County: Dublin Site name: Brenanstown
Sites and Monuments Record No.: - Licence number: 06E0214
Author: Aaron Johnston, for Cultural Resource Development Services Ltd, Archaeological and Historical Consultants, Unit 4, Dundrum Business Park, Dundrum, Dub
Site type: Possible prehistoric activity
Period/Dating: —
ITM: E 722696m, N 724266m
Latitude, Longitude (decimal degrees): 53.254555, -6.161202
A test excavation was carried out on a section of the proposed LUAS B1 line and an associated temporary works compound in June 2006. The excavation, funded by the Railway Procurement Agency, took place between the old Harcourt Street line and Laughanstown Lane. The development footprint in this area measured c. 12600m2. The area is currently undeveloped. Testing consisted of the excavation of a centre-line test-trench and offset trenches at 15m intervals extending to the full 30m width of the development corridor. Two areas of archaeology (Sites 2 and 3) were discovered and excavated under an extension to the test excavation licence.
Site 2
In the initial testing phase, a rectangular area of 14m by 16m was opened up to investigate possible archaeological activity noticed in the test-trenches. Four features of potential archaeological significance were identified. Further excavation in August concluded that these features were natural – possibly a series of root systems and tree boles – and not archaeologically significant.
Site 3A
An L-shaped area measuring 22m by 20m was stripped to expose possible archaeological features noticed in the test-trenches. The topsoil depth measured 0.3–0.5m. The features identified consisted of a small possible post-pit with packing stones, possible slot-trenches, post-holes, pits and associated burnt patches. This may be a small part of a much larger site not yet fully exposed. Although no datable artefacts were retrieved, the feature types suggest a possibly prehistoric date. The possibility of the presence of unexposed archaeological remains is very high.
Site 3B
An area of 6m by 7m was exposed to investigate a burnt patch which was exposed in the test-trench. There seemed to be possible pit or post-hole features surrounding the burnt patch. The features exposed are generally similar to those uncovered in Site 3A. A small flint core was uncovered while cleaning back one of the features, which could suggest a possible prehistoric date. It would appear that this was part of the same archaeological complex of features of Site 3A. The possibility of unexposed archaeological remains is very high. The general landscape setting of the site on top of a low flat hill with good surrounding views, the proximity to the nearby river and fertile soils would have made this a suitable settlement area. The possibilities of unexposed archaeological remains in this area are quite high. A geophysical survey carried out in May (Elliott 2006) suggested that at least 30 small possible pit or post-hole-type anomalies are randomly located across the proposed area of the temporary works compound. These would seem to roughly correspond with the feature types exposed in testing and indicate that the possible archaeological remains continue outside the area tested. A management plan has been drafted to preserve the remains in situ beneath the temporary works compound during the construction of the LUAS.
Reference
Elliot, I.S. 2006 Report on Archaeo-geophysical Survey at Laughanstown: Licence Number 06R069. Unpublished. CRDS Ltd, Dublin.
