archaeological & built heritage assessment - The Heritage Council

More documents

Recommendations

Info

above goals as laid out by the Heritage Council, Waterways Ireland and Leitrim and Roscommon County Councils. 4
2 Methodology Desktop Survey A desktop survey of archaeological and cultural heritage sites within the area of the defined waterways corridor was carried out in order to assess its cultural heritage constraints. (There was a particular emphasis in the research process on the identification of all heritage resources located within 500m of the banks of the waterway route). The Record of Monuments and Places (RMP) of counties Leitrim and Roscommon, as published by the Archaeological Survey of Ireland, was the principal source for identifying archaeological constraints. Additional information was gained from the Sites and Monuments Record (SMR) for each county and a review of local journals and publications. In addition the following sources were consulted: • Archaeological Survey of Ireland files for Counties Leitrim and Roscommon held by the Office of Public Works on behalf of the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government (DoEHLG) • Archaeological Inventory for County Leitrim • Topographical Files for Counties Leitrim and Roscommon, National Museum of Ireland • Irish Architectural Archive • All available Ordnance Survey maps for the area • Current County Development Plan for Counties Leitrim and Roscommon Agencies consulted as part of this cultural heritage assessment included the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government (DoEHLG), DoEHLG Underwater Archaeological Unit, Leitrim County Council and Roscommon County Council. Field Survey Preliminary fieldwork by boat was undertaken by Colin Buchanan & Partners on all navigational routes of the study area in August and October 2004. The list of Recorded Monuments and Places (RMPs) complied as part of the desk based survey were used as a base dataset and sites assessed for levels of visibility from the waterway. The visible sites were photographed from the boat as well the collection of a concise photographic record of the visible landscape adjacent to the waterway itself. The towns and villages pertaining to the study area were viewed and photographed both from the waterway and land. The range and volume of archaeological and built heritage sites within the study area precluded detailed inspection of sites, monuments and buildings in a systematic fashion. However, rigorous field survey of all towns and villages located within the study area together with notable sites of archaeological and built heritage interest was conducted over a six-day period in July and November 2004 by John Cronin & Associates. 5
Page 1 and 2: ARCHAEOLOGICAL & BUILT HERITAGE ASS
Page 3: 1 Introduction Executive Summary A
Page 7 and 8: During the Neolithic and Early Bron
Page 9 and 10: Hillforts are one indication of the
Page 11 and 12: stone anchor/net sinker in Kilglass
Page 13 and 14: Throughout this time of castle buil
Page 15 and 16: At the time of newly acquired wealt
Page 17 and 18: Future underwater investigation int
Page 19 and 20: completed in 1817 and the Ballinamo
Page 21 and 22: Most bridges throughout Europe in t
Page 23 and 24: consumed, the company simply moved
Page 25 and 26: castles; while others were uncastel
Page 27 and 28: • Mohill • Drumod • Roosky
Page 29 and 30: Though one thousand started with hi
Page 31 and 32: King House, the original early eigh
Page 33 and 34: slated houses and a constabulary ba
Page 35 and 36: small island a short distance upstr
Page 37 and 38: the aforementioned sites, there are
Page 39 and 40: entrance to Lough Allen Canal are s
Page 41 and 42: Area 3 Area 3 has been defined as t
Page 43 and 44: dwelling / earthworks (7) / deer pa
Page 45 and 46: settled during the medieval period
Page 47 and 48: sites of different periods. Develop
Page 49 and 50: 8 Legal and policy framework for th
Page 51 and 52: A number of other statutes may also
Page 53 and 54: cultural, scientific, social or tec
Page 55 and 56:
of the era by providing an overview
Page 57 and 58:
mainly gentry, to these areas for m
Page 59 and 60:
Archaeological Potential in the Rec
Page 61 and 62:
Policies & recommendations for futu
Page 63 and 64:
Policy • As part of any developme
Page 65 and 66:
• The archaeology of Irelands riv
Page 67 and 68:
Delaney, R. (ed.) (2000) The Shell
Page 69 and 70:
Opie, H. - (1995f) 'Kiltycamey. Ful
Page 71 and 72:
Appendix 1 | Catalogue: Cultural He
Page 73 and 74:
NMI Year of Townland County Artefac
Page 75 and 76:
NMI Number 1955:4 Year of Discovery
Page 77 and 78:
County 6-inch OS Townland RMP No. S
Page 79 and 80:
County 6-inch OS Townland RMP No. S
Page 81 and 82:
Dev. Plan Ref. No. NIAH Ref. No. -
Page 83 and 84:
Dev. Plan Ref. No. NIAH Ref. No. Bu
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Dev. Plan Ref. No. NIAH Ref. No. 49
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113:
Appendix 5 | Photographic Record 11
show all

archaeological & built heritage assessment - The Heritage Council

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?