10.01.2014 Views

EMAP_2012_Report_6_1.pdf (7.3 MB) - The Heritage Council

EMAP_2012_Report_6_1.pdf (7.3 MB) - The Heritage Council

EMAP_2012_Report_6_1.pdf (7.3 MB) - The Heritage Council

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Clonmacnoise, Armagh and Nendrum also clearly supported craftsmen engaged in specialist<br />

iron-, metal- and glass-production.<br />

Other theories have been advanced about the organisation of early medieval iron-working.<br />

Mytum (1992, 234) interpreted the evidence of the law-tracts as meaning that smiths worked<br />

in permanent forges for a surrounding community of farmers and has argued that each túath<br />

had one head blacksmith who was a major figure in the territory at these sites. However,<br />

Carlin (2008, 111) has criticised this model, noting that the archaeological evidence is not<br />

consistent with this centralised approach, but is instead replete with ‘isolated’ iron-working<br />

features such as those along the M4 and ‘examples of high-quality, small-scale, localised ‘doit-yourself’<br />

smithing that was being undertaken by independent farmers’. <strong>The</strong> focus of the<br />

early literary sources on high-status sites might explain why these sources failed to account<br />

for, or mention the importance of, the iron-working activities at smaller, ordinary farmsteads<br />

in early medieval Ireland.<br />

Although knowledge of the basics of iron-working was probably widespread in early medieval<br />

society, excavations have revealed considerable variability in the extent and character of<br />

evidence at various forms of settlements. <strong>The</strong> slag assemblages from most excavated early<br />

medieval sites typically range from 30-200kg although there are a growing number of sites<br />

with assemblages over 1000kg (Wallace & Anguilano 2010b, 73), perhaps indicative of<br />

specialised iron-working sites. However, it is often difficult to determine the duration of the<br />

iron-working activity at some sites (e.g. Johnstown) while the extent of the excavated area<br />

on different sites and the size of the sample of metallurgical debris taken can vary<br />

considerably, skewing our perception of the character of iron-working at these places.<br />

Comber recognised 14 sites with extensive evidence for iron-working and 37 with average<br />

evidence (Comber 2008, 123-4). <strong>The</strong> weight of iron slag from early medieval sites can give a<br />

very rough indicator of the scale of such activities and was readily available for 60 sites within<br />

the <strong>EMAP</strong> <strong>2012</strong> gazetteer (Appendix 1). This obviously represents accumulated weight over<br />

periods of time and has to take into account that some processes may produce more residues<br />

than others. Nonetheless it gives an indication of the range and scale of work.<br />

A total of 148 sites had no ferrous metallurgical residue. While many of these could be a<br />

result of extent of excavation or what excavators chose to record in older reports it is a<br />

sizeable percentage of the sample. It is striking that some very large excavated settlements<br />

have revealed very little iron working debris. Eighteen of the sites in the <strong>EMAP</strong> <strong>2012</strong><br />

gazetteer had 10kg of metallurgical residue or less. This includes sites such as Baronstown<br />

(Linnane & Kinsella 2009b), Dowdstown (Cagney & O’Hara 2009) and long lived enclosed<br />

cemeteries such as Owenbristy (Tierney & Delaney 2011) and Collierstown (O’Hara 2009c).<br />

Some of these sites had very large excavated areas. This would suggest that iron-working on<br />

these sites occurred very infrequently and those within either carried out smelting and<br />

smithing at other locations or went to smiths at other settlements.<br />

Twenty eight sites had between 10kg and 100kg of metallurgical residue. This ranged from<br />

massive complexes like Roestown 2 (10kg), univallate settlements like Mackney (46kg,<br />

Delaney 2009, 44), the cemetery and settlement at Ratoath (73kg, Wallace 2010) and the<br />

univallate settlement and workshop at Killickaweeny (86kg, Walsh 2008).<br />

Six sites had between 100 and 200kg of metallurgical residue. This included sites with<br />

multiple metalworking areas like Borris (142kg, Wallace & Anguilano 2010a), univallate<br />

enclosures with workshops like Gortnahown 2 (158kg, Young 2009b) and settlements with<br />

cemeteries like Parcnahown (100kg, Young 2009c) and Balriggan (113kg, Photos-Jones<br />

2011). Three sites had between 250 and 500kg of metallurgical residue. <strong>The</strong>se comprised the<br />

univallate settlement and smithy at Sallymount (265kg, Clarke & Long 2009), the Viking<br />

settlement at Woodstown including smelting and smithing (272kg, Young 2009d) and the<br />

royal site at Knowth (341kg, Eogan 1977). Six settlements in the <strong>EMAP</strong> <strong>2012</strong> gazetteer<br />

contained 500kg or more. <strong>The</strong>se were settlements with cemeteries at Johnstown (2200kg,<br />

Photos-Jones 2008a) and Carrigatogher Harding (750kg, Taylor 2009), the multivallate and<br />

39

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!