EMAP_2012_Report_6_1.pdf (7.3 MB) - The Heritage Council

(Lennon 1994, 59), Rathgurreen (Comber 2002, 181) and Rathmullan (Lynn 1981/82, 81),
have produced evidence for broken dog whelk shells. Rathgurreen and Dooey contained
several shallow and deep pits which may have been used in dye manufacture (Comber 2008,
101), and a flat stone object at Rathgurreen was stained red on its flat surfaces (Comber
2002, 181). The best evidence for the extraction of dye from dog whelks was identified at
Inishkea North, where a structure formed of timber and stone (House A, Site 3) was
interpreted as a dye production workshop (Henry 1952, 177). The building measured c. 7.3m
by 6m with an entrance at the eastern end and was probably made of wattle walls set on
stone footings. On the west side was an annex, defined by upright stone slabs, in which was
a pit; nearby was a pile of dog whelk shells. A hearth was found in the centre of the structure
and a large stone-lined pit was located to the north-west of it. It was suggested that the dye
may have been extracted by crushing the live shellfish in the pit before steeping them with
salt and boiling the mixture for a long time (to reduce the amount of liquid) with pot-boilers
(many of which were found on site). This dye-production may have been associated with
textile-working as the site also produced evidence for the manufacture of chlorite spindle
whorls (Edwards 1990, 83).
There is limited other evidence for dye-processing; it was suggested that a broken shale disc
found at Lagore might have been used for grinding/mixing colours (Hencken 1950, 177), and
possible pigment-grinding stones were identified at Lough Faughan (Collins 1955, 69), but
whether these definitely relate to the dyeing of textiles is uncertain.
Leather working – shoes and belts
Accessories such as shoes and belts are also evidence of dress, and may be represented
again either by surviving specimens or by evidence of leather-working. The larger scale
processing or tanning of leather may in some cases be a more specialised, semi-industrial
undertaking, but the cutting, shaping and at times decoration of leather – as seen in several
instances in relation to shoes – could be carried out at individual settlement sites.
Of 317 sites in the gazetteer, just fourteen produced evidence of leather fragments and/or
possible leather working. In some cases the remains included shoes or parts of shoes,
recognisable by shape/form; sites involved included Ballinderry II, Castlefarm, Craigywarren,
Deer Park Farms (Neill 2011, 368-73), Lagore, Lissue, Moynagh Lough and Rathtinaun, with
possible shoes from Baronstown (Nicholls 2009, 2) and Seacash (Lynn 1978, 69). Leatherworking
tools might include shears, knives and awls; of these, the shears already referred to
in relation to textile working could have been used for this craft also. Four sites with leather
remains also produced shears, namely Ballinderry II, Cahercommaun, Deer Park Farms and
Lagore. It has also been suggested that the socketed and pronged items referred to above
might have been used for leather-working/scoring; while this is uncertain, the presence of
such tools might potentially suggest leather-working at Dooey, Marlinstown and Kilcloghans,
although no leather remains survived there. Artefacts definitely related to the
manufacture/repair of shoes on site include shoe lasts; two wooden examples have been
excavated, one from Lagore (Hencken 1950, 10, 170) and the other from Deer Park Farms
(Neill 2011, 373).
Other dress accessories produced from leather working include belts; an interesting
speculation would be whether the leather part of the belt would be made at a separate site
from the metal buckles/strap ends – would the metal fittings perhaps have been bought in to
fit a home-made belt?
Ornaments
The best evidence for manufacture of ornaments lies in the tools and other paraphernalia of
working the particular material involved; only occasionally do unfinished/incomplete articles
appear. Metal working may have produced several types of ornaments; moulds, unfinished or
waste examples may clarify this. Should the types of ornament found on a site not match the
134