urban space. A large number of churches, beginning with 

Christchurch in c.1028, were founded between the mid-eleventh and twelfth century. 

These were on virgin ground, with novel architectural features and dedications to 

universal saints (Ó Carragáin 2010, 236). The bishops of Dublin were ordained in 

Canterbury, thus the ecclesiastical establishment in Dublin had close links with the ethos 

of reform. When Muirchertach Ua Briain was made king of Dublin in 1075, he was 

obviously influenced by this atmosphere. However he rejected the machinations of 

Canterbury and promulgated reform on Irish terms, culminating in the Synod of 

Rathbreasil (Holland 2000). In this diocesan organization Dublin was sidelined in favour 

of Glendalough and did not receive diocesan status until 1152. 

Church Organisation 

One of the idiosyncrasies of Rathdown is that, although it has a high density of 

ecclesiastical sites, each of these is situated singly within its small parish. Also as argued 

above it is hard to establish a hierarchy of ecclesiastical sites. This is unlike the pattern in 

other parts of the country, where a major church has several satellites in its territory. This 

is illustrated by Ross in Co.Cork and Faughart Upper in Co Louth (Boazman 2008a,119; 

2008b, 6.3). As there is copious documentary evidence from antiquity of the foundation 

of each of the Rathdown ecclesiastical sites, it is unlikely that others have disappeared. 

As indicated above it is unlikely that they were the paruchiae of a major ecclesiastical 

site, although many of them had connections to different major sites such as Kildare, 

Glendalough and Ferns. It is possible that this lack of a dominant contender to take over 

the ecclesiastical sites of Rathdown ensured their independence. 

Rathdown as a Hiberno-Scandinavian hinterland 

The concept of a settlement, such as the Hiberno-Scandinavian town of Dublin, that did 

not support itself by subsistence, was new to early medieval Ireland. It was also unlike 

Scandinavian settlement in other countries. In Scandinavia there was no ethnic divide 

between urban and rural, magnate farms supplied the growing emporiums such as 

Kaupang. In England the Scandinavians founded towns but also signed treaties 

legitimizing their landholding, but in Ireland the robust attitude of the Irish kings meant 

that Scandinavian rural settlement was curtailed (Kershaw 2000; Ó Corráin 1998a, 425). 

Thus to feed and supply their liminal settlements they had to negotiate with their 

immediate hinterland. Initially their demands were non-negotiable, in the form of raids 

but the places at which they made their first settlements were often near ecclesiastical 

sites which were centres of agrarian production. If permanent settlement was intended 

then the disruption of the farming year by raiding was non-productive, thus some form of 

accommodation must have taken place (Downham 2004, 90). The low incidence of 

attacks on the considerable number of ecclesiastical foundations in the Rathdown area 

from the mid-ninth century onwards indicates a profitable arrangement between the two 

stakeholders. In the tenth century coin hoards were found exclusively at ecclesiastical 

sites (Sheehan 2004, 185). In Rathdown, there were no hacksilver hordes, only coins at 

Delgany, Clondalkin, Dalkey, and Kilmainham. This represents a monetarisation of a 

previously subsistence economy (Hedeager 1994, 144). Thus the fertile area of Rathdown 

in the tenth and eleventh century became the producer of goods for the neighbouring 

183 

184





town and was no doubt paid for this production in coin. The situation of ecclesiastical 

sites in the Rathdown area as producers of goods for the growing metropolis may have 

contributed to the continued independence of small units of ecclesiastical organisation 

described above. Documentary evidence and the dearth of archaeological evidence for 

blanket Scandinavian settlement of the hinterland suggest that such settlement was 

interleaved with that of existing landowners and these were not supplanted (Etchingham 

1994). 

Ecclesiastical sites in Rathdown 

For the purpose of project ecclesiastical sites were divided into definite, probable and 

possible (Boazman 2009, 4.6.2, 565-569). If all classifications are taken into account the 

density of ecclesiastical sites in Rathdown is one site in a 3.18 sq km area. This is one of 

the highest densities in Ireland (Boazman 2008a, 120). The two distinctive features of 

the area are a significant number of pre-Romanesque unicameral mortared-stone churches 

and commemorative grave slabs, known as Rathdown slabs. These slabs are found in an 

ecclesiastical context and their provenance is restricted to the study area. There are 31 

slabs or parts of slabs extant. Their decoration features herringbone designs, concentric 

circles and cup marks but these are often combined with Christian symbology (Healy 

2009). 

Fig. 5.32: Rathdown slabs at Killegar. 

Non-ecclesiastical burial in Rathdown 

The following summary draws especially on Carroll (1998, 161-170), Conway (1999) 

and O’Neill (2005, 66-88). There are two significant sites of non-ecclesiastical burial in 

the inner study area, Cabinteely and Cherrywood and one in the outer study area, 

Butterfield. All are enclosed, and Cabinteely and Butterfield show evidence of 

enlargement of the original enclosure. Finds of A and B ware and radiocarbon dates in 

the case of Butterfield indicate early foundation. Numbers and duration of burial varied. 

Cabinteely had 1550 burials in six stages of statigraphy, Cherrywood, one early phase of 

38 burials and Butterfield over 200 burials, one dated to the tenth century. All burials 

were extended east west and earmuffs occurred in many graves in all three cemeteries. 

185 

186





There was evidence of metal working in the later stages of Cabinteely and two possible 

bronze book mounts were among the finds. Animal bone was found in the first enclosure 

at Cabinteely but apart from a millstone in a grave there was no evidence of arable 

production. At Cherrywood burial was limited to the early period and the find of part of 

a whalebone plaque, suggests ninth-century Hiberno-Scandinavian occupation. A corndrying 

kiln indicates arable production in the eleventh and twelfth centuries and three sets 

of postholes, reminiscent of Scandinavian house structures, are also dated to the same 

period (Boazman 2009, 4.6, 628-633). 

Ringforts 

The study area has a low density of ringforts which are all situated to the south of the 

Loughlinstown River, the single exception being Glebe which is just north of the river and 

will be discussed below. The ringforts occur in groups limited to certain townlands on 

the lower slopes of the mountains. The low density of ringforts has been discussed by 

several commentators, with urban development and Anglo-Norman cultivation being 

posited as explanations (Stout & Stout 1992, 19). However the dearth of toponomy (‘lis’, 

‘dun’ and ‘rath’) referring to non-extant structures in the study area and the fact that the 

considerable development-led excavation of the last twenty years has not revealed more 

ringforts seems to suggest their scarcity is an idiosyncrasy of the area (Flanagan 1994, 

112). 

Landscape analysis 

Tully ecclesiastical estate 

The ecclesiastical site at Tully lies on a flat-topped hill of 70m altitude (for a tentative 

delineation of the estate see Boazman 2009, 4.7, 644). It has aerial photographic evidence 

of enclosure (Swan 1998). The non-ecclesiastical burial site of Cabinteely lies at a lower 

elevation 1.1km NNE of Tully. Cabinteely was functioning as a burial site during the 

conversion period of Christianity and continued to function as such throughout the 

millennium. Tully must have tolerated this situation or perhaps profited from it in burial 

dues. The find of a book mount suggests that the site of Cabinteely may have 

manufactured craft objects for the ecclesiastical site. 

The ringfort at Glebe lies on designated churchland in the Down Survey. There is 

considerable evidence for arable production in the Tully area, four corn-drying kilns 

preceded the ringfort producing dates of 1460 ±32 AD 540-660 two sigma. In the 

confirmation to Holy Trinity of their possessions Tully is described: ‘Tilac Nonescop 

with the mill’ (MacNeill 1950, 7). The ringfort is dated to 1263 ± 26 AD 670-860 and 

has evidence for both arable and pastoral farming. Finds of bone trial pieces with a Chi- 

Rho and the word ‘Deo’ inscribed seem to suggest that the ringfort was a ‘home-farm’ of 

manaig workers for the ecclesiastical site in the seventh to ninth century. The 1202 

document listing the donors of land to Holy Trinity demonstrates that the group of lands 

surrounding Tully came under the control of the Meic Torcaill family in the early twelfth 

century. That the lands were still continuing in arable production is shown by a date 

from a kiln in Site 40 which lay southwest of the earlier kilns close to Glebe: 1050 ± 27 

AD 890-1030 and the corndrying kiln at Cherrywood (see below). 

Cherrywood lies about a kilometre ESE of Tully. In its earliest incarnation it was 

probably a family settlement and burial ground, similar to the initial stage of Cabinteely. 

Possibly the ecclesiastical site at Tully was not prepared to tolerate two non-ecclesiastical 

burial grounds in the vicinity. The whalebone plaque and silver ingot could indicate 

ninth-century Scandinavian rural settlement. The three rectangular sub-divided houses 

are diagnostic of Scandinavian design. These were contemporary with a nearby 

corndrying kiln dated by charred oats to AD 1020-1190. These dates would concur with 

Meic Torcaill kingship in Dublin and therefore the settlement could indeed have been a 

rural estate under their auspices, close to the ecclesiastical site under their patronage. 

187 

188





founded churches. The promotion of a rural ecclesiastical estate by its Hiberno- 

Scandinavian patrons is thus not surprising. 

Fig. 5.33: Twelfth-century cross at Tully. 

A Hiberno-Scandinavian presence is suggested by the presence of three Rathdown slabs 

near the church. The slab with a cross on it is one of the finest in the corpus. Three other 

pieces of material evidence suggest high status patronage. The date of the mortared-stone 

churches, such as Tully, in Rathdown, is argued by Ó Carragáin to be within a period 

between c.1050 and c.1130 (2005a, 137-149). These dates make it possible that the Meic 

Torcaill, patrons of the church, used some of their not inconsiderable means as Dublin 

merchants to build a stone church. Finally the two crosses at Tully both have features 

that are reminiscent of the twelfth-century cross at Dísert Ó Déaghaidh in Co Clare. The 

cross in the lane has a gable-shaped cap and the south cross has a figure with a crozier on 

it. Cronin suggests that these latter crosses were erected by foundations who had not 

achieved diocesan status after Rathbreasil to try to promote themselves for a succeeding 

synod (1998, 148). No doubt the sidelining of Dublin by Rathbreasil would have been 

taken to heart by the Hiberno-Scandinavian town with its reform ethic and newly- 

189 

Ringfort groups in the Kiltiernan, Glencullen, Ballybrew, Killegar area 

These townlands hold the highest incidence of ringforts and enclosures in Rathdown. 

Unfortunately many of them are non-extant but deduction from cartography and aerial 

photography gives evidence for 43 enclosures and ringforts. The whole study area has 73 

of these sites. This study proposes that the area was divided into three estates, two 

ecclesiastical and one secular. Divisions seem to have been topographical. Killegar is 

divided from Ballybrew by the steep glen of the Cookstown River and from Glencullen 

and Kiltiernan by a large area of marshy land, still visible. Ballybrew and Glencullen are 

divided by a tributary of the Cookstown River, known in Anglo- Norman documents as 

the ‘Glassenbroke’. This stream, which is easily fordable, was subject to boundary 

incursions, in the post-Norman period between St Thomas, who were granted Ballybrew 

and St Mary’s, who had Glencullen. This dispute was settled ‘according to the ancient 

boundaries in the time of the Irish’, thus indicating that the Glassenbroke boundary was 

pre-Norman (Mills 1894, 174; Gilbert 1894, 388). 

In modern parish structure the townland of Ballybrack on the north side of the Glencullen 

River is part of the parish of Kilgobbin but topographical logic suggests that it should be 

part of Kiltiernan, as it is separated from Kilgobbin by Two Rock Mountain. This would 

concur with many Anglo-Norman confirmations of land to St Mary’s in ‘Tulachstelan 

and Glencullen’ (Gilbert 1884, 86). Ballybrew and Killegar lie in the modern parish of 

Powerscourt (which borders Kiltiernan). Killegar was, during the Anglo-Norman period 

on episcopal land, and previous to that is mentioned as a possession of Glendalough in 

the confirmation to Abbot Thomas. Ballybrew was part of a secular baile estate granted 

to Walter Riddlesford (MacCotter 2008, 73, note 93). 

Kiltiernan church lies in a fertile valley sheltered from the south-west by Two Rock 

Mountain. Land-use is at present pasture. The church has been rebuilt but has some 

possible pre-Norman features in a western lintelled doorway surrounded by large granite 

190





blocks. About one kilometre south-west of Kiltiernan is the townland of Ballybetagh. 

There are eight enclosures and one ringfort marked on the RMP but only fragments of 

three are extant. However their position running lineally up both sides of a valley and 

each at the same altitude of the valley slope is reminiscent of the pattern of ringfort 

groups in other parts of the country (Boazman 2008a, 118). This topographical position is 

necessitated by the use of the optimum land. In this case they lie on well-drained land 

above a marshy valley bottom. A similar pattern exists in the valley of the Glencullen 

River where again six enclosures and two ringforts extend to the top of the valley. 

The suggestion of this study is that the ringfort groups on the higher land in the 

Glencullen valley represented the dwelling-places of manaig on the ecclesiastical estate 

of Kiltiernan during the early medieval period. Kiltiernan church stands on lower and 

more fertile ground than the ringfort groups; this could be the demesne land of the 

ecclesiastical site. An Anglo-Norman grant c.1176 suggests an existing pre-Norman 

estate at Tylachstelan (Kiltiernan) (Gilbert 1884, 106). 

Ballybrew 

The ringfort group is that identified as part of a late millennium baile estate (see above). 

There are three enclosures identified by aerial photography here and two ringforts, one 

extant, 35m in diameter. This diameter is large for the Rathdown area. The other 

ringfort was known to be bivallate and is called ‘Raheen’ in local tradition. It is 

interesting that the large ringfort and the bivallate ringfort occur together, as there is only 

evidence of one other bivallate ringfort in the study area. The large ringfort lies just to 

the south-east of the small group of houses known as Ballybrew and has an extensive 

view from north east to southeast towards the sea at Bray. 

191 

Fig. 5.34: Concentration of ringforts and enclosures in the Glencullen, Kiltiernan 

and Killegar and Ballybrew area. 

Killegar 

The ecclesiastical site of Killegar has an enclosure of about 100m diameter and forty 

lintel graves were discovered during gravel extraction. Forty lintel graves were 

unearthed during sand extraction at Killeger. Two early medieval iron bells were found 

in a re-furbishment of the site (Healy 2004, 239). The site was founded in antiquity as 

the saint connected with it, Findbarr, shares one name in his genealogy with an Uí Máil 

genealogy of Berchán of Shankill (Ó Riain 1985, 42). Also ‘Cilli Adgair’ (Killegar) may 

reference an earlier saint with Saxon forebears. West of the ecclesiastical site on the 

sloping land that rises to the head of the valley are recorded fourteen enclosures. The 

average size of these is under 30m. The ecclesiastical site lies at the easternmost point of 

this settlement group and the enclosures, except two, respect it by one kilometre. The 

ecclesiastical estate and the enclosures all lie within the townland of Killegar and there is 

no other church. Thus it could be posited that this was a small ecclesiastical site founded 

in antiquity by a saint of British extraction, was granted land by the Uí Máil relations of 

192





Findbarr in the seventh century, and later became part of the paruchiae of Glendalough. 

Three Rathdown slabs, one well-carved, with a cross, perhaps represent the scattered 

Hiberno-Scandinavian settlement of this part of Rathdown. 

Rathmichael and Shankill 

The ecclesiastical site at Rathmichael is situated at 100m on a hillridge which continues 

west to Carickgollan. It has a commanding vista to the south. Documentary evidence for 

early foundation is scarce. Hagiography is unconvincing and there is no mention of the 

site until the confirmation of the possessions of the Archbishop of Dublin in 1179 (Scott 

1913; MacNeill 1950, 3). Material evidence of early foundation consists of the remains 

of an inner enclosure, about 20m from the possibly pre-Romanesque church, which is 

mostly re-built (Ó Carragáin 2010, 313). There is also a substantial stone-built outer 

enclosure of 136m and the stump of a round tower. 

The ecclesiastical foundation of Shankill, 750m to the SSE of Rathmichael has no 

archaeological remains but has documentary and topographical evidence of being 

founded in antiquity. St Berchán who is associated with Shankill, has a Uí Máil pedigree 

and the site is referred to as ‘Domnach Sinchell’ (O Riain 1985, 45). This appellation 

may suggest a pre-Uí Máil foundation. Shankill lies on fertile agricultural land whereas 

Rathmichael is on the edge of much poorer land. Shankill became one of the demesne 

manors of the Archbishop of Dublin in the thirteenth century and the Down Survey 

indicates a 78% arable land-use for the parish of Rathmichael. 

Fig 5.35: Present day arable farming three kilometres west of Shankill. 

Rathmichael has evidence of thirteen Rathdown slabs, the largest group in the study area. 

The involvement of the Hiberno-Scandinavians in eleventh- and twelfth-century 

ecclesiastical re-furbishment has been noted above at Tully which was associated with 

reform and the by-passing of Dublin at Rathbreasil. Perhaps at Rathmichael there is an 

example of this in the round tower stump and imposing stone enclosure wall which could 

have referenced the eleventh-century stone wall excavated at Dublin (Mitchell 1987,13). 

Also the name Rathmichael refers to a universal saint to whom there is a dedication in 

Dublin, the church of St Michael le Pole, which has an engaged round tower. A saint 

associated with high places and the elevation of Rathmichael would have been ideal for 

demonstrating to the older Domnach church below, with its possible links to 

Glendalough, that reform was in the ascendancy. 

Conclusion 

The political and ecclesiastical history of Rathdown is marked by a succession of 

overlords and a lack of affiliation to a single major ecclesiastical site. This was a fertile 

area with much evidence of arable production and with the economic advantage of access 

to mainland Europe and the Atlantic seaboard of Britain from the earliest period. The 

193 

194



high density of early ecclesiastical foundations is no doubt due to these advantages and 

the organization of these, as single churches in small parishes, is related to the inability of 

secular or ecclesiastical rulers to establish a hierarchy in the area. Confirmation of land 

grants to ecclesiastical land owners at the beginning of the Anglo-Norman period suggest 

a considerable amount of land in Rathdown was in ecclesiastical hands before 1169 

(Otway-Ruthven 1961, 56). The delineation of small ecclesiastical estates at Tully, 

Killegar and Kiltiernan in this study corroborates this. The establishment of Scandinavian 

Dublin and its concern with the ethos of church reform, ensured the continued autonomy 

and prosperity of these ecclesiastical sites in its hinterland. This was illustrated by the 

embellishment of ecclesiastical sites in the area with mortared-stone churches and 

Rathdown slabs. However the lack of architectural innovation combined with 

idiosyncratic sculpture at the ecclesiastical sites in Rathdown also indicated a tension 

within the Hiberno-Scandinavian identity of the rural areas, referencing design motifs of 

the urban centre combined with the traditional format of Irish ecclesiastical architecture. 

5.6 Faughart, Co. Louth (Gill Boazman) 



This section comprises a summary of work on the area centred on Faughart, Co. Louth 

which is being undertaken as part of an ongoing PhD project. The small kingdom of 

Conaille Muirthemne, which extends from north Louth into South Armagh, features in 

early medieval mythology and history to an extent quite disproportionate to its size. 

Recent excavations at Faughart Lower and Balriggan have enabled the re-interpretation 

of the relationship of early medieval sites in the area. 

Topography, geology and land-use 

The study area surrounds Dundalk Bay and roughly comprises the baronies of Upper and 

Lower Dundalk. There is a considerable contrast between the two half-baronies. Lower 

Dundalk to the north of Dundalk Bay is underlain with the granite of the Sliabh Fuait and 

Cooley mountains and is pastureland. The geology of the coastal area is composed of 

Ordovician and Silurian slates and shales but can be sub-divided into two distinct areas. 

The first of these is that close to the town of Dundalk, where extensive reclaimed salt 

marshes extend from Rampark in the east of the study area to the Marshes townlands to 

the south east of the town. Thus early medieval and previous sites are located above this 

previous shore-line, but of course, had easier access to the sea than at the present. The 

second area of Upper Dundalk, which lies concentrically to the marshland, is formed by 

the effects of glaciation consisting of low drumlin hills rising to 60-70m in height. The 

geology of these low-lying areas results in soils which are ‘fine, mellow and easily 

cultivated’ thus supporting arable farming (Kilroe 1907, 66). Pollen analysis undertaken 

by Weir at two locations close to the edge of the outer study area, indicate a strong 

element of tillage in the farming economy of North Louth in the first millennium (1995). 

Historical background 

The study area in the first half of the millennium was almost certainly part of the territory 

of the Ulaid, prior to their dislodgement from Émain Macha and re-settlement in the east 

of Ulster (Byrne 2001, 118). It is quite possible that the Ulaid established Conaille 

195 

196





Muirthemne as a buffer between themselves and the Uí Néill, whose dependent allies, the 

Airgialla, were established to the northwest and west. In mythology and proto-history the 

hill of Faughart is named as a battle ground of Ulaid and Connachta. Conaille 

Muirthemne was the patrimony of Cuchulain and Cormac mac Airt, grandson of the 

legendary Conn Cétchathach, reputedly defeated the Ulaid at Faughart in 248 (AFM). 

This position of Faughart as a flashpoint of conflict continued throughout the first 

millennium (Boazman 2008b, 6.2, 434). 

The first annalistically recorded leader of Conaille Muirthemne died in AD 688 at the 

battle of Imlech Pich just south of the Boyne. The rulers of the Conaille Muirthemne are 

always referred to as taiosech or tigherna. This underpins the supposition that they were 

a semi-independent lordship of the Ulaid and the Book of Rights indicates that they did 

not pay tribute but received stipends for military service (Dillon 1962, 91). The last lord 

of the Conaille Muirthemne is recorded in 1107 (AFM) around which time the area came 

to be dominated by the Uí Cerbhaill branch of the Uí Chremthain (part of the Airgialla) 

led by Donnchad Ua Cerbaill. 

territory is formed by the foothills of the Slieve Gullion range, known as the Fews 

Mountains (Sliabh Fuaid). The geneaology of St Moneena identifying her as Conaille, 

would suggest that her ecclesiastical establishment at Killeavy in South Armagh fell 

within Conaille Muirthemne. 

Finally there is a question as to whether Cuailgne was part of Conaille Muirthemne. 

There is mention of a king of Cuailgne in Chronicum Scotorum and it is mentioned as a 

trícha cét in the Táin and the Lebor Gabala (MacCotter 2008, 238). The ridge of the 

Cooley Mountains forms a clear topographical boundary so certainly for parts of the first 

millennium it was a separate political entity to Conaille Muirthemne. 

Extents of the territory of the Conaille Muirthemne 

The southern boundary of Conaille Muirthemne is the ecclesiastical site of Dromiskin. 

The father of St Ronan, Berach was de Chonilibus (of the Conaille) (Thornton 1997, 

150). Atha na Fert (Knockbridge) is mentioned in the annals (819 AFM) as being in 

Magh Conaille. McFirbisigh places Haggardstown, the birthplace of St Fursey in 

Conaille Muirthemne and Haynestown known as ‘Felda’ is identified as being in ‘Crich 

Conaill’ in the Tripartite Life of St Patrick (Mac Íomhair 1962, 158; Mulchrone 1939). 

Pre-ninth century Louth and its surrounding area were part of Conaille Muirthemne until 

the twelfth century (Mac Íomhair 1962, 178). The Lagan River (previously known as the 

Conchubar) is mentioned in the legend of Conchubar Mac Nessa as being part of Conaille 

Muirthemne and St Daig, of Iniskeen, is stated in Félire Óengusso to be ‘Daig son of 

Cairell of Inís Cáin Dega in Canaille Muirthemne (Stokes 1905, 177). North of Iniskeen 

is the small parish of Kane. Felire húi Gormáin refers to ‘Sodelb, a virgin. Cen is the 

name of her stead on Mag Conaille’(Stokes 1895, 215). The northern boundary of the 

Fig. 5.36: The study area of North Louth. 

197 

198





Ecclesiastical history 

The primary association of Faughart Upper, the major ecclesiastical site of the inner 

study area, is with St Brigit. Although there is no direct reference to her birthplace in the 

Lives of Brigit, Colgan notes in an Appendix: 

Villa in qua nata est, Fochart Muirthemne vocatur, qua est in provincial Ultorum, scilicet 

in regione, qui dicitur Conalle Murthemne. 

(the place in which she was born, is called Faughart Muirthemne, which is in Ulster, lying in the 

region known as Conaille Muirthemne) (1647, 617). 

St Moneena is also associated with Faughart. The life of St Moneena by Conchubranus 

records that Moneena had 150 virgins living with her on the hill at Faughart. However the 

carnal songs of a wedding party reaching the holy place were deemed inappropriate for 

those who were the brides of Christ and she retreated with the group to Killeavy below 

Slieve Gullion leaving one virgin at Faughart (Ulster Society for Medieval Latin Studies, 

1980). 

(AFM). Thus Louth could have had control over dissemination of information and was 

not likely to promote a neighbouring ecclesiastical site, Faughart, with its Brigidine 

associations. It is quite possible that Louth and Faughart had equal status under Armagh 

during the period of Conaille Muirthemne ascendancy in the area. One of the abbots of 

Louth was the steward of ‘Patrick’s people’ beyond the Fews Mountains in 935 (AFM). 

However political developments in the third decade of the twelfth century put Louth in a 

dominant position. Donnchad mac Cerbaill of the Uí Chremtháin rose to prominence in 

the 1130s. He saw an advantage in linking himself with church reform and was friendly 

with St Malachy who chose Áed Ua Cáellaide as bishop of Airgialla (Clogher) in 1138 

and moved the episcopal seat to Donnchad mac Cerbaill’s new power centre at Louth 

(Lawlor 1917, 138). Louth had been previously within the diocese of Armagh. Louth’s 

eminence was emphasized by the foundation of a chapter of the Arrouaisian canons of St 

Augustine at Louth in a ceremony attended by St Malachy, Áed Ua Cáellaide and 

Donnchad Ua Cerbhaill in 1148 (AFM). Thus certainly by the middle of the twelfth 

century Faughart was probably under the episcopal rule of Louth and the dearth of 

records of the Conaille Muirthemne in the twelfth century, suggest under the temporal 

rule of Donnchad Ua Cerbhaill and the Airgialla. 

There is little annalistic record of the ecclesiastical site at Faughart but a list of abbesses 

of Killeavy occurs in the text and twelfth-century notes of the life of Concubranus, and 

this tallies with an annalistic reference, 654.4 (AFM) ‘Coincenn of Cill-Sleibhe, died’. 

The connection of the foundation with the Conaille Muirthemne continues in that the 13 th 

abbess, Allabuir was the daughter of the king of Conaille Muirthemne, Foidmenn mac 

Fallaig whose obit is listed AU 752 (Esposito 1920, 76; Thornton 1997, 140). 

Louth 

Louth, founded by St Mochta is a major ecclesiastical site is in the outer study area. 

Unlike Faughart, Louth is mentioned in 30 annalistic obits of abbots and airennach from 

662 to 1147. Louth must have had a scriptorium as the Book of Cuana was produced 

there and there are four mentions of ‘scribe’, ‘lector’ or ‘tutor’, between 742 and 1047 

The Lands of Faughart 

A grant of part of a marriage settlement by Hugh de Lacy to the Cistercians in 1199, a 

1606 Inquisition and the Down Survey, all describe the same parcel of land between the 

River Flurry and a stream to the west known as the Aduname. This contains the 

ecclesiastical site of Faughart Upper. Although there is no early medieval record of the 

estate, the very longevity of the documented extents, from the twelfth century to the 

seventeenth would suggest a pre-existing land unit (Boazman 2008b, 6.2, 437-440). 

Aerial photography shows a large double-ditched enclosure surrounding the site (Buckley 

& Sweetnam1991, 230). In 1966 a limited excavation was undertaken (O’Connor). The 

east-west trench in the nave indicated a ditch dug to 1.75m running north to south 

199 

200





through the present church nave just west of the mid wall. The feet of several stone-lined 

burials were found at the base of the east chancel wall. Another cist burial was found 

below the north of the north wall. This stone-lined grave was tapering with a single 

shaped cover stone. This is similar to O’Brien’s seventh-century stone-lined cists which 

were tapering rather than with parallel sides (O’Brien 2003, 70). Souterrain ware, animal 

bone and iron slag were among the finds. 

within the proposed ecclesiastical estate, all at lower elevations. The topographical 

position of Ballymascanlon, on an isthmus in Dundalk Bay, rather than its material 

remains, a seventeenth-century church and a souterrain, suggests it derives from 

antiquity. Excavation at Faughart Upper and Lower, have yielded considerable amounts 

of edible shellfish remains, possibly Ballymascanlon could have acted as a maritime 

connection for the ecclesiastical estate at Faughart. Proleek, is a large ecclesiastical 

enclosure, 120m in diameter, to the southeast of Faughart. It is positioned just above the 

Flurry River, on the border of the ecclesiastical estate. It is not unusual for a major site 

such as Faughart to have a prominent secondary site within its estate. Both Donaghmore 

and Rosscarbery in Co Cork have secondary sites with evidence of ritual foci at Kilcullen 

South and Knocknageehy respectively (Boazman 2008a, 126). The second ecclesiastical 

site in the townland of Proleek lies 1.5km west of Cill Mór and 2kms southeast of 

Faughart. 

The two ecclesiastical sites on the plain north of the Sliabh Fuait which terminates at 

Slieve Gullion, now in modern South Armagh, although within the parcel of land 

ostensibly forming the estate of Faughart, appear to privilege other allegiances. The 

pillar stone at Kilnasaggart with its inscription ‘Ternoc’, annalistically dated to an obit of 

715, has a very definite reference to Armagh. This would not be extraordinary as 

Faughart was within the tithe collection area of Armagh (see reference to steward above). 

Kilnasaggart, also on the Slíghe Miodhluachrac was probably a waypoint for travellers 

between Armagh and the south, and as such was acknowledging an important affiliation 

to the north. 

Fig. 5.37: The proposed ecclesiastical estate at Faughart, sited between the Flurry 

and Auduname rivers. 

Faughart is on the summit of one of the foothills of the Fews Mountains with a 

commanding vista south over Dundalk Bay. It is likely that Faughart was positioned on 

the Slíghe Miodhluachrac, leading from Tara to Émain Macha through the Moyry Pass 

1.5kms to the north of Faughart. There are three ecclesiastical sites south of Faughart 

201 

As noted above, according to Conchubranus, St Moneena founded Faughart in honour of 

Brigit but then retreated to Killeavy to pursue an ascetic lifestyle. St Sarbile was left by 

Moneena to continue the ecclesiastical establishment in Faughart. What was the 

explanation for this move from the original foundation with its Brigidine association? It 

seems that Faughart Upper, although an ecclesiastical site, had strong secular affiliations. 

Faughart was an iconic battleground for over a millennium, as an annalistic reference at 

732 (AFM) to the conflict between the Uí Néill and the Ulaid illustrates. Maybe the story 

of St Moneena’s move to Killeavy was a parable for changes in influence at Faughart 

202





which came to fulfill a more public role with its important connection to St Brigit, while 

Killeavy assumed the ascetic role. 

strong possibility of Faughart being maintained as a focus of popular and profitable 

pilgrimage, throughout the first millennium as well as the second (Carroll 1999, 86). 

It was probably in the interest of the rulers of Conaille Muirthemne to promote the cult of 

St Brigit at Faughart and thus maintain a flow of income from pilgrimage. One of the 

noticeable aspects of the ecclesiastical site to this day is the proliferation of ritual foci 

relating to Brigit. These are both within the graveyard of Faughart Upper and in the ritual 

area beside St Brigit’s Stream 500m to the northwest. 

Fig. 5.38: St Brigid’s Bed, the horse-shoe shaped shrine at Faughart Upper. 

In the graveyard are the mound, the horseshoe-shaped monument and St Brigit’s Well. 

The horseshoe-shaped monument contains a rough stone of which there is antiquarian 

evidence of penitents kneeling on the pumice stone until their knees bled (Wright 1748, I, 

19). Of course there is considerable evidence for these practices having an early modern 

provenance but the evidence of the cemetery settlement at Faughart Lower indicates a 

Faughart Upper and the cemetery settlement at Faughart Lower 

About 1.5kms south of the ecclesiastical site lies the recently excavated cemetery 

settlement site of Faughart Lower. I am grateful to Niall Roycroft of the NRA for 

providing information about this site. Both this site and the other cemetery settlements in 

the study area, Balriggan and Rampark, are situated at below 50m of altitude. As such 

they do not have commanding vistas which suggests that they did not want to indicate 

power by use of topography. The three sites are each separated by three kilometres 

unlike the grouping of ringforts in the proposed Faughart estate, which are sometimes 

only a hundred metres apart. Maybe this, combined with the earliest dates in the 

Faughart burial sequence, indicates that these settlements were founded in the fifth 

century when there was considerable movement between Ireland and the disintegrating 

Roman Empire. Perhaps they were initially, small family settlements with quasi- 

Christian burial practices and as such, were established before the floruit of ringforts 

whose tight kin-group structure was manifest in their physical proximity. The dates from 

the earliest cemetery settlement burials at Faughart Lower, RC calibrated 2 sigma AD 

390-550, would suggest a foundation of the settlement in the primary period of 

Christianity in Ireland; the obit of Brigit is 425 and that of Moneena 517. 

There were approximately 750 burials at Faughart Lower, the last c.1000. The fact that 

burial continued in a family plot in unconsecrated ground with the presence of a major 

ecclesiastical site just 1.7 km to the north is unusual. The move from ancestral burial 

places to burial within the precincts of an ecclesiastical site was considered by the ninthcentury 

church to be the norm (O’Brien 1992, 136). Annalistic references to the lords of 

Conaille Muirthemne are recorded from 688 to 1107. The early burials at Faughart were 

in stone-lined graves, but later phases were less ordered, intercut and in some places 

twelve deep, as if this was no longer the burial place of one family. Two features of the 

203 

204





later development of the site, suggest enhancement rather than practical purpose. The 

first was a carefully built cashel wall most prominent on the western side of the site and a 

well, whose proximity to burial would have rendered it non-potable. Perhaps the wall was 

to impress pilgrims approaching on the Slighe Miodluachra from the west and the well an 

echo of St Brigit’s well at the ecclesiastical site above and both were products of a 

promotion of pilgrimage by the rulers of Conaille Muirthemne in this period. 

Ringforts on the proposed ecclesiastical estate of Faughart 

There are thirteen ringforts west of Faughart Upper. As there are 73 ringforts (extant and 

non-extant) in the inner study area, one fifth of them are on this apron of land. Only eight 

of the ringforts in the study area are bivallate. Three of these are in the group beside 

Faughart Upper. Thirteen ringforts in the study area have a diameter over 35m. Three 

are in the group beside Faughart Upper. This tendency for an ecclesiastical estate to 

contain a high density of ringforts and also a high proportion of high status ringforts is 

replicated at Ross in Co. Cork, where the majority of bivallate ring forts in the parish of 

Ross occur in the ecclesiastical estate (Boazman 2008a,119). It is possible that the 

smaller ringforts represent the domicile of manaig on the estate and the larger bivallate 

examples are those of wealthy patrons of the estate. 

other Doolargy ringfort average diameter of 26m. The linear arrangement of ringforts in 

separate river valleys probably signifies different families within the kingroup. This 

physical manifestation of agnatic inheritance is described in the Tripartite Life of St 

Patrick: ‘Fiacc, one of five sons, received his father’s fifth ridge’ (Mulchrone 1939, 166). 

A river valley or a low ridge obviously formed a clear topographical boundary for a kingroup 

area. This linear pattern of ringforts can be found in the parishes of Donoughmore 

and Aghabullogue in mid Cork and Ross in West Cork (Boazman 2008a, 118). 

The size of the ringforts correlates with the infertility of this upland area. Davies’s 

excavation in 1940 revealed evidence of cattle-rearing. The name of the cashel 

‘Lissachiggel’ the fort of the rye, suggesting that only this less prestigious grain would 

grow in the vicinity (1940). 

Other settlement groups in the north of the study area 

Doolargy and Ballymakellett 

Fifteen ringforts, mostly extant, lie on the lower slopes of the Cooley Mountains. There 

are three groups. The western group is situated on the shoulder of steeply rising land in 

the townland of Ballymakellett. This group has evidence of iron-working. The central 

group lies below and on the way to the cashel at Doolargy, separated from the first group 

by a fast-flowing mountain river. This river can be easily forded at one point thus there 

could have been communication between these two groups. The cashel is a spectacular 

site at an altitude of 250m looking down a long valley which has many relict field 

systems and stone huts. To the west of the cashel is a track which leads over the col to a 

group of smaller ringforts. These interconnections suggest a kingroup whose leader lived 

in the central cashel, which was much larger, 58m x 47m in diameter, compared to the 

205 

Fig. 5.39: The cashel at Doolargy. . 

206





Although this was probably part of the Conaille Muirthemne polity, towards the end of 

the millennium the pressure of the eastern Ind Airthir (part of the Airgialla federation) 

eroded the borders and probably dominated this area in the twelfth century. The Airthir 

were split into segments of inter-related dynasties of which the Uí Annluainn 

(O’Hanlons) and the Ó Ruadacáin (Rodericks or O’Roddys) were the most powerful and 

they tenaciously clung to this remote area until c.1590 when a Dowdall document shows 

‘Doulargy, Co Armagh held of O Hanlon by socage, being 60 acres’ (Mac Íomhair 1970, 

81). 

Dungooly is in the catalogue of churches founded by St Patrick in Colgan’s Trias 

Thaumaturgae (1647, 272). It was known as Ernatiensis or Cluain Braoin, hence its 

anglicisation as Urney. One of its abbots was St Dichull who became abbot of Louth in 

700. There is also a reference to a relic, St Patrick’s Bell, which is now lost (ibid.,166). 

There is a considerable number of ringforts in the vicinity of Dungooly and it seems 

likely that it was a proprietary church of the local túath. This was more than likely a 

túath connected to the Conaille Muirthemne but it would have been on the borders of the 

polity and may have made alliances with its Airgialla neighbours (the Louth connection 

mentioned in the history section suggests this). There is a bivallate ringfort 200m to the 

west of the ecclesiastical site, the interior diameter is 37.7m. A line of nine ringforts 

stretches under the shoulder of a ridge of higher ground c600m to the southwest 

beginning in Lurgankeel townland and stretching into Dungooly and over the south 

Armagh border into Carrivegrove. The average size of these is 39m in diameter with two 

bivallate and two cliffedge forts. The large ringfort average size suggests a prestigious 

community, supporting a proprietary church but also, as evidenced by the cliff-edge forts, 

security conscious in their border position between the Conaille Muirthemne and the 

Airgialla. 

Settlement groups in the southern part of the study area 

Balriggan cemetery settlement and surrounding settlement 

The following information has been supplied by Shane Delaney of IACS. Balriggan lies 

on a low knoll of gravel of 13m to 15m within a shallow bowl, immediately surrounded 

on the northwest and southeast by wetland and bog. Thus vista was not a pre-eminent 

element in choice of site. The soils are well-drained glacially mixed gravels and today the 

land-use is mainly pasture although the designation of an area to the south of the site as 

‘Barleyfield’ and four nineteenth century mills in the area would indicate a past emphasis 

on arable farming. The corn-drying kiln at Balriggan has returned early dates, RCD Cal.2 

sigma AD 80-250 but this date is from ash (fraxinus) charcoal at the base of the kiln. 

Dating of charred grain will form part of the final report and this may return a fifthcentury 

date which would correlate with the earliest burials at Faughart Lower. 

The relationship of Balriggan with other forms of early medieval settlement is dependent 

on the dating of the cemetery settlement. The second date from Balriggan is more likely 

to be from the use-time of the site than the ash date from the corn-drying kiln, as it is 

from charcoal in a trough-like pit in the north eastern area of the site. It is RCD Cal.2 

sigma AD 530-650. However this would be at the beginning of the period of 

construction of ringforts, which is c. 600-900 (Stout 1997, 29). The number of burials at 

Balriggan, just 25, would suggest a very short usage period for the site or on the other 

hand, a short period in which the site was used for burial. 

Finds on the site included 800 sherds of souterrain ware and 150kg of iron slag as well as 

six large pits for an undisclosed process and an ore roasting furnace. This seems to be 

evidence of more than domestic making and mending that would be in keeping with the 

modest number of burials and it is possible that the site evolved into a production centre 

for surrounding ringforts. There are three ringforts, about 700-800m from Balriggan, one 

Carn More, has been excavated, finds included 200 sherds of souterrain ware, thus it 

could be contemporary with Balriggan. However an excavated ringfort at 

Newtownbalregan 1.4km southwest of Balriggan returned dates of AD 770-970, which 

would be almost 200 years after the latest date at Balriggan so until further dates are 

207 

208





published for Balriggan, it is difficult to say whether the cemetery settlement functioned 

as an industrial site for other early medieval settlement. 

Souterrains in the south of the Upper Dundalk barony 

Apart from one early date of AD 405-650 at Marshes Upper the dates from excavated 

souterrains in the North Louth area fall between AD 688 and 1190. Thus from around 

the end of the seventh century there was a considerable increase in ostensibly unenclosed 

settlement on dry areas of the flat marshy land to the south of Dundalk . Some of these 

souterrains were enclosed by a ditch, Donaghmore (Rynne 1959), Marshes Upper 3 and 4 

(Gowen 1992), Killally (Clinton and Stout 1997), Marshes Upper 5 (McCormick and 

Crone 2000), but none of the enclosing banks survived. Modern excavation methods 

mean that the environs of souterrains are explored thus the lack of evidence for an 

enclosure can be demonstrated. Tateetra would be an example of this (Hayes 2007). 

Many souterrains constructed in the Upper Dundalk area are apparently without 

enclosure, a total of 33 out of 54, and obviously there must have been unenclosed 

settlement above them. 

The souterrains of Upper Dundalk were carefully crafted often using cut stone, with 

corbelled roof construction and elaborate door fittings. At Tateetra, granite, provenanced 

from 20 km away, was used for the jamb stones of the end chamber and the decorated 

Bronze Age stones and cross slabs were also used to roof this presumably high status 

monument (ibid.). 

Marshes Upper 

This is a group of eleven souterrains, five of which occur in one complex, Marshes Upper 

3 and 4, excavated by Gowen in 1992. Their economy was similar to other early 

medieval site-types. They kept cattle, sheep and pigs and grew oats and barley. They 

made use of the sea as a resource as net weights, fishbones and cetacean bones were 

found. The lack of settlement surrounding the group suggests that they had at least one 

square kilometre of land around them. This would be 240 acres, a good-sized farm. 

Cortial 

Eight souterrains lie on a ridge which is surrounded by marshy land. To the south-west is 

Killycroney and to the south-east Kilcurly. Bertram de Verdon’s grant to the Hospital of 

St John in 1189 makes an exception of ‘five other carucates which pertain to Kilkerly’ 

(Mac Íomhair 1962, 171). This probably means that Kilcurly was ecclesiastical land but 

whether as such it was subject to the same reparations as the possible baile at Cortial is 

unknown. 

Fig. 5.40: Gallery 5 at Tateetra. 

Ballybarrack 

The area comprising the townlands Rath, Ballybarrack, Littlemill, Newtownbabe, 

Killally, Carnaneregagh forms the present parish of Ballybarrack. The benefices of the 

area were granted to various religious foundations by the de Verdons at the beginning of 

the twelfth century (White 1943, 45; Otway-Ruthven 1968, 404). These benefices 

approximate to the modern parish of Ballybarrack. MacCotter considers that the late 

millennium land unit, the baile biataig was sub-divided to became the ‘vill’ of Anglo- 

Norman administration (2008, 79). He lists Ballybarrack as an example of this, the 

assumption being that Ballybarrack and surrounding land formed a baile biataig or 

209 

210





secular estate. This was obviously fertile land as ‘Miltoune de Ballybalricke’ is referred 

to in the 1332 partition of the de Verdon lands (Otway Ruthven 1968, 427). 

There is no toponymic evidence for an early ecclesiastical estate here. The archaeology 

suggests some form of early medieval settlement as there was an enclosure excavated 

here by Kelly in 1977 with three extensive souterrains, one of which incorporated an 

ogham stone. There was no burial evidence, but a late medieval church lies very close to 

the enclosure. St Thomas’ Abbey was granted a ‘church’ at Ballybarrack by Nicholas de 

Verdon in 1232, thus there is ecclesiastical evidence at Ballybarrack, at the beginning of 

the Anglo-Norman period (Gilbert 1889, 9; Otway-Ruthven 1968, 404). One 

interpretation could be that this was first a settlement enclosure with a kin-group church, 

and the souterrains were a later feature, contemporaneous with other souterrains in the 

area in the second part of the millennium. There are several eight other souterrains in the 

parish of Ballybarrack and these may well have represented late millennium settlement in 

the baile. 

to the inhabitants of the area in exchange for manpower and food, an arrangement 

between clientship and feudalism. This was represented by the baile system. The baile 

biataig had to pay render in goods and cattle to the ruler of the trícha cét. The trícha cét 

had the power to raise a military levy and this was no doubt administered at baile level 

(Mac Cotter 2008, 52). Maybe this explains the change to unenclosed settlement which 

insinuates a surrender of protection. Thus those who were in the lower ranks of society no 

longer had the cachet of enclosed settlement but still expressed their free status by 

constructing souterrains that were well-crafted and a status symbol in themselves. . 

Conclusion 

To choose to build unenclosed settlement after a period of enclosed settlement such as 

ringforts, is a choice which must indicate some change in the structure of the society. As 

indicated in the historical section the Conaille Muirthemne kings were at their most 

powerful between AD 688 and 1096. This is manifest in the ringfort groups surrounding 

Faughart and also the probable promotion of the pilgrimage site of Brigid. However, 

towards the end of the millennium there was a distillation of power and smaller political 

units were subsumed. Thus the lords of Conaille Muirthemne were under attack from 

their neighbours, segments of the Aigialla from Ulaid and subsequently from Louth. The 

entries in AFM record two battles involving Conaille Muirthemne in the ninth century, 

six in the tenth century and fifteen in the eleventh century and the first seven years of the 

twelfth century. To be able to draw on a combat force that would fight these battles they 

would need to have access to manpower. The diffused power indicated by the many 

petty lords of a ringfort society would not be cohesive enough. It is probable that 

towards the end of the millennium, the kings of Conaille Muirthemne offered protection 

211 

212





5.7 The Aran Islands and North Clare/South Galway (Bernadette 

McCarthy) 

This section describes ongoing work on two case studies within the Co. Galway regional 

study. The Aran Islands are situated in Galway Bay, and are a geological extension of the 

Burren in Co. Clare, characterised by carboniferous limestone karstic terrain. The North 

Clare/South Galway study-area is situated in the Burren and spans two separate early 

medieval kingdoms, that of Corcomroe, which corresponds to the 12 th Century diocese of 

Kilfenora, and that of the Uí Fhiachrach Aidne, which corresponds to the 12 th C diocese 

of Kilmacduagh. On the Aran Islands, many ecclesiastical sites tend to be situated at the 

foot of terraces where fresh water is available and the soil is more fertile such as Cill 

Ghobnait on Inisheer. Some sites including Cill Cheannannach on Inishmaan, Killeaney 

on Aran and Teampall Chaomháin on Inisheer are located near the shore where there 

were access points from the mainland. Most of the ecclesiastical sites of the North 

Clare/South Galway region are located in an upland area of the Burren which forms the 

boundary between the Uí Fhiachrach Aidne and Corco Modruad territories. Nonetheless, 

though they are in this border location which is largely characterised by limestone karst 

the sites tend to exploit areas of fertile soil. Oughtmama is located on a geological divide: 

the northern half of the site consists of rocky, barren limestone pavement while the 

southern side comprises deep, fertile soil left by glacial drift. Keelhilla is located in 

upland karstic terrain yet it is on a small pocket of rich soil by a spring in what is 

otherwise an agricultural wasteland (Fig. 5.46). Similarly, while Cill Cheannannach on 

Inishmaan is built directly on karstic terrain, a pocket of rich soil is located nearby. When 

considering the full spectrum of ecclesiastical sites and forts on the Aran Islands, a salient 

pattern is that ecclesiastical sites tend to be located in the shelter of terraces or slopes near 

sources of fresh water while forts tend to be located at high points such as the top of 

terraces, hills or sea-cilffs, with expansive views of Galway Bay. For example, Cill 

Chomhla in Onaght is located at the foot of the limestone bluff on which Dún Eóganachta 

stands (Fig. 5.47). This sharp distinction between ecclesiastical site and stone fort in the 

landscape may reflect very different concerns and ways of life. Those living in the 

213 

ecclesiastical sites benefited from shelter, fresh water and good land for agriculture in the 

location of their sites. Those who built the cashels, on the other hand, evidently desired 

an expansive view of Galway Bay for strategic reasons. 

The contrast between the distribution of ecclesiastical sites and ringforts in the North 

Clare/South Galway study-area is striking (Fig. 5.43). As noted, ecclesiastical sites tend 

to be located in the vicinity of the county border in occasional green pockets. While 

clusters of ringforts are plentiful elsewhere in the Burren, few ringforts occur in this 

border area. The cashels which are located on the western side of the boundary zone, like 

those of the Aran Islands, enjoy a high location with an expansive view. They include 

Caherconnell, positioned at one end of a major north-south pass through the Burren 

mountains. The fort probably served to defend the political boundary of Corcomroe as 

well as being in a position to profit from those using the routeway. Another cliff-edge fort 

is located by the same routeway is Oughtmama while there is another cliff-edge fort on 

the modern county boundary in Leagh South. Cahercommaun is another major cashel in 

an elevated position located on the western edge of this boundary zone. A trivallate 

cashel, with evidence for fine metal-working, it was again an elite site. An analysis of 

radiocarbon and dendrochronological remains from Caherconnell showed that the fort 

was constructed between the tenth and twelfth centuries AD, though most excavated Irish 

ringforts have been found to date between the seventh and tenth centuries AD (Hull and 

Comber 2008, 31). From the tenth century on the Corcu Modruad were put under 

increasing pressure from the Dál Cais expansion. The need to defend the political 

boundaries of Corcomroe may thus have resulted in the construction of cashels on major 

routeways and boundaries in this area which is otherwise lacking in non-ecclesiastical 

settlement. 

Another striking pattern that emerges from analysis of the North Clare/South Galway 

study area is that churches situated in this boundary areas of two large territorial units 

may have received termonn lands on both sides of the boundary, a phenomenon which 

has been noted by Ó Riain in relation to early medieval boundaries in general (1972, 28). 

Such churches may have had representatives from both territories, as at St Mac Duach’s 

214





hermitage in Keelhilla. An early vernacular text described above shows that the 

dedication to St Mac Duach existed in the medieval period (O’Keeffe 1904, 43-8). The 

principal foundation of Mac Duach, who was an Uí Fiachrach saint, is Kilmacduagh in 

Co. Galway. This site, however, is located across the border in Clare and may therefore 

indicate that Kilmacduagh had termonn lands on the other side of the Uí Fiachrach 

kingdom’s boundary. Similarly, Killinny parish adjoining Kilmacduagh Parish in 

Galway, dedicated to Enda as was Cill Éinne on Aran, may actually have been a termonland 

of the diocese of Kilfenora. Ó Carragáin notes that the church at Templemore, Co. 

Clare bears a remarkable resemblance to the one at Kiltiernan across the border in Co. 

Galway (2002, 26). Location on the boundaries of kingdoms enabled ecclesiastical 

estates to maintain some independence from secular power structures, yet also served as 

points of contact between kingdoms. Ó Riain notes how boundary churches played a role 

in the payment and collection of tribute (1972, 26-27), while Ní Ghabhláin notes how 

boundary ecclesiastical sites served as areas of sanctuary which provided entryways to 

kingdoms for travellers. As well as receiving hospitality on the ecclesiastical site they 

could meet parties from other kingdoms on neutral ground (1996, 332). It was therefore 

to the advantage of secular kingships to donate land for ecclesiastical foundation in 

boundary territories. 

of church dedications and later medieval sources such as papal taxations, papal letters, 

Elizabethan fiants and the 1584 Inquisitions suggest ecclesiastical sites from various 

The four townlands of Aran, the two townlands of Inishmaan and the single townland of 

Inisheer each contain a major ecclesiastical site and stone fort. This is an unusual 

settlement pattern which would not generally be found on the mainland, where ringforts 

tend to occur in clusters, as in parts of the North Clare/South Galway study-area, and 

ecclesiastical sites are fewer and more widely dispersed. As in the North Clare/South 

Galway study-area, its nature as a boundary zone surrounded by large territories is 

responsible for this unusual layout. Galway Bay was a peripheral area yet nonetheless a 

marine crossroads of major strategic importance. Historical analysis of their borders and 

ecclesiastical land ownership merged with the GIS indicates more than one early 

medieval kingdom from the surrounding mainland may have had a presence at once on 

the islands, leading to the four-fold division of the island and its complex pattern of 

ecclesiastical land ownership. A combination of early medieval hagiography with study 

Fig. 5.41: Aran with major sites and townlands named. 

Fig. 5.42: Inishmaan with major sites and townlands named. 

Fig. 5.43: Inisheer with major sites and townlands named. 

215 

216





Fig. 5.45: Plan of Mainistir Chiaráin, indicating termonn marking pillar stones. 

Fig. 5.44: Distribution of definite early ecclesiastical sites and ring-forts along the 

county border of North Clare/South Galway study-area. 

Fig. 5.46: Hinterland of St Mac Duach’s Hermitage. The site is located in the trees at 

the base of the ridge. 

217 

218





Fig. 5.47: Gable-shrine at Cill Chomhla with Dún Eoghanachta in background. 

surrounding secular polities claimed a right to lands on Aran (for full outline and 

discussion, see McCarthy 2009, 691-3; 746-7). Killeaney, containing St Enda’s 

foundation of the same name, was associated with both the Corcu Modruad and the 

Eoghanacht, and was a prebend of the diocese of Kilfenora in the later medieval period. 

In Oghill, Mainistir Chiaráin, also known as Mainistir Connachtach, was held by the 

diocese of Tuam in the later medieval period and the site can be associated with both 

Kilkieran across Galway Bay in Connemara and the Conmaicne Mara who fought a battle 

against the Corcu Modruad at the monastery in 1016, while the nearby Teampall Asurnaí 

is dedicated to a saint of Uí Fhiachrach genealogy. Teampall Mac Duach in the townland 

of Kilmurvy is dedicated to St Mac Duach, cousin of Guaire of Aidhne, and it is likely 

that a member of the ruling line of the Uí Fhiachrach was installed in the site. The most 

westerly townland of Onaght was associated with the Eoghanacht and, later on, the Dál 

Cais, whose patron saint was Brecan, dedicatee of the main church of Na Seacht 

dTeampaill and close relation of St Flannan of Killaloe in the genealogies. In the later 

medieval period the site was a prebend of the diocese of Killaloe, the spiritual centre of 

Dál Cais power. Both Na Seacht dTeampaill and Killeaney, each associated with the 

Eoghanacht/Dál Cais, contain high crosses similar to those found on Dál Cais associated 

site of the Clare mainland such as Kilfenora (de Paor 1979). High crosses of this style are 

absent, however, from the Uí Fhiachrach Aidne territory of the North Clare/South 

Galway study-area as well as the Uí Fhiachrach Aidne associated central townlands of 

Oghill and Onaght on Aran. Enda, founder of Killeaney at the island’s eastern end, and 

Brecan, founder of Na Seacht dTeampaill at the island’s western end, share many 

similarities in their hagiographical representations and Brecan appears to have been 

developed by the Dál Cais as a replacement for the Corco Modruad and Eoganacht 

associated Enda, perhaps reflecting their usurpation of their territories from the Corco 

Modruad and their overlords the Eoganacht from the tenth century on (McCarthy 2009, 

685). Na Seacht dTeampaill and Killeaney both appear to have undergone a major period 

of rebuilding between the eleventh and thirteenth centuries, a period which coincides 

with the height of Dál Cais power in the territory (McCarthy 2009, 684). The presence of 

a major cashel and major ecclesiastical site in each townland of all three islands might 

219 

220





therefore be seen as a reflection of how the islands’ landscape, which formed a boundary 

zone between numerous secular polities, may have been divided into various termonn 

lands of different ecclesiastical centres on the mainland. The major stone forts in each 

townland were elite settlements for the differing polities who laid claim to this boundary 

area. 

Teaghlach Éinne, on the eastern peripheries of the ecclesiastical complex of Killeaney, 

may have served as a focus for elite lay burial. Manning has remarked on the similarity 

between graves excavated at the site and those excavated at Reefert (1985, 111), a royal 

cemetery at the edge of Glendalough. An early medieval cist excavated c.130m northwest 

of the site (Gosling 1993, 144) may represent burial of less important lay individuals as 

close to the site as possible. A differing burial tradition is evident in the location of the 

non-ecclesiastical burial grounds of Buaile Glas on Inisheer and Buaile na Naomh on 

Inishmaan. Each site is located close to an early medieval cashel in a southern part of 

each island distanced from the primary areas of early ecclesiastical settlement which in 

each case is on the northern side of the island. Those living in the southern areas of 

Inisheer and Inishmaan may have been inhabited distinct territory from the ecclesiastical 

lands further north, confirming their territorial identity through their use of ancestral 

burial-grounds in the early medieval period. The burial-ground of Owenbristy, in the 

North Clare/South Galway study-area, is not only located on a townland boundary, like 

Buaile na Naomh, but also on the edge of a turlough. The site was inhabited seasonally, 

being flooded annually by the turlough, and burials included flexed inhumations, 

showing the transition to Christian burial was not yet complete in this liminal burialground. 

Evidence of continuity of a pre-Christian past is also apparent when considering 

the early medieval resuse of Dún Aonghasa (McCarthy 2009, 694, 758). Rynne (1991, 

261) has suggested that the stone forts of Aran may have been ceremonial centres, whose 

function in the landscape was superseded by the development of early ecclesiastical sites. 

His theory is plausible in the case of Dún Aonghasa: with its cliff-top location and central 

‘stage’ of natural rock the multi-period site has all the appearance of a ritual space. 

Excavation indicates most of the stone forts were early medieval in origin (McCarthy 

2009, 758), but the towering monumentality and elevated position of Dún Aonghasa is 

replicated in their form and location. Cnoc Raithni, a probable early medieval nonecclesiastical 

burial ground, also shows a concern with maintaining links with a 

perceived ancestral heritage. Though producing Late Bronze Age evidence for burial 

(McCarthy 2009, 758), the mound was reused in the early medieval period when slablined 

graves were inserted. A non-ecclesiastical burial ground at Cross, Co. Galway was 

in use sporadically from the Late Neolithic to the early medieval period as excavation 

indicates (Mullins 2007, 109). 

The early Irish monastic familia included a wide range of individuals who were not 

monks in the strict sense. Cill Éinne covered a broad landscape ranging from Teampall 

Bheanáin in upland karstic terrain on its western periphery to Teaghlach Éinne on the 

shoreline to the east. Hagiographical evidence suggests the community were diverse 

(McCarthy 2009, 682). This diverse community needed to be controlled and directed so 

as to maintain order and differentiate between sacred and profane space. This hierarchical 

ordering is evident in the way space was defined in the ecclesiastical site of Aran and the 

placement of certain monuments. The termonn or extents of the ecclesiastical site (see 

McCarthy 2009, 736 for discussion of this term) were defined through the use of pillarstones 

as well as enclosures and high crosses on parts of the Aran landscape. Mainistir 

Chiaráin, Eochaill, is the most striking example of a site with evidence for a termonn in 

its hinterland. Two of the standing pillar-stones which are in situ appear to mark a 

curvilinear boundary to east and northeast and are inscribed with crosses which face 

eastwards and outwards. The base of another cross-inscribed pillar which may not be in 

situ is located in the graveyard 40m N of the church where there are fragments of at least 

one other cross-inscribed pillar. Another cross-inscribed pillar stands immediately west 

of the church (Fig. 5.45). In the same townland, there are two pillar-stones west of the 

later medieval church of Teampall an Ceathrair Álainn (McCarthy 2009, Fig. 5.28). The 

most westerly, 420m from the church, is just across the townland boundary in Cill 

Mhuirbhigh. A raised path leads from the church to each of the two stones. The two 

stones are aligned with each other on an east/west axis and appear to mark the western 

extents of ecclesiastical lands: a GIS representation shows that the land between the 

church and the most westerly stone is more fertile and lush than the rockier land in the 

221 

222





site’s hinterland. A curvilinear boundary is also asserted at Na Seacht dTeampaill, where 

three surviving high crosses surrounding the ecclesiastical complex are aligned on 

cardinal points: west, south and north/northeast (see McCarthy 2009, Fig. 5.30). An 

enclosure surrounds the complex settlement of Teampall mac Duach and Templenaneeve. 

A low, uninscribed pillar-stone is located 20m north-east of the pre-Romanesque church 

of Teampall Mac Duach in the adjoining townland of Cill Mhuirbhigh while there is a 

cross-inscribed pillar immediately west of the church as at Mainistir Chiaráin. These 

may have marked the ‘sanctissimus’ or most sacred core of the site around the principal 

church (See McCarthy 2009, Fig. 5.31). A fox figure inscribed on a north-west quoin of 

Teampall MacDuach and a cross inscribed on a south-east quoin of Templenaneeve may 

also have served to delineate and protect the boundaries of the site (See McCarthy 2009, 

739-40 for identification of ‘fox’ figure and discussion of its apotropaic qualities). 

The diverse population of the early ecclesiastical complex included hermits who 

practiced a strict ascetic lifestyle. Keelhilla is traditionally considered to be the site of St 

Mac Duach’s hermitage. The site is located in a rugged upland area of the Burren in 

karstic terrain. Teampall Bheanáin is located on an exposed hilltop location in 

inhospitable karstic terrain that is untypical of other ecclesiastical settlement in the study 

areas. Its exceptionally small pre-Romanesque church is unusually aligned on a 

north/south axis. On the western periphery of the ecclesiastical complex of Killeaney, the 

site is likely to be a satellite hermitage. A semi-subterranean drystone hut located just 

north of the church could have been home to one or two individuals. The north/south 

alignment of the church as well as the northern location of the drystone hut on the site 

may also have been thought more suited to the eremitical life. Gilchrist notes that in 

medieval Britain the ‘northern situation was more fitting for the penitential vocation of 

the recluse‘ (1995, 190)‘ and I have noted elsewhere how anchoritical off-shoots tend to 

be north of early ecclesiastical sites in an Irish context (McCarthy 2007, 55, 60, 72). The 

tiny church may have been a reliquary chapel housing the remains of St Benignus, 

Patrick’s successor. Ó Carragáin (2010) and McCarthy (2007, 101) have highlighted the 

association of relics with hermits. Hermits, as figures on the edge of society, were 

considered appropriate guardians for sacred relics. Knocknaman, a small ecclesiastical 

enclosure that is an offshoot of the enclosure containing Teampall MacDuach and 

Templenaneeve, and Atharla, another small ecclesiastical enclosure that is an offshoot of 

Teampall Chiaráin, are each located to the northeast of the larger ecclesiastical sites on a 

rock-knoll and contain cross sculpture. These sites may also have been the focus of 

stricter ascetic settlement, as well as housing reliquary foci which were cared for by 

hermits and visited by pilgrims. Each of the sites was visible from and in view of the 

main ecclesiastical settlement, like Teampall Bheanáin. Temple Cronan in North Clare is 

located in a townland called Termon, suggesting the site was located at the edge of an 

ecclesiastical estate. It is likely the site, which was an important pilgrimage destination, 

was an offshoot of a larger site such as Oughtmama to the north. The northerly location 

of Knocknaman, Atharla and Teampall Bheanáin relative to large ecclesiastical 

settlement may be reflective of a tradition of shrine location. St Caomhán bed, a highly 

decorated recumbent slab said to mark the location of the founder’s grave is located a few 

metres north-east of Teampall Chaomháin on Inisheer while excavation indicates St 

Enda’s Bed at Killeaney was also located north-east of the church of Teaghlach Éinne 

(Manning 1985, 111), the church itself at the north-east corner of what was once an 

extensive settlement. The remains of the gable-shrine at Cill Cheannannach are located 

north of the church. A stone bearing the inscription CARI (‘of the dear one’) at the northeast 

corner of Teampall Bheanáin may also be a manifestation of this pattern. 

From the ninth century pilgrimage on the Continent became more difficult due to 

Carolingian restrictions on movement within the Empire (Jones 2004, 189), and the 

monumentalisation of the landscape of the Aran Islands from the tenth to twelfth 

centuries can be linked to its increasingly important role as a pilgrimage destination 

(McCarthy 2009, 687). Cill Éinne on Aran, and Cill Cheannannach on Inishmaan are 

both located next to a principal landing-point where pilgrims would have arrived by sea. 

Teampall Bheanáin is highly conspicuous and when approaching Aran by boat its profile 

on top of the hill is one of the first things that draws the eye. In the North Clare/South 

Galway study-area, vestiges of pilgrimage can also be traced on the landscape. The 

routeway running from north to south through the hills of the Burren along the border 

between the kingdoms was a likely pilgrimage route, and a tau-cross on the brow of 

223 

224





Roughan Hill may have marked a resting-place for pilgrims (Jones 2004, 141). Large 

ecclesiastical sites such as Oughtmama en route may have provided hospitality for 

pilgrims. Two gable-shrines containing translated relics at Temple Cronan in Termon 

would have been a highly significant point in the pilgrim’s journey, and, like Teampall 

Bheanáin, it is likely this small site at the edge of an ecclesiastical estate would have been 

home to a community of ascetics who cared for the relics as one of their main duties. 

Gable-shrines at Cill Cheannannach on Inishmaan and Cill Chomhla on Aran would also 

have been major pilgrimage attractions. The early ecclesiastical sites of the islands 

formed a network of sacred places for the pilgrim, like the pilgrimage landscape of 

Rome, and some of their sites had numerous features which the pilgrim could make a 

‘round’ of while visiting the site. The numerous leapacha or saints’ beds of Na Seacht 

dTeampaill would also have been important focal points during a pilgrim’s circuit of the 

site, as would have been the high crosses on its boundary. Carefully reused dedicatory 

inscriptions appear in the early medieval fabric of pre-Romanesque churches built 

between the eleventh and thirteenth centuries at Teampall Bhreacáin, Teampall Bheanáin 

and Teaghlach Éinne, a phenomenon which is unique to Aran in an Irish context (Ó 

Carragáin 2010, 106). The individuals commemorated became part of the monumental 

Christian landscape which was developing with the construction of stone churches and 

the erection of high crosses. Cill Éinne had multiple churches dedicated to different 

saints, as did Oughtmama in Co. Clare, as well as features such as high crosses within the 

termonn. A great many saints are venerated in total throughout the islands through church 

dedications and the landscape encapsulated the concept of the ‘Communion of Saints’ 

vital to early Christian doctrine: the binding together of the saints in Heaven with those 

living on Earth in spiritual solidarity under Christ’s power. Invoking the many different 

saints venerated at different points of the insular landscape, the pilgrim engaged in a 

multi-faceted sacred experience which bridged both the earthly and celestial domains. 

Overall, the Aran Islands and North Clare/South Galway study-areas provide an insight 

into how ecclesiastical settlement and cashels functioned in boundary zones of early 

medieval Irish society. While ecclesiastical sites tended to be in liminal locations, they 

exploited fertile pockets of land and attracted pilgrims. Cashels in this boundary location 

were elite settlements concerned more with guarding routeways than agricultural 

production. Non-ecclesiastical burial-grounds also tend to be located in liminal locations 

yet served to affirm kin-group identities, while eremitic satellite sites can be identified on 

the peripheries of ecclesiastical complexes which were important pilgrimage destinations. 

Boundaries played a huge role in the early medieval Irish landscape, topographically 

peripheral yet central to the organisation of power. 

225 

226





6.1 Aspects of the international context for Making Christian Landscapes 

Sam Turner 

Chapter 6 

International Context and Conclusions 

This contribution presents a brief initial analysis of the pattern and scale of early 

medieval landscapes in two parts of Britain in order to provide some comparisons for the 

patterns analysed in the Making Christian Landscapes project. The chronological focus is 

the period AD c. 450-800, i.e. the time between the effective end of the Roman Empire 

and the beginning of the Viking Age in Britain. 

It will focus on two themes. First, it will present case studies of landscapes to analyse 

patterns of settlement, the context of early churches and other types of religious or ritual 

sites. Then it will attempt to consider the scale of these patterns in terms of their 

relationships to both broader patterns of physical geography and density of settlement or 

demography. The case-studies are drawn from the early medieval kingdoms of Cornwall, 

Wessex and Northumbria. 

6.1.1 Cornwall 

Cornwall was an independent kingdom in south-west Britain until at least the ninth 

century. It developed out of the post-Roman kingdom of Dumnonia and the Roman 

province of the Dumnonii, which ultimately had their origins in the Iron Age polities of 

the later prehistoric period. Unlike the neighbouring county of Devon to the east, 

Cornwall maintained various aspects of its British cultural identity – principally its own 

language – into the early modern period. The contrast is particularly visible to modern 

visitors in the place-names of the two counties: in Cornwall the vast majority are Cornish, 

but in Devon almost all are English. 

There is some evidence that Cornwall was a Christian land by the end of the sixth 

century. Inscribed stones with text in Latin and ogham testify to Cornwall’s international 

227 

228





connections in this period across the western seaways to Wales, Ireland and beyond. 

Where imported Mediterranean ceramics or inscribed stones occur at church sites, as at 

Phillack, St Kew and Tintagel, there are hints of early Christian centres founded in late 

Antiquity. Nevertheless, it is only in the seventh century and after that there is fairly 

convincing archaeological or historical evidence for the origins of monastic sites and 

other churches that have survived into later medieval or modern times. 

St Neot has existed since at least the ninth century: it is probably mentioned in Asser’s 

Life of King Alfred and there are fragments of a fine ninth-century carved stone cross in 

the churchyard. Hints that a monastic estate once existed here survive in documents 

including Domesday Book and in later medieval administrative patterns (Turner 2006a, 

127-9). 

In fact, this region to the south of the moor is relatively rich in pre-Conquest sculpture: 

two further ninth-century monuments stand on the border of the parish due east of the 

church at King Doniert’s Stone (whose inscription probably mentions one of the last 

recorded Cornish kings), and tenth- or eleventh-century crosses survive at Cardinham and 

Four Hole Cross on the northern boundary of the parish, with fragments found at St Cleer 

church and at Bofindle. Whilst these later monuments probably relate to a new phase of 

church foundation in the tenth and eleventh centuries, it is possible that they might have 

been founded on the sites of existing cemeteries. Examples elsewhere in Cornwall show 

that cemeteries sometimes stood in the territories of monasteries but did not necessarily 

have churches. Burial grounds with cist graves have been found at Treharrock and St 

Endellion in the parish of St Kew, the earliest documented Cornish monastery (Olson 

1989). The use of some such sites extended from the later Iron Age to the later medieval 

period, as at Trevone and Trethillick near the early medieval monastery of Padstow, both 

of which were also associated with later medieval chapels (Preston-Jones 1984). 

Fig. 6.1: St Neot and neighbouring parishes to the south of Bodmin Moor, Cornwall. 

The area around St Neot to the south of Bodmin Moor provides an interesting example of 

a developing Christian landscape in the early Middle Ages. The church of St Neot nestles 

in the valley of the small St Neot River, which flows south from the moors into the larger 

River Fowey, itself providing the southern and eastern boundary of the medieval and 

modern parish. 

The settlement patterns around St Neot also help show how the likely monastery helped 

to shape the emerging medieval landscape. Archaeological and historical evidence shows 

that apart from the post-medieval village centres around St Neot and St Cleer, settlement 

here has always been scattered across the landscape in individual farms and hamlets. The 

pattern of early medieval settlements can be inferred to a great extent from the 

distribution of tre place-names, probably coined between the fifth and tenth centuries. 

These settlements concentrate in the lower-lying lands to the south of the moor. They are 

largely absent from the higher ground and the medieval parish of Cardinham to the west, 

which remains heavily wooded with extensive tracts of grazing to this day. In these 

respects they are different to both earlier and later settlements in the area. Later 

229 

230





prehistoric, Romano-British and medieval farms with English place-names are much 

more widely distributed; by contrast, the early medieval settlements cluster in the better 

farmland, away from the hilltops and relatively close to the monastery. 

was Lesmanaoc, meaning ‘the monks’ court’ or ‘the court of the Meneage’. Just after the 

Norman Conquest, Robert of Mortain gave three estates in Amaneth or Manaek to Mont 

St Michel, including this one (Olson 1989; Turner 2006a, 126). The area retains the name 

‘Meneage’ to this day, and in origing it probably means something like ‘monks’ land’. 

Whilst we should not necessarily imagine a monastic community that directly farmed 

such a large area, it is quite possible both that the community’s tenants on outlying farms 

might have been part of a territory known as Manaek. 

Fig. 6.2: St Keverne and the Meneage, Cornwall. 

In the west of Cornwall, the church of St Keverne provides another example. A Cornish 

ecclesiastical community is first mentioned here in Domesday Book, and although there 

is little earlier evidence for the monastery itself both patterns of settlement and estates 

recorded in later sources suggest an establishment with long chronological roots. The 

church itself lies in the village of St Keverne, but this is a post-medieval settlement. The 

earlier medieval pattern is again made up of farms with tre place-names, here the densest 

concentration of them anywhere in Cornwall. In fact, several places with Cornish names 

in the vicinity are mentioned in early medieval charters, including tenth-century 

references to Traboe and Lesneage (Hooke 1994). The tenth-century name of the latter 

A similar arrangement can be detected in the neighbouring region of Penwith. Here on 

Cornwall’s westernmost peninsula a church has existed at St Buryan since at least the 

tenth century, and very likely earlier too. The ecclesiastical community at St Buryan was 

granted land by the victorious English king Athelstan in a charter that almost certainly 

marks its refoundation rather than first establishment (Hooke 1994, 22-7; Preston-Jones 

and Langdon 1997). At least five of the places mentioned in the charter had habitative 

place-name elements, which suggests they were the sites of farms linked to the 

community. In the later Middle Ages St Buryan was the mother church of outlying 

chapels at Sennen and St Levan, where Charles Thomas has tentatively identified a 

ruined building on the rugged cliff above the cove at Porth Chapel as the remains of an 

early medieval hermitage (Cornwall HER). Other chapels existed within the medieval 

parish of St Buryan, some of which may have perpetuated the sites of earlier burial 

grounds. At Vellansager, for example, a stone cross stood near the traditional site of a 

medieval chapel and close to the find-spot of an early medieval inscribed stone (Preston- 

Jones and Langdon 1997; Okasha 1993, 68-9). 

In summary, there is relatively little firm archaeological or historical evidence for 

Cornish churches before the ninth or tenth century. What evidence survives suggests that 

the most important churches were probably held by religious communities who also 

owned land in the surrounding territories. The churches acted as a focus for settlement in 

their regions, and many are surrounded by clusters of settlements whose names are 

thought to signify that they had been established in the early Middle Ages. Within such 

territories, other important sites for religious and/or ritual practice existed, even if there is 

231 

232





presently little evidence for churches. From at least the ninth century, crosses marked 

significant points along paths and on boundaries, and even before this inscribed memorial 

stones had been set up in similar locations. Such memorials may also have marked 

burials, and there is increasing evidence that unenclosed communal burial grounds 

existed away from churches during the early Middle Ages: burial was probably not 

controlled directly by the church until at least the tenth century. 

century has been confidently recorded, but scholars have identified the sites of probable 

minster churches from a combination of sources including documentary evidence. 

Although we lack place-names in Devon that can be dated securely to the seventh-ninth 

centuries, it is clear that important Devon churches tend to occupy similar locations to 

their equivalents in Cornwall, surrounded as they are by the richest agricultural land 

(Turner 2006a). They are not, as is sometimes claimed, usually located in the isolated 

positions supposedly favoured by British monks (cf. Hall 2009). 

6.1.2 Wessex 

The western counties of Wessex did not come under English political control at the same 

time. Hampshire and Wiltshire were already dominated by the Anglo-Saxons before their 

kingdom’s conversion from paganism to Christianity in the middle of the seventh 

century. By contrast, Devon, Somerset and Dorset probably had already largely Christian 

populations when they became Wessex counties. Despite these differences, most major 

churches in western Wessex tend to occupy similar locations. They are generally sited in 

low-lying positions fairly close to rivers, but just above their floodplains. As such, they 

were surrounded by rich farmland and stood at the heart of local landscapes of agriculture 

and communications (Turner 2006a). 

Most of the county of Devon had once formed part of the post-Roman kingdom of 

Dumnonia, but it came under Anglo-Saxon control during the course of the seventh and 

eighth centuries. As in Cornwall, the archaeology of early medieval Christianity in Devon 

remains relatively poorly understood. In the south and west, a scatter of inscribed stones 

demonstrate that during late Antiquity the two areas shared a similar Christian 

monumental culture. Aspects of both the physical and cultural geography also have more 

in common with Cornwall than most parts of England to the east. West of the Exe the 

landscape is dominated by rolling hills with steep valleys, and everywhere settlement 

dispersed in individual farmsteads and hamlets is more common than nucleated villages. 

Nevertheless, the English settlement radically altered the region’s place-names, so that 

surviving British toponyms were very rare in the Middle Ages and later. Few church sites 

have been explored archaeologically and no standing fabric dating to before the tenth 

233 

Fig. 6.3: The likely early medieval monastery of Stoke St Nectan and the medieval 

landscape of Hartland, Devon. 

234





Further east in Somerset, Dorset, Wiltshire and Hampshire important churches were also 

usually located in the kind of low-lying positions amidst good farmland that are believed 

to have been the focus for settlement during the early Middle Ages. There are many 

examples with good archaeological or historical evidence from the ninth century or 

earlier, including Axminster, Crediton, Cranborne, Sherborne, Wareham, Wimbourne, 

Bath, Britford Tisbury, Ramsbury and Winchester. As in Cornwall, sites for other types 

of ritual practice like burial continued in Wessex through the conversion period, and there 

is little evidence in the burial record to suggest a sharp disruption in the seventh century. 

Even some elite burials continued to take place in the wider landscape throughout the 

seventh century, like the famous primary and secondary barrow burials on Swallowcliffe 

Down and Roundway Down in Wiltshire. 

More typical burial-places also continued to function during the conversion period. The 

large cemeteries at Cannington in Somerset and Poundbury in Dorset are perhaps the 

best-know examples showing continuity of use from the late Roman period into the early 

Middle Ages, but there are other, smaller burial grounds with simpe dug or stone-lined 

graves dating to the seventh century and later dispersed across the landscape. Examples 

include the cemeteries at Wembdon Hill, at Shepton Mallet and below Brean Down in 

Somerset, at Ulwell and Tolpuddle in Dorset, and at Monkton Deverill in Wiltshire 

(Webster et al. 2008, 183-4). 

6.1.3 Northumbria 

It is useful to compare the early medieval kingdom of Northumbria with the South West 

not least because the surviving information is so different. In Wessex and Cornwall there 

is relatively little evidence for early churches but plentiful written material for the later 

Saxon period. In Northumbria, documentary sources for the ninth-eleventh centuries are 

largely lacking, but there is much written and archaeological evidence from the so-called 

‘Golden Age’ of the seventh and eighth centuries. 

Fig. 6.4. Roundway Down, Wiltshire: 7th-century barrow burials and likely minster 

churches. 

The early churches in the valley of the River Tyne provide good examples. Owing to its 

association with Bede, Jarrow is perhaps the most well-known of these sites. Like its twin 

house Wearmouth a few miles to the south, it was subject to extensive campaigns of 

excavation by Rosemary Cramp from the 1950s onwards and recently published (Cramp 

2005). Achaeological and historical sources that include standing buildings, surviving 

sculpture, and the works of Bede provide us with further evidence for a string of sites 

along the Tyne valley that were established from the mid-seventh century onwards. 

Important pre-Conquest institutions probably existed at Tynemouth, Gateshead, Bywell, 

Ovingham, Corbridge and Hexham, and there may have been other monasteries, for 

example at Donamutha on the east side of Jarrow Slake (Wood 2008a) and at Newcastle. 

Many of these monasteries probably had extensive endowments of land. The lands of 

Wearmouth and Jarrow have recently been studied by Brian Roberts (2008) and Ian 

235 

236





Wood (Wood 2008a; 2008b). Their interpretations of the significance of the monastic 

lands vary, not least because Wood suggests the two houses should be regarded as 

separate foundations from the outset rather than the ‘one monastery in two places’ 

described in Bede’s Lives of the Abbots of Wearmouth and Jarrow. Nevertheless, it is 

clear that the estates granted to the houses were both extensive and long-lived. Very 

much like the monasteries of Wessex, the lands of these two great Northumbrian houses 

were initially focussed on the sides of their respective river valleys, even though they 

came to be mixed up to some extent in later medieval times. 

Because the later Saxon documentary records are much poorer for Northumbria than for 

Wessex, we have few records of grants like the charters available in the south of Anglo- 

Saxon England, which makes work like Roberts’ all the more valuable. Despite this, it 

seems highly likely that many of the other major monasteries in the valley of the Tyne 

would have possessed similar estates, with good agricultural land in the valleys directly 

controlled by the communities. 

Topographically, the location of the monasteries is also similar in both Wessex and 

Northumbria. They tend to lie on the lower valley slopes, sometimes even immediately 

adjacent to the river. At Jarrow, for example, recent geophysical survey and retrogressive 

analysis has been undertaken as part of a new research project by archaeologists at 

Newcastle and Durham universities (www.omtp.org.uk). Preliminary results suggest that 

the monastic centre may have stood on a low promontory with the southern and eastern 

edge defined by the small River Don (a tributary of the Tyne, whose confluence used to 

lie on the opposite side of Jarrow Slake), and that the northern edge defined by a 

substantial ditch or inlet, now buried below the park to the north of St Paul’s church. If 

so, Jarrow’s location has much in common with some of the Thames minsters discussed 

by John Blair (2006). Beyond Anglo-Saxon England, sites like Portmahomack in northeast 

Scotland share very similar topographical positions (Carver 2008). 

It was noted above that the place-name evidence for Anglo-Saxon England is harder to 

map than in early medieval Cornwall. Nevertheless, in a recent study Mark Wood (2007) 

has attempted to analyse early settlement patterns from place-name and other evidence in 

Bernicia (one of the antecedent kingdoms to Northumbria). Wood has shown 

convincingly that the place-names believed to be early – probably dating to the seventh 

and eighth centuries – tend to cluster along the major river valleys like the Tyne, Wear 

and Tees, the same locations as the important early churches. 

In the wider ritual landscape, the conversion to Christianity in Northumbria (as in 

Cornwall and Wessex) does not seem to have meant an immediate end to burial sites 

away from churches. Several excavated examples in northern Northumbria show that 

existing burial grounds continued to be used, as at Millfield South and Hepple (Scull and 

Harding 1990; Miket 1974). Also comparable to Wessex are the secondary barrow 

burials of the seventh and early eighth century like Capheaton (Petts 2006, 66). 

The evidence from different parts of Britain in the conversion period allows the 

development of a general model to explain how major churches were located and the 

impact they had on surrounding territories. Firstly, such churches were not in general 

isolated; instead, they were usually sited amidst good agricultural land and often on 

important routes of communication like major rivers. Although early medieval settlement 

patterns are not easy to reconstruct in any part of Britain, it seems that churches acted as 

foci for settlements which often tended to be clustered close to them. Other ritual sites 

such as burial grounds continued to exist within the territories of newly established 

ecclesiastical communities; even if churches exercised some degree of control over some 

of the communal burial grounds, they did not necessarily interfere with existing practices. 

6.1.4 Focus and Scale 

As this discussion has shown, important churches in different parts of Britain tend to 

occupy central locations, both in terms of physical topography and settlement geography. 

The churches did indeed function as central places in landscapes, and played other central 

roles that can be detected in the archaeological and historical record. They became 

increasingly important as places for burial, and many minster churches developed large 

237 

238





burial grounds. They also became important points for exchange not only of cultural and 

religious ideas but also of products and imports, roles typified by the archaeology of a 

place like Jarrow (Cramp 2005; 2006). 

This centrality can also be revealed in other ways. In both Cornwall and Northumbria 

some churches are known from medieval and early modern records to have had special 

zones of extended sanctuary around them in the Middle Ages. Examples include 

Beverley and Ripon in Yorkshire, Durham, Hexham in Northumberland, and Padstow, St 

Buryan and St Keverne in Cornwall (Davies 1996, 5). At St Keverne, John Leland wrote 

in the sixteenth century that ‘within the land of Meneke or Menegeland’ the parish church 

of St Keverne was set within a sanctuary, and it is possible that a lost Anglo-Saxon cross 

mentioned in an early medieval charter might have marked the boundary of this sanctuary 

(Turner 2006a, 165-7). At St Buryan, Preston-Jones and Langdon (1997) have discussed 

the medieval crosses that stand in the landscape around the church and highlighted the 

possibility that they could have been used to mark the zone of sanctuary. The zone itself 

is depicted on a sixteenth-century map, and Preston-Jones and Langdon suggest its 

boundaries followed the line of a ridge of rough grazing ground which surrounded the 

church and its immediate farmland. These churches and others like them provided 

important central places and foci for the social lives of people living in early medieval 

landscapes. 

Nevertheless, important questions remain about the scale of church foundation, and the 

ways ordinary people in Britain experienced the Christian religion. Work for the Making 

Christian Landscapes project has highlighted differences between Ireland and Britain in 

the early Christian period that relate less to the nature of churches, the fundamental 

ideology behind them and the ways they shaped the landscape around them, but more to 

their frequency and the differing political and social contexts which allowed more 

churches to be founded in Ireland (Boazman 2008; Ó Carragáin 2009). 

Bede famously wrote to Ecgberht, Archbishop of York, that ‘every’ chief nobleman of 

Anglo-Saxon Northumbria had established a minster, complaining about their laxity and 

the ability of nobles to effectively use churches to appropriate church land for their 

families. In an area like the Tyne valley, as noted above, important early churches are 

both well-documented and survive well archaeologically. Famous establishments like 

Jarrow, Wearmouth and Tynemouth are only about 10km apart; and Bywell, Corbridge 

and Hexham less than 6km from one another. Nevertheless, as in parts of Wessex like the 

valley of the Wiltshire Avon, these churches served very large areas that extended out 

from the river into the rural hinterland. Compared to Ireland, early churches here were 

still relatively thin on the ground 

It seems likely, as John Blair has suggested (2005, 75), that these differences owe much 

to the scale at which church founders were able to exercise political and social power. In 

Wessex and Northumbria powerful kings probably oversaw the foundation of fairly 

regular networks of monasteries / minsters, even where they did not create institutions 

themselves. It is interesting that in Cornwall the evidence seems to suggest the situation 

was similar to England, at least in the seventh-ninth centuries and probably also in its 

earliest phases (Turner 2006a). Whilst burial probably continued on traditional sites, it 

seems likely that important ecclesiastical communities were established at relatively few 

sites. 

In Ireland, the degree of political fragmentation meant many people could act as church 

founders; in Britain, only a relatively small number did so. Further research will enable 

us to investigate these patterns more, but also to consider what the practical effects were. 

Fewer churches presumably meant that fewer people in England had an intimate 

engagement with them, and that they visited them less often. They and their families 

might have felt less closely bonded to these Anglo-Saxon churches, especially in a 

country where political power was increasingly defined in relation to land, rather than to 

kin groups who derived their wealth from moveable assets like cattle. If churches were 

exclusively in the hands of the social elite, this might also have enabled them to control 

the mass of people’s ability to use and visit churches. In turn, there could be implications 

for the continuity of other kinds of ritual sites and ritual practice in the broader landscape. 

It might also have affected the growth of local cults. It is now important to broaden our 

239 

240



enquiry to consider the experience of churches by different types of people, and to 

compare how differences in political organisation might have affected the everyday 

experience of religion. 

6.2 Conclusions 



Here we will briefly outline some of the most significant patterns that are emerging from 

our research. 

6.2.1 The Density of Non-Ecclesiastical Burials and Ecclesiastical Sites 

A crucial aim of the project is to explore the extent to which the process of landscape 

change varied from region to region. For example, we wish to determine the extent to 

which the present diversity within and between regions – especially between the east and 

west of the country – reflects early medieval regionality or simply differential visibility 

due to the presence or absence of stone buildings and/or pre-development archaeology. 

The uniform methodology employed is allowing us to compare regions systematically for 

the first time. Regional differences in the nature of the evidence have been confirmed. 

For example, non-ecclesiastical burial in the various regions are also represented by quite 

different archaeology: ogham stones in Corcu Duibne, barrows, mounds and cemetery 

settlements in Leinster. Similarly minor ecclesiastical sites in Corcu Duibne leave clear 

archaeological traces, while those in areas such as Corbally and Faughart rarely do. Here 

instead they are more likely to remain in use and are therefore often attested in late 

documentary sources, which often allow an early origin to be postulated. 

Despite these differences, this study suggests that the underlying patterns of burial and 

settlement density and distribution are quite similar in areas which one might assume 

would be very different. When land unsuitable for permanent settlement is excluded, 

there is quite consistent density of early ecclesiastical across most areas, though the 

evidence used to deduce their early origin varies greatly from region to region. The area 

per definite/probable churches is usually 9-14km², while the area per church when 

possible examples are also included is between 7-9km². One exception is the Rathdown, 

Co. Dublin case study where Gill Boazman has shown that there was a church for every 

3km² in the core area. She has already begun to tease out the implications of this 

unusually high density. In a few other areas, such as Connemara and to a lesser extent 

Rosscarbery, Co. Cork, the density is a good deal lower than usual. We have enough case 

studies, however, to suggest that in most areas the density of churches is very high and 

241 

242





quite consistently so. This suggests that the foundation of minor ecclesiastical sites was 

based on land-holding patterns that were fairly consistent across the country. 

Because Sam Turner is applying the same methodology to areas of England (the 

Southwest and Northumbria), comparisons between England and Ireland are also now 

possible. Preliminary investigation suggests that in pre-Viking England, including 

Cornwall in the period before Anglo-Saxon colonisation, churches were far thinner on the 

ground. In many cases there seems to be 100km² or more for every church. One factor 

which seems to contribute to this contrast is that in England the foundation of churches 

(minsters) was carefully controlled by kings, whereas in Ireland a relatively diffuse social 

structure meant that more of the population were considered to be of noble stock and had 

the right to found their own ecclesiastical sites (Ó Carragáin 2009). 

6.2.2 Ecclesiastical and Secular Estates 

This is all very well in theory, but in order to determine exactly what sections of society 

were founding churches, or indeed who was living at cemetery settlements or burying 

their dead at other types of non-ecclesiastical cemeteries, it is essential insofar as 

possible, to determine who owned the land on which these sites occur. This can only be 

done through documentary research of the sort undertaken by Paul MacCotter, Anne 

Connon and others as part of this project. Reconstructing millennium-old estates is not an 

easy undertaking. While the boundaries of modern civil parishes and baronies are often of 

early medieval origin, it is not possible to reconstruct estates on the basis of a cursory 

analysis of them. This requires meticulous research of a wide range of documentary 

sources. This sort of detailed reconstruction of the subdivisions of small areas has rarely 

been attempted by historians. Very interesting patterns are beginning to emerge as the 

archaeological evidence is placed within this territorial framework. 

As the districts and estates are reconstructed, the land-use patterns within them are being 

analysed using Historic Landscape Characterisation. In the Corbally study area traces of 

high medieval open strip fields were identified in places, but while some of the townland 

boundaries may be early medieval in origin, no early medieval subdivisions of these 

townlands could be identified in the sources used for the Making Christian Landscapes 

HLC. Somewhat more potentially early fields were identified in Mag Réta, while in 

Corcu Duibne a substantial proportion of the field systems that were extant in c.1829-42 

apparently incorporated pre-modern elements including many which are probably early 

medieval. Already this HLC has begun to inform our interpretation of early medieval 

settlement patterns in the area. 

A number of ecclesiastical estates have now been delimited and their early medieval 

monuments analysed. As one might expect, some of them have a higher than average 

density of minor churches. This is true, for example, of Inis Úasal, Co. Kerry, Kilcullen, 

Co. Kildare and Faughart, Co. Louth. In the case of Inis Úasal these sites are quite evenly 

distributed across the estate and, along with the other early medieval settlements within it 

(below), they presumably served as out-farms. One is associated with a field system of 

possibly early date and also features an early medieval mill, which was probably used to 

process cereals produced on the whole estate. A possible mill-site has also been identified 

near the principal church on the ecclesiastical estate of Killashee. The minor 

ecclesiastical sites may have been run by ecclesiastical families, headed perhaps by 

married priests, or alternatively they may have been run directly by religious from the 

principal church. Killashee, Co. Kildare and Tulach Mín / Áth Cros Molaga, Co. Cork are 

examples of ecclesiastical estates that do not conform to this pattern insofar as the 

number of minor ecclesiastical sites on them is low. Instead, in the case of Killashee, 

there are a number of impressive ‘ecclesiastical’ ringforts on its borders, some of them 

multi-vallate. This should alert us to the likelihood that there was some diversity in the 

pattern of settlement on ecclesiastical estates. Presumably these large ringforts represent 

the dwellings of the more affluent lay-tenants of the estate, the individuals referred to in 

the early sources as manaig. In the estate of Inis Úasal, Co. Kerry, there was a high 

density of both ringforts/cashels as well as minor churches, and, as in Killashee, some of 

these were unusually large in internal diameter, hinting that they may be the remains of 

relatively large-scale ecclesiastical farms. Thus, it appears that the different types of 

estates we are delimiting leave distinct signatures in the archaeological record. 

243 

244





On secular and royal estates minor ecclesiastical sites are generally not quite as common, 

but they are densely distributed nonetheless. Many of these are probably proprietary 

churches – possessions of individual secular families – of the sort frequently mentioned 

in the genealogies but which are rarely identifiable in the documentary sources. We have 

found that, in the absence of documentary evidence, place-names sometimes strongly 

suggest that a church was owned by a particular family. In any case, as long as land can 

be identified as secular property, it is probably safe to assume that many of the churches 

on it were proprietary in nature. The many examples of this identified in our case studies 

illustrate the important role that minor proprietors played in the development of the early 

medieval Church at a local level. 

proportion of non-ecclesiastical examples are on significant early medieval boundaries. 

In the Southern Uí Fáeláin area possible non-ecclesiastical burials are represented 

primarily by barrows, ring-ditches and mounds, many of which are late prehistoric in date 

but some of which were made or reused during the early medieval period. In stark 

contrast to ecclesiastical sites in the area, virtually all possible examples are on the 

boundaries of the kingdom of Uí Fáeláin. Most of them occur in ones or twos, but there is 

a great concentration in the townlands of Greenhills, Brownstown, Corbally and Silliot 

Hill. The excavations carried out by Aegis Archaeology in Corbally have augmented the 

number of these burials considerably and have confirmed that some of them are early 

medieval in date; some were apparently in use as late as the ninth or tenth century. 

Turning to the landscape context of settlements, we have found that compared to ringforts 

and cashels ecclesiastical sites are found in a wide range of locations – lowland as well as 

upland – reflecting their more diverse functions. One popular theory about the location of 

Irish ecclesiastical sites is that they tend to be sited on boundaries. We have found several 

instances of this, for example in the Fig Maige and Galway case studies discussed above. 

Nevertheless, it does not seem to have been as common as is often assumed. In most 

areas including Corcu Duibne and Southern Uí Fáeláin churches are more likely to be 

sited near the centre of their estates. There are no major territorial divisions within the 

Corcu Duibne case studies, but the Southern Uí Fáeláin case study area is defined on 

most sides by the boundary of the kingdom of Uí Fáeláin and it is notable that virtually 

no ecclesiastical sites occur on this boundary. In the Corcu Duibne core case studies (as 

distinct from the kingdom as a whole), it is also notable that the ogham stones that are not 

sited on boundaries tend to be those at ecclesiastical sites. 

6.2.3 Non-Ecclesiastical Burials 

This brings us to the landscape context of non-ecclesiastical burials. The Making 

Christian Landscapes project has found strong evidence to support the theory that nonecclesiastical 

burials tend to be sited on boundaries. One class of non-ecclesiastical burial 

does not conform to this pattern: in our case studies cemetery settlements do not occur on 

or near boundaries. Preliminary analysis of Iveragh ogham stones shows that a high 

Documentary research strongly suggests that Silliot Hill and Brownstown are the site of 

the important Uí Fáeláin oenach/assembly site of Carmun Liphi, which was known in the 

early sources as one of the seven great burial grounds of Ireland ‘before the period of 

belief.’ Unexpectedly, there is even clearer documentary evidence that the burials in the 

adjoining townlands of Corbally and Greenhills, which probably represent an ‘over-spill’ 

of the Carmun Liphi complex into the adjoining district, were on an episcopal estate of 

Kildare, probably by the seventh century. Some cemetery settlements in the Faughart, 

Rathdown and Mag Réta case studies also appear to be on ecclesiastical land. This 

implies that, even during the Viking Age, some ecclesiastics did not strongly object to 

‘non-ecclesiastical’ cemeteries and had no particular fears for the souls of those buried in 

them. It undermines the common assumption (e.g. Etchingham 2006, 88) that such 

cemeteries were outside the bounds of ecclesiastical jurisdiction. 

When considering such sites, we should be careful not to project high medieval notions 

of ‘correct’ Christian burial into the early medieval period when the relationship between 

burial and belief was much more fluid. The concept of the Christian cemetery in which 

the whole community was buried within a formally consecrated area around a church 

developed slowly across Europe and the process was not complete until at least the tenth 

century (Ó Carragáin 2003b, 146-47). For most of the pre-Viking period ecclesiastical 

authorities were not too concerned about where the bulk of the Christian population was 

245 

246





buried. Even when, in the eighth century, reservations begin to be expressed about burial 

at non-ecclesiastical cemeteries, it cannot be assumed that these were shared by all 

clerics. In these pre-Gregorian reform times there was no overarching ecclesiastical 

hierarchy to ensure uniformity of practice when it came to such matters. While significant 

familiae of churches existed, many of these have left us with little in the way of relevant 

documents, and in any case many minor churches were not properly integrated into any 

such network (below). The surviving late seventh- and eighth-century documents indicate 

that even major sites like Iona and Armagh still considered burial in non-ecclesiastical 

cemeteries acceptable. The most telling hagiographical episode is in Adomnán’s Life of 

Columba in which the saint baptises an old man and is present when his companions bury 

him under a cairn of stones far from a church site (Sharpe 1995, 1.27; O’Brien 1992, 134- 

35). If this paragon of Christian orthodoxy could sanction such a burial, then it is not 

difficult for us to imagine rustic priests from minor churches performing burial liturgies 

at various kinds of non-ecclesiastical cemetery. According to the Collectio Canonum 

Hibernensis (c.716-725: Charles-Edwards 2000, 265, 421) those who are not buried with 

their ancestors are accursed. Monks and clerics are of course an exception to this rule, but 

even they are reminded of their duty to look after the graves of their ancestors in other 

(presumably non-ecclesiastical) cemeteries. Another canon in the same collection 

discourages burial among pagans (‘evil persons’) and encourages instead burial at church 

sites (‘desert places’) (O’Brien 1992; 2008; Wasserschleben 1885 § 1.3, 8.2, 51.2). But 

even this canon stops short of damning those buried with pagans. Thus, as Etchingham 

(2006, 87) recognised, even in the eighth century ecclesiastics do not seem to have been 

quite as adamant about the importance of churchyard burial as some authors have implied 

in the past. A similar picture is evident in France where large numbers of nonecclesiastical 

cemeteries have been excavated in recent years. When Jonas of Orléans 

mentions such cemeteries in the ninth century it is not to condemn their existence but 

rather to complain that some of the people buried in them did not pay their dues to the 

local church; we can take it from this that many of the others had (Treffort 1996, 168-70). 

Another clear indication that unenclosed cemeteries without church buildings were not 

considered to be intrinsically pagan is the fact that a number of examples occur very near 

major ecclesiastical sites. On Inishmurray the satellite cemetery of Relickoran was 

established on the periphery of the island, away from the monastic cemetery, probably 

soon after the foundation of the monastery. It was apparently unenclosed until the tenth 

or eleventh century, when it was monumentalised by the addition of a drystone enclosure, 

paving, cross-inscribed pillar and two outdoor altars. It remained in use until the 

seventeenth century (O’Sullivan and Ó Carragáin 2008, 293-97). Probably it was for 

individuals from one or more families closely associated with the monastery but who 

were not members of the community. Interestingly the cemetery was dedicated to a 

disciple of Columba called Odrán. According to hagiography, on Iona his role was to 

petition Columba for the salvation of secular individuals buried in a satellite cemetery 

similar to that on Inishmurray. The sixth- to twelfth-century unenclosed cemetery at 

Mount Gamble near the monastery of Swords, Co. Dublin, may have had a similar 

function (O’Donovan 2006). Now the estate reconstruction carried out as part of the 

Making Christian Landscapes project has shown that even non-ecclesiastical burials sited 

some distance from church sites were not necessarily outside the realms of ecclesiastical 

jurisdiction. Thus, non-ecclesiastical burial was not primarily an expression of a drawn 

out process of conversion, but rather an expression of the fact that people’s ideas about 

what it meant to be Christian changed considerably over time. 

6.2.4 Final Remarks 

This project is identifying significant new patterns in the archaeological and documentary 

records that are illuminating various aspects of the process of Making Christian 

Landscapes in Ireland and elsewhere. This is a vindication of our decision to focus on 

making comparisons between small areas as none of these patterns would have become 

apparent if we had chosen to look at larger areas is less detail. For example it would not 

be possible to properly assess the density of ecclesiastical sites in a large area, because of 

the amount of research involved, both archaeological and historical. Nor would it be 

possible to reconstruct the early medieval territories to which these churches, and other 

early medieval sites belonged, or to assess the land-use patterns within those territories 

using HLC. The GIS is allowing us to make further, fine-grained comparisons between 

ecclesiastical estates and secular estates within and between regions. 

247 

248





We are also investigating Viking Age and high medieval changes to the ecclesiastical 

network, to determine to what extent they are responsible for the marked variation in 

church density in different regions, for our research suggests that ecclesiastical sites were 

more evenly spread at an earlier date. It was suggested above that the high density of 

ecclesiastical sites in pre-Viking Ireland primarily reflects diffuse power structures. One 

possibility that we are considering is that, in the Viking Age, as the roles of churches 

evolved, there was an increasingly close correlation between church density and 

population density. In this regard it is interesting that the greatest density of community 

churches in Viking Age England is in the highly populated south and east (Blair 2005, 

418-19). If case studies such as Corcu Duibne, Mag Réta and Southern Uí Fáeláin are any 

indication, there is a negative correlation between the number of ecclesiastical sites that 

were largely abandoned during the early or high medieval periods and the degree to 

which an area was colonised by the Anglo-Normans. This may be partly because 

colonisation meant townland names (e.g. cill names) were more likely to be changed and 

memories of abandoned sites forgotten; but it is also possible that in heavily colonised 

areas minor sites were more likely to remain in use due to the rise in population. 

So far this discussion has focused upon general patterns in the density and location of 

sites and possible correlations between these patterns and the evolving structures of early 

medieval society. In this regard, the emphasis has been ‘top down’ rather than ‘bottom 

up.’ As our research continues, we hope to refine the model that is emerging from this 

approach. We are also, however, approaching the process of Making Christian 

Landscapes from a different perspective: that of the people whose lives it effected so 

profoundly. The many excavations and rich field archaeology in our chosen case studies 

give us a firm platform upon which to write person-centred discussions of particular sites 

and landscapes. Such discussions will form an important component of future 

publications arising from the Making Christian Landscapes project. In particular, we are 

attempting to distinguish the varying experiences of people of different social status 

ranging from royal aristocracies, to local elites to ordinary people. We are particularly 

excited to have gathered a wealth of information to illuminate the experiences of this last, 

relatively neglected group. We are addressing issues such as the proximity of ordinary 

people to ecclesiastical sites, cemetery settlements and other burial grounds; their 

evolving attitudes to burial and their ancestors; the role of magic and superstition in 

shaping their world view and its fluid relationship with more ‘orthodox’ religious beliefs 

and practices; the experience of ordinary people who lived on ecclesiastical estates with 

clerical landlords versus those on secular estates; and the effects of the process of Making 

Christian Landscapes on constructions of gender over the course of the early medieval 

period. In considering the local elite, it will be particularly interesting to explore the 

implications of the fact that in Ireland such individuals, and even individuals of lesser 

status, were in a position to found their own churches, though this does not appear to 

have been so in many parts of Britain. An important issue is the extent to which this 

limited the power of royal aristocracies to control the process of Making Christian 

Landscapes within their kingdoms, and their strategies for augmenting that control, 

especially as expressed in the patronage of important sites in the form of high crosses 

and, later, stone churches and round towers (e.g. Ó Carragáin 2010, Chapter 4). 

Let us conclude by thanking Heritage Council for its generous funding of the Making 

Christian Landscapes project. The INSTAR programme has enabled us to establish 

collaborations and undertake research which would otherwise have been very difficult to 

realise. While the INSTAR-funded phase of the project is now finished, the work will 

continue over the next two years, some of it supported by scholarships from the IRCHSS. 

We hope that the various publications arising from the project will make a substantial 

contribution to the subject. 

249 

250





Bibliography 

Unpublished Manuscript Sources 

NAI Record Commissioners Calendar of Plea Rolls, volumes 1–13. 

NAI Record Commissioners Calendar of Memoranda Rolls, volumes 1, 6, 11. 

Genealogical Office MSS 190-2. 

Primary Sources 

Abrams, L. 2010. Conversion and the church in Viking Age Ireland. In J. Sheehan and 

D. Ó Corráin (eds) The Viking Age. Ireland and the West. Dublin. 

Austin, D. 2007. Characterisation or caricature? Concluding discussion. Landscapes 8.2, 

92-105. 

Begley, J. 1906. The Diocese of Limerick Ancient and Medieval. Dublin. 

Blair, J. 2005. The Church in Anglo-Saxon Society. Oxford. 

Blair, J. 2006. The minsters of the Thames. In J. Blair and B. Golding (eds) The Cloister 

and the World: Essays in Medieval History in Honour of Barbara Harvey, 5-28. 

Oxford. 

Boazman, G. 2006. Cork and Cornwall: A comparative study of the impact of 

Christianity on settlement patterns, 450-800 AD. Unpublished MA thesis, 

University College Cork. 

Boazman, G. 2008a. Cork and Cornwall: Settlement patterns and social organization 

during the establishment of Christianity. AD 450-800. Journal of Irish 

Archaeology 17, 113-137. 

Boazman, G. 2008b. The study area of North Louth. In T. Ó Carragáin et al. Making 

Christian Landscapes: Settlement, Society and Regionality in Early Medieval 

Ireland. Report for the Heritage Council on Phase 1: 01 June – 05 December 

2008. 

Boazman, G. 2009. The study area of the half-barony of Rathdown. In T. Ó Carragáin et 

al. Making Christian Landscapes: Settlement, Society and Regionality in Early 

Medieval Ireland. Report for the Heritage Council on Phase 2: 01 June – 04 

December 2009. 

Breslin P. 1996. Getting to Know ArcView GIS. California. 

Brooks, E. St. J. 1951. The de Ridelesfords. Journal of the Royal Society of Irish 

Antiquaries 81, 115-138. 

Buckley, V. and Sweetnam, P.D. 1991. Archaeological Inventory of County Louth. 

Dublin. 

Burke, M. 2006. Society and settlement on the Drogheda estate in County Kildare, 1750- 

1840. In W. Nolan and T. McGrath (eds) Kildare History and Society, 349-386. 

Dublin. 

Burrough, P.A. and McDonnell, R.A. 1998. Principles of Geographical Information 

Systems. New York. 

Byrne, F.J. 2001. Irish kings and high kings. Dublin. 

251 

252





Carrigan, W. 1905. History and Antiquities of the Diocese of Ossory. Dublin. 

Carroll, J. 1998. The Old Orchard Inn Rathfarnham. Medieval Archaeology 48, 161. 

Coyne, F. 2010. Corbally, Co. Kildare: an early medieval cemetery and settlement in 

context. In C. Corlett and M. Potterton (eds) Death and burial in early medieval 

Ireland in light of recent excavation. Bray. 

Carroll, M.P. 1999. Holy wells and popular Catholic devotion. Baltimore. 

Conway, M. 1999. First findings at Cabinteely. Dublin. 

Carver, M., 2008. Portmohomack: Monastery of the Picts. Edinburgh. 

Caulfield, S. 1983. The Neolithic settlement of North Connaught. In T. Reeves-Smith and 

F. Hammond (eds) Landscape Archaeology in Ireland, 195-216. Oxford. 

Charles-Edwards, T.M. 2000. Early Christian Ireland. Cambridge. 

Clinton, M. and Stout, F. Two souterrains and an enclosure at Killally, Co Louth. 

Journal of the County Louth Archaeological and Historical Society 24.1, 129- 

134. 

Codd, E.F. 1970. A relational model of data for large shared data banks. Communications 

of the ACM 13.6, 377-387. 

Council of Europe 2000. The European Landscape Convention. Florence, 20.X.2000. 

Published online at : 

http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/cultureheritage/heritage/Landscape/default_en.asp. 

Crawford, B. (ed.) 1996. Scotland in Dark Age Britain. St Andrews. 

Cramp, R., 2005. Wearmouth and Jarrow Monastic Sites, Vol. 1. London. 

Cramp, R., 2006. Wearmouth and Jarrow Monastic Sites, Vol. 2. London. 

Cronin, R. 1998. Late high crosses in Munster: tradition and novelty in twelfth century 

Irish art. In J. Sheehan and M. Monk (eds) Early Medieval Munster, 125-137. 

Cork. 

Colgan, J. (1592-1698) and Ó Riain, P. (ed.) 1997. Trias Thaumaturga. Dublin. 

Comber, M. 2006. Ringforts and the settlement landscape of the Burren in the first 

millennium AD: Year 2 - A focused landscape survey. Unpublished report for the 

Heritage Council. 

Darvill, T., Gerrard, C. and Startin, B. 1993. Identifying and protecting historic 

landscapes. Antiquity 67, 563-574. 

Davies, O. 1939. Excavations at Lissachiggel. Journal of the County Louth 

Archaeological and Historical Society 9, 209-243. 

Connon, A. 2009. An Historical Overview of the Four Kingdoms Involved in the Na 

Clanna Study Area. In T. Ó Carragáin et al. Making Christian Landscapes: 

Settlement, Society and Regionality in Early Medieval Ireland, 311-330. Report 

for the Heritage Council on Phase 2: 01 June – 04 December 2009. 

Davies, W. 1996. Protected space in Britain and Ireland in the Middle Ages. In B.E 

Crawford (ed.) Scotland in Dark Age Britain, 1-19. Aberdeen. 

Dillon, M. 1962. Lebor na Cert. London. 

253 

254





Doherty, C. 2000. Cluáin Dolcain: a brief note. In A. Smyth (ed.) Seanchas: essays in 

honour of Francis J Byrne, 182-88. Dublin. 

Downham, C. 1994. The historical importance of Viking-Age Waterford. Journal of 

Celtic Studies 4, 71-96. 

Edwards, K.J., Hamond, F.W. and Simm, A. 1983. The medieval settlement of Newcastle 

Lyons, Co. Dublin: an interdisciplinary approach. Proceedings of the Royal Irish 

Academy 83C, 351-76. 

Environmental Resource Management and ERA-Maptec Ltd 2000. Pilot Study on 

Landscape Characterisation in County Clare. Kilkenny. 

Esposito, M. 1920. The Sources of Conchubranus’ Life of Saint Moneena. English 

Historical Review 35, 71-8. 

Etchingham, C. 1994. Evidence of Scandinavian settlement in Wicklow. In K. Hannigan 

and W. Nolan (eds) Wicklow: History and Society, 113-138. Dublin. 

Fairclough, G. 2003. The long chain: archaeology, historical landscape characterization 

and time depth in the landscape. In H. Palang and G. Fry (eds) Landscape 

Interfaces. Cultural Heritage in Changing Landscapes, 295-318. Dordrecht. 

Fairclough, G. 2008. A New Landscape for Cultural Heritage Management: 

Characterisation as a Management Tool. In L. Lozny (ed.) Landscapes Under 

Pressure, 55-74. New York. 

Feehan, J. 1999. Laois: an overview of the county as a place where history happened. In 

P. Lane and W Nolan (eds.) Laois: History and Society, 1-25. Dublin. 

Finch, J. 2007. ‘Wider famed countries’: Historic Landscape Characterisation in the 

Midland Shires. Landscapes 8.2, 50-63. 

Flanagan, D. 1994. The Christian impact on early Ireland: placenames evidence. In P. 

Ní Chatháin and M Richter (eds), Ireland and Europe: the early church, 25-51. 

Stuttgart. 

Etchingham, C. 1999. Church Organisation in Ireland A.D. 650 – 1000. Maynooth 

Etchingham, C. 2006. Pastoral provision in the first millennium: a two-tier service? In E. 

Fitzpatrick and R. Gillespie (eds) The Parish in medieval and early modern 

Ireland, 79-90. Dublin. 

Fleming, A. and Ralph, N. 1982. Medieval settlement and land use on Holne Moor, 

Dartmoor: the landscape evidence. Medieval Archaeology 26, 101-137. 

Fowler, P.J. 1966-67. Ridge and Furrow cultivation at Cush, Co. Limerick. North 

Munster Antiquarian Journal 10, 69-71. 

Fairclough, G.J., Lambrick, G. and McNab, A. (eds) 1999. Yesterday’s World, 

Tomorrow’s Landscape: the English Heritage Landscape Project 1992-94. 

London. 

Fairclough, G., Rippon, S. and Bull, D. (eds) 2002. Europe's cultural landscape: 

archaeologists and the management of change. Brussels. 

Fowler, P. 2002. Farming in the First Millennium AD: British Agriculture between Julius 

Caesar and William the Conqueror. Cambridge. 

Fox, H. 1973. Outfield cultivation in Devon and Cornwall: a reinterpretation. In M. 

Havinden (ed.) Husbandry and Marketing in the South West, 1500-1800, 19-38. 

Exeter. 

255 

256





Fredengren, C. 2002. Crannogs. Bray. 

Gilbert, J. T. (ed.) 1854. History of the City of Dublin. Dublin. 

Gilbert, J.T. (ed.) 1884. Chartularies of St Mary’s Abbey. London. 

Hayes, A. 2004. An archaeological investigation of a souterrain at Tateetra, Dundalk, 

Co.Louth. In J. O’ Sullivan and M. Stanley (eds) Recent discoveries on National 

Road Schemes : NRA Monograph Series. Bray. 

Healy, P. 2004. Archaeology, Early Christian remains and local histories: Paddy 

Healy’s Dublin. Dublin. 

Gilbert, J. T. (ed.) 1886. Crede Mihi. Dublin. 

Gilbert, J.T. (ed.) 1889. Register of the Abbey of St Thomas, Dublin. London. 

Gilchrist, R. 1995. Contemplation and Action: The Other Monasticism. London. 

Healy, P. 2009. Pre-Norman Grave-slabs and Cross-inscribed stones in the Dublin 

Region. Dublin. 

Hedeager, L. 1994. Warrior economy and trading economy in Viking Age Scandinavia. 

Journal of European Archaeology 2.1, 130-148. 

Gosling, P. 1993. Archaeological Inventory of County Galway: Volume 1. Dublin. 

Hennessy, W. (ed.) 1866. Chronicum Scotorum. London. 

Gowen, M. 1992. Excavation of two souterrain complexes at Marshes Upper, Dundalk, 

Co.Louth. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 92C, 55-121. 

Hennessy, W. and McCarthy, B. (eds) 1887-1901. Annala Uladh: Annals of Ulster in 

Irish and English. Dublin. 

Hall, D., Hennessy, M. and O‘Keeffe, T. 1985. Medieval agriculture and settlement in 

Oughterward and Castlewarden, Co. Kildare. Irish Geography 18, 16-25. 

Hall, T. 2009. Identifying British Christian sites in western Wessex. In N. Edwards (ed.) 

The Archaeology of the Early Medieval Celtic Churches, 154-171. Leeds. 

Harte, A. 2002. The field systems and archaeological landscape at Caherlehillan, Co. 

Kerry: a GIS approach. Unpublished M.A. dissertation, University College Cork. 

Hayden, A. 1994. Coarha More, Valentia Island: Bronze Age settlement. In I. Bennett 

(ed.) Excavations 1993, 42–3. Bray. 

Henry, F. 1957. Early monasteries, beehive huts, and drystone houses in the 

neighbourhood of Caherciveen and Waterville, Co. Kerry. Proceedings of the 

Royal Irish Academy 58, 45-166. 

Herbert, M. 2004. Observations on the Life of Molaga. In J. Carey, M.Herbert and K. 

Murray (eds) Cín Chille Cúile, 127-40. Aberystwyth. 

Heritage Council 2007. A Review of Research Needs in Irish Archaeology. Report 

prepared by The Heritage Council for the Minister for the Environment, Heritage 

and Local Government. Kilkenny. 

Herring, P. and Johnson, N. 1997. Historic landscape character mapping in Cornwall. In 

K. Barker and T. Darvill (eds) Making English Landscapes, 70-91. Oxford. 

257 

258





Herring, P. 1998. Cornwall’s Historic Landscape: Presenting a Method of Historic 

Landscape Character Assessment. Truro. 

Herring, P. 2007. Historic Landscape Characterisation in an ever-changing Cornwall. 

Landscapes 8.2, 15-27. 

Holland, M. 2000. Dublin and the reform of the Irish church in the eleventh and twelfth 

centuries. Peritia 14, 111-160. 

Jones, C. and Walsh, P. 1996. Recent discoveries on Roughan Hill, County Clare. 

Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries 126, 86-107. 

Jones, C. 2004. The Burren and the Aran Islands - Exploring the Archaeology. Cork. 

Lambrick, G. 2010. Historic Landscape Characterisation in Ireland: Policy and Best 

Practice Guidance. Published online by the Heritage Council at: 

http://www.heritagecouncil.ie/fileadmin/user_upload/Publications/Archaeology/Ir 

ish_HLC_Guidelines.pdf. 

Hooke, D. 1994. Pre-Conquest Charter-Bounds of Devon and Cornwall. Woodbridge. 

Hull, G and Comber, M. 2008. Caherconnell, Co. Clare, and cashel chronology. 

Archaeology Ireland 22.4, 30-34. 

Keeley, V.J. 1991. Archaeological Excavation of a burial ground, Greenhills, townland. 

Journal of the Kildare Archaeological Society 17, 180-201. 

Lawlor, H.J. 1917. The genesis of the Diocese of Clogher. Journal of the County Louth 

Archaeological and Historical Society 4.2, 129-153. 

Lennon, A.M. 2009. Derrinsallagh 3, Co. Laois. Unpublished report prepared by ACS 

Ltd. 

Mac Airt, S. (ed.) 1951. The Annals of Inisfallen. Dublin. 

Kelly, E.P. and Mass, J. 1999. The Vikings and the kingdom of Laois. In P.G. Lane and 

W. Nolan (eds.) Laois History and Society: interdisciplinary essays on the history 

of an Irish county, 123-60. Dublin. 

. 

Kelly, F. 1997. Early Irish Farming. Dublin. 

MacCormick, F. and Crone, F. 2000. A destroyed enclosure at Site 5, Marshes Upper, 

Co Louth. Journal of the County Louth Archaeological and Historical Society 

24.4, 553-562. 

MacCotter, P. 2004. Colmán of Cloyne: A Study. Dublin. 

Kershaw, P. 2000. The Alfred-Guthrum Treaty: scripting accommodation and interaction 

in Viking-Age England. In D. Hadley and J. Richards (eds) Cultures in Contact. 

Scandinavian settlement in England, 44-64. Turnhout. 

MacCotter, P. 2006. The Rise of Meic Carthaig and the Political Geography of 

Desmuma. Journal of the Cork Historical and Archaeological Society 111, 59– 

76. 

Kilroe, J.R. 1907. A description of the soil geology of Ireland. Based on geological maps 

and records, with notes on climate. Dublin. 

MacCotter, P. 2008. Medieval Ireland: territorial, political and economic divisions. 

Dublin. 

259 

260





MacCotter, P. 2009. The kingdom of Corcu Duibne and its Church. In T. Ó Carragáin et 

al. Making Christian Landscapes: Settlement, Society and Regionality in Early 

Medieval Ireland, 36-91. Report for the Heritage Council on Phase 2: 01 June – 

04 December 2009. 

MacCotter, P. Forthcoming. The lands of the medieval Irish Church. 

MacCotter, P. and Nicholls, K.W. (eds) 1996. The Pipe Roll of Cloyne: Rotulus Pipae 

Clonensis. Cloyne. 

Mac Íomhair, D. 1962. The Boundaries of Fir Rois. Journal of the County Louth 


Mac Íomhair, D. 1970. The Lordship of Ballymascanlan. Journal of the County Louth 


Miket, R. 1974. ‘Undoubted Anglian burials’ from Hepple, Northumberland. 

Archaeologia Aeliana 2, 275-280. 

Mills, J. 1894. The Norman Settlement in Leinster. The cantreds near Dublin. Journal 

of the Royal Society of Irish Antiquaries 24, 161-75. 

Mitchell, F. 1987. Archaeology and environment in early Dublin. Medieval Dublin 

Excavations 1962-81. Dublin. 

Mitchell, F. 1989. Man and Environment in Valentia Island. Dublin. 

Mulchrone, K. (ed.) 1937. Facsimiles in collotype of Irish manuscripts ii, The Book of 

Lecan. Dublin. 

Mulchrone, K. 1939. Bethu Phátraic: the Tripartite Life of Patrick. Dublin. 

Mac Neill, C. 1950. Calendar of Archbishop Alen’s Register 1172-1534. Dublin. 

Mac Shamhráin, A. 1996. Church and Polity in Pre-Norman Ireland: the case of 

Glendalough. Maynooth. 

Manning, C. 1985. Archaeological Excavations at two church sites on Inishmore, Aran 

Islands. Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries 115, 96-120. 

McCarthy, B. 2007. Asceticism in Early Medieval Ireland: an archaeological perspective. 

Unpublished M.A. dissertation, University College Cork. 

Mullins, G. 2007. Pagan or Christian? Excavation of a hilltop cemetery at Cross, Co. 

Galway. In J. O’Sullivan and M. Stanley (eds) New Routes to the Past - 

Archaeology and the National Roads Authority Monograph Series No. 4. Dublin. 

Newman, C. 1997. Tara: An Archaeological Survey. Dublin. 

Nicholls, K.W. 1985. The charter of John, lord of Ireland, in favour of the Cistercian 

abbey of Baltinglas. Peritia 4, 187-206. 

Nicholls, K. W. 1986. Three Topopgraphical Notes. Peritia 5, 411-2. 

McCarthy, B. 2009. The Aran Islands. In T. Ó Carragáin et al. Making Christian 

Landscapes: Settlement, Society and Regionality in Early Medieval Ireland. 

Report for the Heritage Council on Phase 1: 01 June – 05 December 2008. 

Nicholls, K.W. 2003. Gaelic and Gaelicized Ireland in the Middle Ages. Dublin. 

Ní Ghabhláin, S. 1995. Church, Parish and Polity: The Medieval Diocese of Kilfenora, 

Ireland. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of California. 

261 

262





O’Brien, E.1992. Pagan and Christian burial during the first millenium AD. In N. 

Edwards and A. Lane (eds) The Early Church in Wales and the West, 130-137. 

Oxford. 

O’Brien, E. 2003. Burial practices in Ireland, first-seventh centuries AD. In J. Downes 

and A. Ritchie (eds) Sea Change: Orkney and northern Europe in the Later Iron 

Age AD 300-800, 62-72. Angus. 

O’Brien, M. 1976. Corpus Genealogiarum Hiberniae. Dublin. 

O’Brien, W. 2009. Local Worlds: Early Settlement Landscapes and Upland Farming In 

South-West Ireland. Cork. 

Ó Carragáin, T. 2005. Habitual masonry styles and the local organization of church 

building in early medieval Ireland. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 

105C, 99-149. 

Ó Carragáin, T. 2006. Church buildings and pastoral care in early medieval Ireland. In E. 

FitzPatrick and R. Gillespie (eds) The Parish in Medieval and Post-Medieval 

Ireland, 91-123. Dublin. 

Ó Carragáin 2009. Cemetery settlements and local churches in pre-Viking Ireland in light 

of comparisons with England and Wales. In J. Graham-Campbell and M. Ryan 

(eds) Irish/Anglo-Saxon Relations before the Vikings, 239-61. Oxford. 

Ó Carragáin, T. 2010. Churches in early medieval Ireland. Newhaven. 

Ó Buachalla, L. 1949-1950. The Placenames of North East Cork. Journal of the Cork 

Historical and Archaeological Society 54, 31–4, 88–91; 55, 46–9, 91–95. 

Ó Buachalla, L. 1966-7. An Early Fourteenth-Century Placename List for Anglo-Norman 

Cork. Dinnseanchas 2, 1–12, 39–50, 61–7. 

Ó Carragáin, T. 2002. Pre-Romanesque Churches in Ireland: interpreting archaeological 

regionalisms. Unpublished PhD thesis, University College Cork. 

Ó Carragáin, T. 2003a. A Landscape Converted: Archaeology and early Church 

organization on Iveragh and Dingle, Ireland. In M. Carver (ed.) The Cross Goes 

North: Processes of Conversion in Northern Europe AD 300-1300, 127-52. 

Suffolk. 

Ó Carragáin, T. et al. 2008. Making Christian Landscapes: Settlement, Society and 

Regionality in Early Medieval Ireland. Report for the Heritage Council on Phase 

1: 01 June – 05 December 2008. 

Ó Carragáin, T. et al.2009. Making Christian Landscapes: Settlement, Society and 

Regionality in Early Medieval Ireland. Report for the Heritage Council on Phase 

2: 01 June – 04 December 2009. 

Ó Cíobháin, B. 2009. The early ecclesiastical toponymy of Uíbh Ráthach. In J. Sheehan 

and J. Crowley (eds) The Iveragh Peninsula: a cultural atlas of the Ring of Kerry, 

93-95. Cork. 

O’ Connor, L. 1966. Excavations at Faughart Upper. Journal of the County Louth 


Ó Carragáin, T. 2003b. The architectural setting of the cult of relics in early medieval 

Ireland. Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland 133, 130-76. 

O’ Conor, K. 1998. The Archaeology of Medieval Rural Settlement in Ireland. Dublin. 

263 

264





Ó Corráin, D. 1983. Some legal references to fences and fencing in early historic Ireland. 

In T. Reeves-Smyth and F. Hammond (eds) Landscape Archaeology in Ireland, 

247-252. Oxford. 

Ó Corráin, D. 1998a. Viking Ireland: Afterthoughts. In H. Clarke, M. Ní Mhaonaigh and 

R. Ó Floinn (eds) Ireland and Scandinavia in the early Viking Age, 422-429. 

Dublin. 

O’ Donovan E. 2006. Mount Gamble, Co. Dublin. In I. Bennett (ed.) Excavations 2003: 

summary accounts of archaeological excavations in Ireland, 181-82. Dublin. 

O’Neill, J. 2005. Excavation of pre-Norman structures on the site of an enclosed early 

Christian cemetery at Cherrywood, County Dublin. Medieval Dublin 8, 66-88. 

O‘Neill, T. 2009a. Parknahown 5, Co. Laois. Unpublished report prepared by ACS Ltd. 

O‘Neill, T. 2009b. Parknahown 2, Co. Laois. Unpublished report prepared by ACS Ltd. 

O‘Neill, T. 2009c. Parknahown 3, Co. Laois. Unpublished report prepared by ACS Ltd. 

Ó Riain, P. 1972. Boundary association in early Irish society. Studia Celtica 7, 12–29. 

O’ Donovan, J. (ed.) 1856. The Annals of the Kingdom of Ireland by the Four Masters 

from the earliest period to the year 1616. Dublin. 

Ó Riain, P. (ed.) 1977. Traces of Lug in early Irish hagiographical tradition. Zeitschrift 

für Celtische Philologie 36, 138-56. 

Ó hInnse, S. (ed.) 1947. Miscellaneous Irish Annals. Dublin. 

Okasha, E. 1993. Corpus of early Christian inscribed stones of south-west Britain. 

Leicester. 

O’Keeffe, J.G. 1904. Colman mac Duach and Guaire. Ériu 1, 43-48. 

O’Keeffe, J.G. 1926-8. The ancient territory of Fermoy. Ériu 10, 170–89. 

O’Keeffe, J.G. 1931. Betha Molaga. In J. Fraser, P. Grosjean and J. G. O'Keeffe (eds) 

Irish texts 3, 1-8, 11-22. London. 

O’Keeffe, T. 2000. Medieval Ireland: an archaeology. Stroud. 

Olson, L. 1989. Early Monasteries in Cornwall. Woodbridge. 

Ó Murchadha, D. 2002. Carman, site of Óenach Carmain: a proposed location. Éigse 33, 

57–70. 

Ó Riain, P. 1978. Cath Almaine. Dublin. 

Ó Riain, P. 1985. Corpus Genealogiarum Sanctorum Hiberniae. Dublin. 

Ó Ríordáin, S.P. 1940. Excavations at Cush, Co. Limerick (1934 and 1935). Proceedings 

of the Royal Irish Academy 45C, 83-182. 

Ó Ríordáin, S.P. 1949. Lough Gur Excavations: Carrig Aille and the ‘Spectacles’. 

Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 52C, 39-112. 

O‘Sullivan, A. and Harney, L. 2008. Early Medieval Archaeology Project, investigating 

the character of early medieval archaeological excavations 1970-2002. 

Unpublished Report for the Heritage Council, University College Dublin. 

O‘Sullivan, J. and Ó Carragáin, T. 2008. Inishmurray. Monks and Pilgrims in an Atlantic 

Landscape. Cork. 

265 

266





O'Sullivan, M. and Downey, L. 2008. Post-Medieval Fieldscapes—Part 3: Field 

Enclosure. Archaeology Ireland 22.4, 34-37. 

Rynne, E. 1959. Souterrain at Donaghmore, Co. Louth. Journal of the County Louth 


Otway-Ruthven, J. 1961. The medieval churchlands of Co. Dublin. In J.A. Watt, J.B. 

Morrall and F.X. Martin (eds) Medieval Studies presented to Aubrey Gwynn S.J., 

54-73. Dublin. 

Petts, D., 2006. Shared Visions. The North East Regional Research Framework for the 

Historic Environment. Durham. 

Plummer, C. (ed. and trans.) 1925. Irish Litanies: text and translation. London. 

Power, P. (ed.) 1932. Crichad an Chaoilli being the Topography of Ancient Fermoy. 

Dublin. 

Preston-Jones, A. 1984.The excavation of a long-cist cemetery at. Carnanton, St 

Mawgan, 1943. Cornish Archaeology 23, 157–178. 

Rynne, E. 1991. Dún Aonghasa: Fort or Temple? In B. Ó hEithir and R. Ó hEithir (eds) 

An Aran Reader. Dublin. 

Scott, G.D. 1913. The Stones of Bray. Dublin. 

Scull, C. and Harding, A. 1990. Two early medieval cemeteries at Milfield, 

Northumberland. Durham Archaeoogical Journal 6, 1-29. 

Sharpe, R. 1995. Adomnán’s Life of Columba. London. 

Sheehan, J. 2004. Social and economic integration in Viking-Age Ireland: the evidence 

of the hoards. In J. Hines, A. Lane and M. Redknapp (eds) Land, Sea and Home: 

Proceedings of a conference eon Viking period settlement, at Cardiff, July 2001, 

177-188. Leeds. 

Preston-Jones, A. and Langdon, A. 1997. St Buryan crosses. Cornish Archaeology 36, 

107-128. 

Sheehan, J. 2009. Early Medieval Iveragh, AD 400-1200. In J. Sheehan and J. Crowley 

(eds) The Iveragh Peninsula: A Cultural Atlas of the Ring of Kerry. Cork. 

Price. L. 1954. The Grant to Walter de Ridelsford of Brien and the land of the sons of 

Torquil. Journal of the Royal Society of Irish Antiquaries 84, 72-7. 

Sheehan, J. and Crowley, J. 2009. The Iveragh Peninsula: A Cultural Atlas of the Ring of 

Kerry. Cork. 

Radner, J. (ed.) 1978. Fragmentary Annals of Ireland. Dublin. 

Stokes, W. 1895. Félire Húi Gormáin. London. 

Rippon, S. 2004. Historic Landscape Analysis: Deciphering the Countryside. York. 

Stokes, W. 1905. Félire Óengusso Céli Dé. London. 

Roberts, B. 2008. The land of Werhale – landscapes of Bede. Archaeologia Aeliana 37, 

127-159. 

Stout, M. and Stout, G. 1995. Patterns in the past: county Dublin 5000 BC-1000 AD. In 

F.H.A. Aalen, K. Whelan and M. Stout (eds) Dublin City and County: from 

Prehistory to Past. Studies in honour of J.H. Andrews, 5-41. Dublin. 

267 

268





Stout, G. and Stout, M. 2008. Excavation of an Early Medieval Secular Cemetery at 

Knowth Site M, County Meath. Dublin. 

Turner, S. 2006b. Fields, property, and agricultural innovation in late medieval and early 

modern south-west England. In K. Giles and J. Finch (eds) Post-Medieval Estate 

Landscapes. Leeds. 

Swan, L. 1985. Monastic Proto-towns in early medieval Ireland: the evidence of aerial 

photography, plan analysis and survey. In H. Clarke and A. Simms (eds) The 

comparative history of urban origins in non-Roman Europe, 373-8. Oxford. 

Swan, L. 1998. A forgotten tower house at Laughanstown (Tully). In C. Manning (ed.) 

Dublin and beyond the Pale, 163-168. Bray. 

Thomas, J . 1993. The politics of vision and the archaeologies of landscape. In B. Bender 

(ed.) Landscape: Politics and Perspectives, 19-48. Providence. 

Thornton, D. 1997. Early Medieval Louth: the Kingdom of Conaille Muirthemne. 

Journal of the County Louth Archaeological and Historical Society, 24. 1, 139- 

150. 

Tilley, C. 1994. A Phenomenology of Landscape. Oxford. 

Treffort, C. 1996. L’Église carolingienne et la mort. Lyons 

Turner, S., 2004. The changing ancient landscape: south-west England AD c.1700-1900. 

Landscapes 5.1, 18-34. 

Turner, S. 2007. Landscape archaeology for the past and future: the place of Historic 

Landscape Characterisation. Landscapes 8.2, 40-49. 

Turner, S. and Fairclough, G. 2007. Common culture: the archaeology of landscape 

character in Europe. In D. Hicks, G. Fairclough and L. McAtackney (eds) 

Envisioning Landscapes: Situations and Standpoints in Archaeology and 

Heritage, 120-145. California. 

Turner, S. and Crowe, J. 2010. Unlocking historic landscapes in the Eastern 

Mediterranean: two pilot studies using Historic Landscape Characterisation. 

Antiquity 84, 216–229. 

Ulster society for Medieval Latin Studies (eds) 1980. The Life of Saint Monenna by 

Conchubranus. Seanchas Ard Macha 10.1, 250-273. 

Waddell, J. 1998. The Prehistoric Archaeology of Ireland. Galway. 

Walsh, C. Bray, Valentia Island. In I. Bennett (ed.) Excavations 1995, 81. Bray. 

Wasserschleben, H. (ed.) 1885. Die Irische Kanonensammlung. Liepzig. 

Turner, S. 2005. Devon Historic Landscape Characterisation. Unpublished report, Devon 

County Council Historic Environment Service and English Heritage. 

Webster, C.J. (ed.) 2008. The Archaeology of South West England: South West 

Archaeological Research Framework. Taunton. 

Turner, S. 2006a. Making a Christian Landscape: The Countryside in Early Medieval 

Cornwall, Devon and Wessex. Exeter. 

Weir, D.A. 1995. A palynological study of landscape and agricultural development in Co 

Louth from the second millennium BC to the first millennium AD. In C. Cotter et 

al. Discovery Programme Reports: 2: Project results 1993, 77-126. Dublin. 

269 

270





White Marshall, J. and Walsh, C. 2005. Illaunloughan Island: an early medieval 

monastery in County Kerry. Dublin. 

Wiggins, K. 2009a. Report on the Archaeological Excavation of Killeany 1, Co. Laois. 

Unpublished report prepared by ACS Ltd. 

Wiggins, K. 2009b. Bushfield or Maghernaskeagh / Lismore 1, Co. Laois. Unpublished 

report prepared by ACS Ltd. 

Williams B.B. 1983. Early Christian Landscapes in County Antrim. In Reeves-Smyth T. 

and Hammond F. (eds) Landscape Archaeology in Ireland, 233-246. Oxford. 

Williamson, T. 2007. Historic Landscape Characterisation: Some queries. Landscapes 

8.2, 64-71. 

Wood, I. 2008a. The Origins of Jarrow. The Monastery, the Slake and Ecgfrith’s 

Minster. Jarrow. 

Wood, I. 2008b. Monasteries and the geography of power in the age of Bede. Northern 

History 45.1, 11-25. 

Wood, M. 2007. Bernician narratives: place-names, archaeology and history. 

Unpublished PhD thesis, Newcastle University. 

Wright, J. 1748. Loutheriana. London. 

Appendix 1: Description of Database Tables used for the Core 

Case Study Areas 

Ecclesiastical Sites 

Field 1: MCL (Making Christian Landscapes) Identifier. 

Field 2: Likelihood of Early Medieval Origin (Definite, Probable, Possible or Not early) 

This field is filled in based on evidence in other fields below. It is obviously important for 

estimating the densities of (1) definite, (2) definite and probable (3) and all possible early 

ecclesiastical sites in an area. The database also includes some ecclesiastical sites (usually 

parish and chapels-of-ease rather than abbeys and priories) that, as a result of an assessment of 

the various sources, we have decided are probably of later medieval origin. It is sometimes 

useful to be able to represent such sites in the GIS. 

Probable early ecclesiastical settlements: 

Place-name, pre-Anglo-Norman dedication and/or limited archaeological evidence (partial 

enclosure which may be ecclesiastical etc. but not a holy well) suggesting presence of 

ecclesiastical settlement of early medieval origin. Identifying all ‘probable’ sites is timeconsuming, 

as all possible ecclesiastical place-names must be scrutinised and all ecclesiastical 

sites must be studied using OS maps, aerial photography and preferably fieldwork in order to 

identify possible remnant ecclesiastical enclosures. In addition, townlands with ecclesiastical 

place-name elements but without an extant ecclesiastical site are studied for remnant enclosures 

or other clues about its former location. 

Possible early ecclesiastical settlements: 

Even where conclusive documentary, place-name and archaeological evidence is lacking, some 

high medieval parish churches, chapels-of-ease and Augustinian (though not Cistercian) abbeys 

have been categorised as possibly of early medieval origin. 

271 

272





A large majority of parish churches and abbeys are clearly of early origin, and it is considered 

possible that many others are also early even though the evidence does not survive. The lack of 

an early ecclesiastical place-name does not greatly diminish the possibility that a church is 

early in origin; note, for example, that only about one third of definite early ecclesiastical sites 

on the Iveragh peninsula (Corcu Duibne) are in townlands with early ecclesiastical placenames. 

In many cases, however, we have erred on the side of caution and categorised such sites 

as later medieval in origin especially where documentary and placename evidence supports this 

possibility. Children’s burial grounds with some evidence for an enclosure and with an ogham 

stone, cross-slab, remnants/tradition of a church or some other possible early medieval feature 

are also considered to be possible early ecclesiastical sites. 

Field 3 Classification of Early Medieval Ecclesiastical Sites 

In this field early ecclesiastical sites are assigned to one of the following categories. To date 

this has been attempted only for Corcu Duibne and Fir Maige. It should be stressed that this is 

not possible in the case of many early sites. The classifications that we have made are usually 

tentative and we must always bear in mind that the character of a site may well have changed 

over time. Also, while we are finding this scheme useful in exploring the relationships between 

ecclesiastical and other sites, we are conscious that it could become constraining if followed 

too rigidly. Some ecclesiastical sites probably did not conform to any of these categories, and a 

case could reasonably be made for additional individual categories, or even entirely alternative 

schemes. The scheme is useful, however, as long as it is treated as an interpretative tool which 

will be subject to revision and modification as the research continues. Our categories are: 

Mother church 

Subordinate but still significant church 

Community Church/Chief church of late tuath 

Probable Community Church/Chief church of late tuath 

Possible Community Church/Chief church of late tuath 

Family church 

Minor eremitic church 

Minor church of unknown character 

Unclassified early church – possible/probable/definite 

Important pilgrimage church 

Later medieval church (probable/definite) 

These categories are discussed in more detail in the 2009 MCL report. 

Field 4 Principal Reasons for Deciding on Early Origin 

This field allows for the principal reason, archaeological, historical or toponomic, for the 

category selected in Field 2. 

Field 5 

Likely Terminus Ante Quem for foundation based on Archaeology: pre-400 (obviously this 

would represent pre-ecclesiastical burial or settlement, and is only to be included if continuity 

is clearly evident) / 400-550 / 550-850 / 850-1100 / 1200+ / unknown 

Field 6 

Likely Terminus Ante Quem for foundation based on Documentary evidence (i.e. not including 

toponymy): 400-550 / 550-850 / 850-1100 / 1200+ / unknown 

Field 7 

Dedication: standardised spelling of saint’s name / uncertain / none 

Early Medieval Documentary Sources 

Documentary indicators of date: 

Field 1: Mentioned in pre-850 Source Y/N 

Field 2: Mentioned in pre-1200 Source Y/N 

Documentary indicators of EM character/function: 

Field 3: Evidence for asceticism / monasticism in the primary sense of the term: Y/N 

Field 4: Evidence for priests: Y/N 

Field 5: Evidence for bishops: Y/N 

273 

274





Field 6: Evidence for nuns: Y/N 

Field 7: Evidence for close association with particular secular group: Y/N 

Documentary indicators of EM status: 

Field 8: Subsidiary Churches: Y/N 

Field 9: Name and/or MCL Signifier (if within study areas) of Subsidiary Churches (add fields 

as appropriate) 

Field 10: Superior Churches: Y/N 

Field 11: Name and/or MCL Signifier (if within study areas) of Superior Churches (add fields 


Later and Post Medieval Documentary Sources 

Later documentary indicators of EM character/function: 

Field 1: Evidence for asceticism / monasticism in the primary sense of the term: Y/N 

Field 2: Evidence for priests: Y/N 

Field 3: Evidence for bishops: Y/N 

Field 4: Evidence for nuns: Y/N 

Field 5: Evidence for close association with particular secular group: Y/N 

Documentary indicators of EM status: 

Field 6: Subsidiary Churches: Y/N 

Field 7: Name and/or MCL Signifier (if within study areas) of Subsidiary Churches (add fields 


Field 8: Superior Churches: Y/N 

Field 9: Name and/or MCL Signifier (if within study areas) of Superior Churches (add fields as 

appropriate) 

Notes on documentary sources: details of the documentary sources are included as text but this 

is not searchable. 

Status in the High Medieval Period Based on History and Archaeology 

Field 1: arch-episcopal centre 

Field 2: episcopal centre 

Field 3: abbey 

Field 4: priory 

Field 5: friary 

Field 6: preceptory 

Field 7: prebend 

Field 8: archdeaconry 

Field 9: rural deanery 

Field 10: ‘colonial rectory’ 

Field 11: parish 

Field 12: chapel-of-ease based on documentary evidence 

Field 13: chapel-of-ease based on archaeological evidence (i.e. no post-1200 documentary 

reference but archaeological evidence for continued use/rebuilding of church) 

Field 14: cemetery and settlement (i.e. no post-1200 documentary reference or church but 

archaeological evidence for settlement and formal adult burial) 

Field 15: cemetery (i.e. no post-1200 documentary reference or church but archaeological 

evidence for formal adult burial as distinct from cillín burial) 

Field 16: settlement (i.e. no post-1200 documentary reference or church but archaeological 

evidence for settlement) 

Field 17: probably abandoned by 1200 (i.e. no documentary or archaeological evidence except 

for cillín burial or informal pilgrimage activity) 

Field 18: uncertain 

NB: If a site changed status within the high/late medieval period its first known status is 

recorded and the change in status is mentioned in the note. If it doubled as more than one of the 

above the most important is recorded (e.g. if a friary was founded at an episcopal centre, the 

site is still recorded as an episcopal centre in the first instance). 

Toponymy 

Townland or Parish Name 

275 

276





Field 1: Ecclesiastical Placename Elements: domnach / cill / dísert / other early ecclesiastical 

element (temple etc.) / none 

Field 2: Other Placename Elements: family name / saint’s name / other (i.e. topographical etc.) 

Local Name 

Field 3: Ecclesiastical Placename Elements: domnach / cill / dísert / other early ecclesiastical 

element (temple etc.) / none 

Field 4: Other Placename Elements: family name / saint’s name / other (i.e. topographical etc.) 

Notes on toponymy are included as text but this will not be searchable. 

Early Medieval Settlement Enclosures 

This table is used for all settlement enclosures, including ecclesiastical settlements, cemetery 

settlements, ringforts etc. 

MCL Identifier: 

Documentary/Toponymic Evidence for Non-Ecclesiastical Settlements 

These fields are left blank in the case of ecclesiastical enclosures as the documentary evidence 

for these sites is dealt with in more detail elsewhere (above). 

Field 1: Placename elements that refer to enclosure: dun/lis/rath/caiseal/cathair/phoirt/dun 

Field 2: Other placename elements: kinship or dynastic name / topographical 

Field 3: Mentioned in Documentary Sources by: 800 / 1000 / 1100 / 1200 / 1600 

Field 4: Associations in Documentary Sources: royal site / taísech (i.e. noble) site / site closely 

associated with ecclesiastical establishment 

Field 5: MCL Identifier for the site where it is located. This is only relevant for ecclesiastical 

enclosures. In the case of all other settlements the MCL Identifier for the enclosure is also the 

one for the site as a whole. 

Field 6: Site Type: ecclesiastical / cemetery settlement / univallate ringort / bivallate ringfort / 

trivallate ringfort / ringfort with counterscarp bank / platform ringfort / cashel / longphort / 

possible longphort / promontory fort / unclassified settlement enclosure / other / uncertain 

Inner Enclosure 

Field 1: Preservation: fully extant / more than half extant / fragment extant / crop-mark / 

shadow-site / cartographic evidence / excavation / not extant 

Field 2: Circular / sub-circular / curvilinear / d-shaped / rectilinear / irregular / uncertain 

Field 3: Maximum internal dimension 

Field 4: Minimum internal dimension 

Field 5: Interior area in msq 

Field 6: Index of circularity (calculated automatically; curvilinear enclosures only) 

Field 7: Construction: earth bank and ditch / earth and stone bank and ditch / stone cashel 

Field 8: Bank exterior height where relevant 

Field 9: Bank interior height where relevant 

Field 10: Bank width where relevant 

277 

278





Field 11: Ditch width where relevant 

Field 12: Ditch depth where relevant 

Field 13: Entrance location: E-NE / NE-N / N-NW / NW-W / W-SW / SW-S / S-SE / unknown 

Field 14: Entrance form: stone-faced / lintelled / unknown 

Field 15: Causeway: Y/N 

Field 16: Evidence of enlargement: Y/N 

Notes 

Middle Enclosure (if present) 



Field 2: Curvilinear / rectilinear / d-shaped / irregular / uncertain 













Field 15: Causeway; Y/N 


Notes 

Outer Enclosure (if present) 



Field 2: Curvilinear / rectilinear / d-shaped / irregular / uncertain 











Field 13: Platform height (in the case of platform ringforts) 

Field 14: Platform circumference base (in the case of platform ringforts) 

Field 15: Platform circumference top (in the case of platform ringforts) 

Field 16: Terrace and steps in inner wall: Y/N 

Field 17: Mural chambers: 1/2/3/4/5 



Field 20: Causeway: Y/N 


Notes 

Subdivision(s) 



Field 2: Between inner and outer enclosure / subdivision of inner enclosure (e.g. Reask) 

279 

280









Notes: Note details of association between ringfort and royal family etc. 

Features and Artefacts only Associated with Ecclesiastical and Other Ritual Sites 

Early Medieval Church (including Romanesque churches but excluding shrine chapels 

which are recorded under ‘Fixed Reliquary Focus’) 


Field 1: MCL Identifier for the site where it is located or was found (where relevant): 

Field 2: Name of site where it is located or was found (where relevant): 

Field 3: Type of Site where it is Located or Other Location – drop-down menu of all site types: 

e.g. ecclesiastical site / cemetery settlement / non-ecclesiastical burial ground / ringfort / cashel 

/ longphort / promontory fort / unclassified settlement type / not associated with settlement or 

other monument / other / uncertain 

Field 4: Type: organic / dry-stone / mortared pre-Romanesque / mortared Romanesque 

Field 5: Function: Principal church / subsidiary church dedicated to an Irish saint other than the 

founder / subsidiary church dedicated to a universal saint / nunnery church / baptistery / 

subsidiary church for ascetics / royal or mortuary chapel associated with particular family (e.g. 

Temple Connor / Temple Melaghlin) / subsidiary ‘parish’ church (at episcopal sites – e.g. 

Temple na Togha, Armagh) / subsidiary church of uncertain function / other (NB: definite 

shrine chapels are recorded under Fixed Reliquary Focus). 

Field 6: Likely Date: 400-650 / 650-900 / 900-1050 / 1050-1130 / 1130-1200 

Field 7: Internal Area (in metres squared): ??msq / unknown 

Field 8: Dedication: standardise spelling of saint’s name / none 

Dedications of minor monuments are recorded only if they are closely associated with a saint in 

folklore or hagiography – e.g. not every bullaun at Glendalough is dedicated to Kevin and 

‘none’ is chosen if there is no strong association with saint. In a few rare cases a monument is 

dedicated to two saints: e.g. Cross of Patrick and Columba at Kells, Church of Peter and Paul at 

Armagh. 

High or Late Medieval Church (including Transitional churches) 



281 

282










Field 4: Date of earliest phase whose area can be determined: 1180-1400 / 1400-1600 / 

unknown 

Field 5: Total internal area of earliest phase whose area can be determined: ??msq / unknown 

Field 6: Function: Principal church / subsidiary church dedicated to an Irish saint other than the 

founder / subsidiary church dedicated to a universal saint / nunnery church / baptistery / 

subsidiary church for ascetics / royal or mortuary chapel associated with particular family (e.g. 

Temple Connor / Temple Melaghlin) / subsidiary ‘parish’ church (at episcopal sites – e.g. 

Temple na Togha, Armagh) / subsidiary church of uncertain function / abbey / friary / priory / 

other. 






Armagh. 

Notes 

Round Tower 








Field 4: Diameter at base: 

Field 5: Original Height (if know): 

Field 6: Present Height: 

Field 7: Likely Date: 900-1130 / 1130-1200 

Notes 

Fixed Reliquary Focus (including some ‘leachta’) 








Field 4: Type: early shrine chapel / later shrine chapel / corner-post shrine / gable shrine / 

miscellaneous shrine / possible stone shrine / special grave / possible special grave (including 

some ‘leachta’) 

Field 5: Likely Date: pre-700 / 700-950 / 950-1100 / 1100-1200 






Armagh. 

Ogham Stone 




283 

284









Field 4: Specific First Known Location: isolated (i.e. no other evidence for burial or settlement) 

/ non-ecclesiastical burial ground / upright within ecclesiastical site / upright at periphery of 

ecclesiastical site / built into souterrain at ecclesiastical site / built into early church / built into 

later church / found during grave-digging at ecclesiastical site / built into non-ecclesiastical 

souterrain / at non-ecclesiastical settlement (ringfort etc.) / over water / not associated with 

settlement or other monument / other / location in antiquity unknown 

Field 5: Specific Present Location (if different from above): isolated (i.e. no other evidence for 

burial or settlement) / at non-ecclesiastical burial ground / upright within ecclesiastical site / 

upright on or in close proximity to another feature (leacht, special grave, holy well etc.) / 

upright at periphery of ecclesiastical site / built into souterrain at ecclesiastical site / built into 

early church / built into later church / found during grave-digging at ecclesiastical site / built 

into non-ecclesiastical souterrain / at non-ecclesiastical settlement (ringfort etc) / over water / 

other / location in antiquity unknown 

Field 6: Height (approx – add one third for standing examples): 

Field 7: Width: 

Field 8: Area: (height x width) 

Field 9: Longer axis NE-SW: Y/N (this could indicate prehistoric origin) 

Field 10: Text of inscription (original and translation) 

Field 11: Date of inscription: 5th-cent / 6th-cent / 7th-cent / unknown 

Field 12: Formulae: name only / maci / mucoi / other / unknown 

Field 13: Tribal/family name: Standardise spelling. 

Field 14: Possible indicators of Christianity: Latin name / >





Field 7: Width: 

Field 8: Area: 

Field 9: Type: very large upright cross, cross-slab or pillar (>1.5m) / large upright cross, crossslab 

or pillar (>1m high) / small upright cross, cross-slab or pillar (






Armagh. 

Notes: record any evidence for function – e.g. any of the hollows perforated suggesting use for 

grinding? 

Outdoor Altar (including some leachta) 








Field 4: Form: drystone / boulder 

Field 5: Evidence suggesting early origin: Y/N (e.g. surmounted by cross-slab etc.) 

Field 6: Evidence suggesting recent origin: Y/N 






Armagh. 

Notes (including evidence for date) 

Pilgrimage Station (including some leachta) 









Field 5: Evidence suggesting recent origin: Y/N (e.g. rerouting of pilgrimage in 19thcent or 

somesuch) 






Armagh. 

Notes (including evidence for date; overall form – curvilinear, rectilinear or amorphous? – give 

measurements / drystone construction? / built over earlier monument – prehistoric cairn?) 

Holy Well 








Field 4: Superstructure: mortared stone well house (i.e. fully covered) / drystone well house 

(i.e. fully covered) / partially covered with stone / not covered 


Field 6: Evidence suggesting recent origin: Y/N (e.g. transfer of well in 19thcent) 


289 

290









Armagh. 

Notes (evidence for date etc.) 

Miscellaneous Ritual Focus 








Field 4: Type: holy tree or bush / holy stone / stone with saint’s foot or knee print etc. Too 

many and too varied for a drop-down menu 

Field 5: Evidence suggesting early origin: Y/N 

Field 6: Evidence suggesting recent origin: Y/N 






Armagh. 

Notes (including evidence for date – e.g. mentioned in hagiography?) 

Grave Plot of possibly early date (including some leachta but not including saints’ graves) 








Field 4: E-W Dimension 

Field 5: N-S Dimension 

Notes: including evidence for early date. 

Metal Shrine or other Ecclesiastical Metalwork 








Field 4: Type: Corporeal reliquary / bell / crosier / house-shaped shrine / associative reliquary / 

chalice / paten / wine strainer / processional cross / crucifixion plaque / altar furnishings / other 

church fittings and furnishings (Donore handle etc.) / other 






Armagh. 

Field 6: Date of Manufacture: 550-650 / 650-850 / 850-1050 / 1050-1200 / 1200+ 

291 

292





Field 7: Date of First Refurbishment: 550-650 / 650-850 / 850-1050 / 1050-1200 / 1200+ 

Field 8: Date of Second Refurbishment: 550-650 / 650-850 / 850-1050 / 1050-1200 / 1200+ 

Field 9: Find Context: stray find / hereditary keeper / other 

Notes: 

Pilgrimage Site Focussed on Natural Features (Mountains, Lakes etc.) 


Field 1: Nature of pilgrimage focus: mountain, lake, cave etc. 


Field 3: Day of Pilgrimage: 

Notes: Note associations with other sites – pilgrimage stations, altars, prehistoric cairns etc. 

Assembly/Inauguration Site 


These occur/took place at a wide range of sites – non-ecclesiastical burial grounds, 

ecclesiastical sites, ringforts etc. Best to give them their own MCL Identifier and link them to 

the relevant site. 

Field 1: MCL Identifier for the site where it is located (where relevant): 

Field 2: Name of site where it is located (where relevant): 





Field 4: Form: mound / cairn / stone / tree etc. 

Field 5: Earliest Known Use as Assembly Site based on documentary and/or archaeological 

evidence: 

Field 6: Latest Known Use based on documentary and/or archaeological evidence: 

Notes: 

Excavated Cemetery 








Field 4: Prehistoric Funerary Evidence: Late Iron Age / Early Iron Age / Bronze Age / 

Neolithic / Date Unknown / multi-period including Late Iron Age / multi-period not including 

Late Iron Age / none 

Field 5: Character of Earlier Funerary Monuments (where relevant): Drop down menu listing 

various barrows, ring-ditched enclosures, mounds, stone cairn, flat cemetery / variation / 

unknown etc. 

Field 6: Location within Settlement Enclosure (where relevant): centre / E of centre / NE of 

centre / SE of centre / S of centre / SW of centre / W of centre / NW of centre / N of centre / E / 

NE / SE / S / SW / W / NW / N 

This assumes that the cemetery is within the inner enclosure of a site with concentric 

enclosures. 

Field 7: Cemetery Enclosure: enclosure designed to fully delimit whole cemetery / enclosure 

designed to partially delimit whole cemetery / enclosure designed to enclose a minority of 

graves within unenclosed cemetery (ring-ditch etc) / enclosure with no burials around which 

burials cluster (e.g. Augheraskea) / cemetery unenclosed / unknown 

Field 8: Construction of enclosing element: earth bank / stone bank 

Field 9: Evidence for expansion of cemetery beyond enclosure: Y/N 

Field 10: Evidence for new enclosure around expanded cemetery: Y/N 

Cemetery enclosure here means a dedicated, contemporary burial enclosure which, in the case 

of settlement sites, sets cemetery apart from at least some domestic/industrial activities. It is 

293 

294





clearly to be distinguished from settlement enclosures around sites as a whole and even the 

majority of inner enclosures of ecclesiastical and cemetery settlements. 

Field 11: Number of graves excavated: less than 20/ 20-50/ 50-100/ 100-300/ 300-500 / 500- 

1000 / 1000-2000 / over 2000 

Field 12: Estimated total number (where possible): less than 20/ 20-50/ 50-100/ 100-300/ 300- 

500 / 500-1000 / 1000-2000 / over 2000 

Field 13: Adult Males (as a % of those excavated): 

Field 14: Adult Females (as a % of those excavated): 

Field 15: Adolescent Males 13-17yrs (as a % of those excavated): 

Field 16: Adolescent Females 13-17yrs (as a % of those excavated): 

Field 17: Adults or Adolescents of Indeterminate Sex (as a % of those excavated): 

Field 18: Infants and Children (as a % of those excavated): 

Field 19: Grave orientation: approx E/W (as a % of those excavated) 

Field 20: Grave orientation: approx N/S (as a % of those excavated) 

Field 21: Dug graves (as a % of those excavated) 

Field 22: Lintel graves (as a % of those excavated) 

Field 23: Graves with pillow stones (as a % of those excavated) 

Field 24: Unclassified burials (as a % of those excavated) 

Field 25: Shroud pins: Number recovered 

Field 26: Knives: 1/2/3/4/5 

Field 27: Brooches or other jewellery: 1/2/3/4/5 

Field 28: Other Objects 

Radiocarbon Dates 

All radiocarbon dates are listed, earliest to latest. Both 1 sigma and 2 sigma determinations are 

recorded where available. 

Radiocarbon Date 1 

Field 29: Bottom of 2 sigma range (i.e. 1 figure) 

Field 30: Top of 2 sigma range (i.e. 1 figure) 

Field 31: Bottom of 1 sigma range (i.e. 1 figure) 

Field 32: Top of 1 sigma range (i.e. 1 figure) 

Field 33: Source: shell / bone / textile / young wood / old wood / other / unknown 

Field 34: Danger of inaccuracy due to context or character of sample: low / medium / high / 

unknown 

Notes: Any potential problems with radiocarbon dates are recorded here. 

Field 35: Likely Terminus Ante Quem for Establishment of Cemetery: e.g. 500 – give number 

Field 36: Likely Terminus Ante Quem for Abandonment of Cemetery: e.g. 800 – give number 

Stone Secondary Location Table 


Field 1: Easting of Secondary Location 

Field 2: Northing of Secondary Location 

Field 3: Date of Transfer to Secondary Location: 

Secondary location is relevant for some inscribed/sculpted stones moved in antiquity. Recent 

changes in location (e.g. to a museum) are not recorded. Usually the first known location will 

be the most important. In very rare cases Easting and Northing of Tertiary Location may be 

necessary. 

Field 4: MCL Identifier of site on which object is located 

Field 5: Name of site, if applicable 

Field 6: Types of site where it is located – drop-down menu of all site types: e.g. ecclesiastical 

site / cemetery settlement / non-ecclesiastical burial ground / ringfort / cashel / longphort / 

promontory fort / unclassified settlement type / not associated with settlement or other 

monument / other / uncertain 

Field 7: First Location – drop-down menu listing the following locations: upright within 

ecclesiastical site / upright close proximity to other feature / upright at periphery of 

ecclesiastical site / built into souterrain at ecclesiastical site / built into non-ecclesiastical 

souterrain / built into early church / built into later church / found during grave-digging at 

295 

296





ecclesiastical site / at non-ecclesiastical settlement / over water / other / location in antiquity 

unknown 

Field 8: Second Location – drop-down menu listing the following locations: 

Isolated / non-ecclesiastical burial ground / upright within ecclesiastical site / upright close 

proximity to other feature / upright at periphery of ecclesiastical site / built into souterrain at 

ecclesiastical site / built into non-ecclesiastical souterrain / built into early church / built into 

later church / found during grave-digging at ecclesiastical site / at non-ecclesiastical settlement 

/ over water / other / location in antiquity unknown / none 

Other Early Medieval Features and Artefacts 

Excavated Settlement Evidence (excluding buildings which are treated individually) 

Where relevant, the following fields are added to entries on any excavated site and/or 

monument. In the case of, for example, a ringfort where a circular house and souterrain has 

been excavated, the fields are added to the database entries for all three. In this way, 

associations of particular activities with particular monuments/structures within a site can be 

recognised. 

Excavated Evidence for Cereal Processing (excluding mills – see below): 

Field 1: Definite Cereal Drying Kilns: 1/2/3 

Field 2: Grain Stores: 1/2/3 (e.g. Caherlehillan) 

Field 3: Quern stones of likely EM date: 1/2/3 

Field 4: Plough shares 1/2/3 

Notes: 

Plant Remains: 

Field 1: Wheat: Y/N 

Field 2: Oats: Y/N 

Field 3: Barley: Y/N 

Field 4: Rye: Y/N 

Field 5: Flax: Y/N 

Field 6: Dyeing plants: Y/N 

Field 7: Other/Unclassified Y/N 

Notes: 

Animal Bone: 

Field 1: Cattle (as a % of the total): 

Field 2: Sheep/goats (as a % of the total): 

Field 3: Pig (as a % of the total): 

Field 4: Wild animals and birds (as a % of the total): 

297 

298





Field 5: Sea Birds (as a % of the total): 

Field 6: Fish (as a % of the total): [A potentially important indicator of monastic diet.] 

Field 7: Other not including Sea Birds and Fish (as a % of the total): 

Field 8: Other including Wild Animals, Sea Birds and Fish (as a % of the total): [as sometimes 

often won’t have figures for these] 

Field 9: Indeterminate (as a % of the total): 

Notes: 

Craft and other activities 

Field 1: Iron Smelting: Y/N/uncertain 

Field 2: Iron Working: Y/N/uncertain 

Field 3: Copper Alloy Working: Y/N/uncertain 

Field 4: Silver/Gold Working: Y/N/uncertain 

Field 5: Glass-working: Y/N/uncertain 

Field 6: Leather-working: Y/N/uncertain 

Field 7: Textile production: Y/N/uncertain 

Field 8: Manuscript production: Y/N/uncertain 

Field 9: Bone-working: Y/N/uncertain 

Field 10: Stone-working (spindle whorl blanks etc.): Y/N/uncertain 

Field 11: Flint-knapping: Y/N/uncertain 

Field 12: Woodworking: Y/N/uncertain 

Field 13: Equestrian evidence: Y/N 

Notes: 

Pottery 

Field 1: Type: A Ware / B Ware / E Ware / Souterrain Ware / Imported Viking Age Pottery / 

unclassified pottery probably locally produced / uncertain 

Field 2: Date Range 

Notes: 

Radiocarbon Dates 

All radiocarbon dates are listed, earliest to latest. Both 1 sigma and 2 sigma determinations are 

recorded where available. 

Radiocarbon Date 1: 

Field 1: Bottom of 2 sigma range (i.e. 1 figure): 

Field 2: Top of 2 sigma range (i.e. 1 figure): 

Field 3: Bottom of 1 sigma range (i.e. 1 figure): 

Field 4: Top of 1 sigma range (i.e. 1 figure): 

Field 5: Source: shell / bone / textile / young wood / old wood / other / unknown 

Field 6: Danger of inaccuracy due to context or character of sample: low / medium / high / 

unknown 

Notes: Any potential problems with radiocarbon dates are recorded here. For example if 

species of tree is not mention, or if it’s oak charcoal, or if the charcoal does not necessarily 

relate to a burning episode contemporary with the site. 

Field 1: Likely Terminus Ante Quem for Establishment of Settlement: e.g. 500 – give number 

Field 2: Likely Terminus Ante Quem for Abandonment of Settlement: e.g. 800 – give number 

Souterrain 








Field 4: Construction: wood / drystone / earth cut / rock cut 

Field 5: Overall known length: 

Field 6: Chambers: single/ multiple 

Field 7: Creep: Y/N 

299 

300





Field 8: Door jambs: Y/N 

Field 9: Porthole Slab: Y/N 

Field 10: Re-use of decorated stones: ogham/prehistoric/ogam and prehistoric/cross-inscribed 

and prehistoric 

Field 11: Association with house site: circular / rectangular / none / uncertain 

Field 12: MCL Identifier for house (where relevant) 

Notes 

Field 2: Name of site where it is located or was found (where relevant) 





Field 4: Type: horizontal / vertical 

Field 5: Date: 500-650 / 650-850 / 850-1100 / exact date unknown 

Notes: 

Domestic Building 

MCL Identifier 

Field 1: MCL Identifier for the site where it is located or was found (where relevant) 






Field 4: Form: circular / sub-circular / conjoined / rectilinear / other / uncertain 

Field 5: Construction: entirely organic (excavation evidence) / primarily organic with stone 

foundations and/or paving (excavation evidence) / drystone walls with organic roof / drystone 

walls and roof 

Field 6: Wall thickness (in the case of stone buildings) 

Field 7: Internal Area 

Field 8: Estimated Date 

Notes: If date is suggested above it is justified here. Other features are also mentioned (annulus, 

masonry quality etc.). 

Early Water Mill 



Boundaries 

Parish and barony boundaries are recorded where (like for example Corbally) they are closely 

associated with excavated and/or surveyed sites. If they are recorded at more than one point the 

fields below are copied but the same MCL Identifier is used. 


Field 1: MCL Identifier for the site associated with it at this point (where relevant) 

Field 2: Name of site associated with it at this point (where relevant) 





Field 4: Name of First Principal Secular Land-division delimited at point surveyed 

Field 5: Name of Second Principal Secular Land-division delimited at point surveyed 

Field 6: Name of First Principal Ecclesiastical Land-division delimited at point surveyed 

Field 7: Name of Second Principal Ecclesiastical Land-division delimited at point surveyed 

Field 8: Nature of Secular Land-divisions Delimited: townland / Baile Biatach / villate / cantred 

/ administrative barony (rather than feudal barony) / county / barony and county / other / none 

Field 9: Nature of Ecclesiastical Land-divisions Delimited: early ecclesiastical estate / parish / 

early ecclesiastical estate and parish / rectory / deanery / diocese / episcopal manor / 

archdiocese / other / none 


301 

302










Notes: Here the reason the boundary was surveyed at this point is recorded. Also any evidence 

of whether it is possible to distinguish modern rebuilding from earlier phases is recorded. 





Field 4: Artefact Type: e.g. pennanular brooch / shears / decorated hone-stone etc. (too many 

possibilities for drop-down menu). 

Field 5: Estimated Date: give range / uncertain but EM / uncertain 

Notes: circumstances of find must be described and date justified. 

Viking Silver Hoard 








Field 4: Hoard Type: 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / coin hoard (according to Sheehan’s classification) 

Field 5: Hoard Type 2: coins only / non-numismatic only / mixed 

Field 6: Date: 850-940 / 940-1000 / specific deposition date (coin hoards) 

Field 7: Weight or estimated weight in kg if known 

Crannogs 


In 2008 no table was prepared for crannogs and there are no examples in any of the case study 

areas researched to date. Should a crannog need to be recorded into the database the facility 

remains so that the table could be developed with ease. 

Early Medieval Artefact (other than shrine, Viking silver hoard etc.) 

This table is used somewhat selectively for significant artefacts (e.g. brooches, manuscripts, 

tools diagnostic of a particular activities like shears/spindle whorls, loom weights bucket or 

barrel staves etc.) whether they were found at particular sites or were isolated, stray finds. 




303 

304





Prehistoric Monuments Currently Lacking Evidence for Early Medieval Reuse 

Any monument that was probably visible in the EM period is recorded, but ones including 

excavated prehistoric house sites with no surface trace are not. Monuments known to have been 

reused as places of burial, inauguration, assembly etc are dealt with in more detail in tables 

described above. For sites with no evidence for early medieval reuse details are not recorded 

but the following fields are used: 


Field 1: Monument Type 

Field 2: Prehistoric date: definite / probable / possible 


The above and below fields are used in cases where the monument is in or very near (





Hilltop enclosure 

Holed stone 

House (not all) 

Hut-site 

Kerb circle 

Linear earthwork 

Linkardstown burial 

Megalithic structure 

Megalithic tomb – court 

Megalithic tomb – passage 

Megalithic tomb – portal 

Megalithic tomb – unclassified 

Megalithic tomb – wedge 

Midden 

Mine 

Mound 

Pit circle 

Promontory fort – coastal 

Promontory fort – inland 

Quarry – prehistoric 

Radial stone cairn 

Radial stone enclosure 

Ring cairn 

Ring ditch 

Road 

Rockart 

Rock scribing 

Settlement cluster (not all) 

Standing stone 

Standing stone – pair 

Stone circle 

Stone circle – embanked 

Stone circle – five stone 

Stone circle – multiple stones 

Stone row 

Urn Burial 

The following additional classifications are not in www.archaeology.ie: 

Late Iron Age Roman-Style Votive Deposition or Romano-British Burials (Newgrange, St 

Ann’s Well, Co. Meath, Freestone Hill, Lambay etc). 

Late Prehistoric ‘Royal’ Site 

Miscellaneous Prehistoric Ritual Monument 

Miscellaneous Settlement Site probably of Prehistoric Date 

Ritual Deposition Site (not every find of prehistoric metalwork is recorded but we do record the 

location of ritual deposition sites that have produced large number of artefacts) 

307 

308

AR01049_Christian_Landscapes_Final_Report_2_10.pdf - The ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?