2006:574 - Abbotstown Business Park, Cappogue, Dublin

NMI Burial Excavation Records

County: Dublin Site name: Abbotstown Business Park, Cappogue

Sites and Monuments Record No.: DU014–027 Licence number: 06E0228; 06R034

Author: Franc Myles, Margaret Gowen & Co. Ltd, 27 Merrion Square, Dublin 2.

Site type: Site of castle

Period/Dating:

ITM: E 715825m, N 734698m

Latitude, Longitude (decimal degrees): 53.349805, -6.260310

This assessment had two components. A programme of geophysical prospecting by Joanna Leigh and Declan Enright was undertaken in early March 2006. The survey areas were set out using tapes and detailed survey blocks were tied in with a DGPS system to allow accurate relocation. This was followed by the mechanical excavation of five test-trenches across the site to ‘address the archaeological potential of the entire development site and in particular test for the presence of any remains associated with the castle site’.
The development footprint encompasses the site of Cappogue Castle, which is indicated on the RMP map as being adjacent to a complex containing a small farmhouse and a number of outbuildings. This is also the site of a protected structure, No. 92 on the Fingal County Council Development Plan. In addition, the constraint circle for a recorded habitation site (DU014–028) encroached into the development footprint to the south-east. This Neolithic habitation site was excavated by Margaret Gowen in advance of the construction of a gas main. The four fields tested undulate slightly, with occasional bedrock outcrops evident towards the north.
The trenches were excavated through to natural subsoil and/or bedrock, which was located just underneath the surface in the area around the castle site. There was no evidence recovered for the castle or for any other features of archaeological significance. However, in the very north-western corner of the development site a small rectangular earthwork was recorded, the remains of a mud-walled cabin known as the ‘Honeymoon House’ and used until c. 40 years ago to accommodate farm labourers.
The principal focus of the assessment was to locate evidence for the castle and it would appear likely that this was located in an area east of a small pond, just to the north of the ‘site of castle’, which is now occupied by a complex of farm buildings and an extensive concrete farmyard. An examination of the standing structures within the farmyard did not reveal evidence for the castle or, for that matter, evidence for reused masonry in the fabric.
The construction works for the proposed business park involve the demolition of all standing structures, the levelling of the site and a certain amount of landscaping. The northern boundary of the site (which includes the farmhouse and some of the outbuildings) is within a 12m corridor reserved for the proposed Metro to Dublin airport. The proposed development will involve the construction of three large co-joined double warehouses along the M50, and smaller warehouses and a landmark building along the Ballycoolin Road. The Ordnance Survey castle indicator is located under a proposed carpark between Blocks C and E, but the farmhouse structures are slightly to the east under Blocks E and G.
As evidence for the castle was not located across the RMP location, it would certainly be possible that the castle is located in the vicinity of the farmyard and it was recommended that further test-trenching be undertaken across the areas now covered with a concrete yard, after the standing structures had been demolished. Additionally, it was recommended that the area north of the pond along the land-take of the proposed Metro should be investigated, if the castle’s remains are not located elsewhere.
The collapsed vernacular dwelling at the north-western corner of the site will be directly impacted upon by the provision of car parking spaces to the rear of the proposed Block B. The preservation of this earthwork was recommended as a reminder of the site’s archaeological past (perhaps as part of the landscaping scheme).
The pond is undoubtedly the result of human intervention in the landscape, although its antiquity was not established archaeologically. In an area with evidence of prehistoric settlement, such as the adjacent Neolithic habitation site, its significance has not perhaps been adequately considered. Its preservation as part of the landscaping scheme would obviate the need for further archaeological investigation prior to its disappearance under the proposed Block E.