EMAP_2012_Report_6_1.pdf (7.3 MB) - The Heritage Council

Site Site type Quantity Reference
Ballinderry I, Co. Westmeath Crannog 1 Hencken 1936, 140
Cahercommaun, Co. Clare Cashel 2 Hencken 1938, 53
Carraig Aille I, Co. Limerick Cashel 2 Ó Ríordáin 1949a, 98
Carraig Aille II, Co. Limerick Cashel 4 Ó Ríordáin 1949a, 78
Cherrywood, Co. Dublin Other 2 Ó Néill 2006, 81
Dooey, Co. Donegal Other 3 Ó Ríordáin & Rynne 1961, 62
Garryduff, Co. Cork Univallate 10 O’Kelly 1963, 49-50
Gransha, Co. Down Raised 1 Lynn 1985, 88
Killickaweeny, Co. Kildare Univallate 2 Walsh 2008, 45-6, 49
Lagore, Co. Meath Crannog 1 Hencken 1950, 120
Marlinstown, Co. Westmeath Multivallate 1 (described as a Keely 1991
leather scorer)
Movilla Abbey, Co. Down Ecclesiastical 1 Yates & Hamlin 1983, 62
Raheennamadra, Co. Limerick Univallate 1 Stenberger 1966, 46
Raystown, Co. Meath Non-circular 1 Seaver 2010, 276
The Spectacles, Co. Limerick Cashel 2 fastened
together
Ó Ríordáin 1949, 103
Table 8.4: Examples of sites producing pronged & socketed objects
Wool textiles were finished after weaving by a process called ‘fulling’, to thicken them and to
eliminate oils, dirt, and other impurities. This involved two processes – scouring and milling
(thickening). The first stage, ‘scouring’, involved cleaning the greasy wool by steeping it in
cold water with detergent in the form of stale human urine or vegetable ash and trampling
upon it to release the natural grease or lanolin. The next stage involved the thickening of the
cloth by matting the fibres together to increase its strength and waterproofing (felting). When
this was completed, water was used to rinse out the foul smelling liquor used during this
cleansing process. The process often caused the cloth to shrink and therefore after the
‘fulling’ was complete, the wet cloth was often attached with tenterhooks to a frame known
as a tenter to stretch the cloth. Tenterhooks have been noted at Knowth (FitzGerald 2012,
560-1) and in Scandinavian Waterford (Scully 1997, 486). Other possible artefacts relating to
these processes might include the wooden trough and wicker frames from Deer Park Farms
(Wincott Heckett 2011, 363). Linen (and possibly nettle) cloth was finished by smoothing
with a polished stone. Examples of these have been recorded at Ballyaghagan (Proudfoot
1958, 30), Clea Lakes (Collins & Proudfoot 1959, 98) and Millockstown (Manning 1986, 161).
A potash glass linen smoother was recorded within a Type 1 mid-eleventh to early-twelfthcentury
building in the Insula North, Waterford City (Bourke 1997, 389), and similar evidence
has been found in pre-Norman Dublin (Bourke 1987). Two glass linen smoothers were also
found at Ballinderry I crannog (Johnson 1999, 68). The presence of polishing stones may
again be a matter of identification; it has been suggested that the many Neolithic polished
stone axes found at Deer Park Farms might have been used for this purpose (Wincott Heckett
2011, 362).
Using a combination of the various tools noted above, a total of 58 sites produced evidence
for weaving being carried out. The geographical distribution is given in Fig. 8.3. Forty-five
sites had evidence for other textile working processes also, leaving thirteen sites with
evidence for weaving only. Of these thirteen, just one (Ballyvass) had multiple tools (and also
surviving textile; Ballyaghagan had both a loom weight and rubbing stones, while the remain
had just a single type of tool: loom weights at Aghadegnan, Ballynakelly, Gortybrigane,
Haggardstown, Killealy and Rinnaraw, pinbeaters at Beginish and Loughbown 1, rubbing
stones at Colp West and socketed/pronged items at Kilcloghans and Marlinstown (in both
cases, these were originally identified as relating to leather-working). This underlines the
importance of the recognition and correct identification of artefacts as relating to particular
crafts and uses. The case of loom weights is perhaps the most obvious example: 34 sites in
all produced one or more loom weights (not all of them certain), but 23 of these had no other
weaving-related tools.
129