2009:AD14 - ARMAGH ROAD, LISDOO, Louth

Testing of a proposed development site was undertaken in April and in June 2009 across 24.7ha of greenfields lying predominantly in Lisdoo townland, but also extending west into the Sportsmans Mall area. The site is bound by the R177 Armagh Road to the south-west and to Doylesfort Road to the northeast, some 1km distant from Dundalk town. Almost 0.4ha of test-trenches were opened, on the basis of geophysical survey (Target 2009, 09R6) and landscape analysis. The topsoil and subsoil were both extremely stony, making machine-excavation of most of the test-trenches, and any subsequent archaeological work, a delicate matter. Archaeology was nevertheless identified in several places on the development site; it has been grouped into eleven locations on the basis of testing, geophysical and landscape data to facilitate more succinct description and understanding of the findings. These locations do not necessarily indicate discrete ^sites’; a number of them are similar and likely to be related; several of them also appear to be multi-period and may represent a palimpsest indicative of reuse, or the ^curation’, of an earlier archaeological landscape.
Human burial remains had previously been identified, during monitoring of geotechnical test-pits, and excavated by Fintan Walsh (IAC) at one hill slope location within the development site (Excavations 2004, Nos 1114 and 1115, 04E1642 and 04E1641 respectively). This location, of provisional early medieval/medieval date, was not retested, although nearby test-trenches yielding no archaeology helped to define maximum dimensions for this archaeology. A local-authority geotechnical pit nearer to the former excavation site was monitored, but no archaeology was identified therein. A second location of possible human burials, with evidence for possible related activity nearby, was identified elsewhere on the development during the testing and left in situ. It consisted of 3–4 east–westorientated inhumation graves, with a single human bone recovered from the uppermost fill of one cut: the distal portion of an adult (18+ years) right femur (J. Geber, pers. comm.). One central grave appeared to be lined with planar stone slabs. No enclosure was identified around the burials, but two pits and an associated linear ditch in the same trench (some 32m distant) yielded several sherds of coarseware and a thicker sherd of possible grass-marked undecorated souterrain ware, suggesting a possible date from the 7th/8th century into the medieval period. The graves were also just 15m west-south-west of what may be a much earlier prehistoric ring-barrow or pit cremation cemetery (12m diameter) that was also identified during testing at the north-western edge of the development. Both burial locations were on higher-elevation ^saddles’ between hilltops, a distinctive landscape setting from the other identified archaeological locations.

On a hilltop between the two burial locations, an enclosure/possible ringfort was identified at the northern edge of the development. It was c. 45m in diameter, with an enclosing ditch 2.2–3.7m wide describing an oval around the hilltop. Scattered smaller features were identified within the enclosure, including post-holes in/adjacent to the former interior bank that may once have formed part of a palisade. There was some uncertainty as to whether the 2.2m-wide ditch was the continuation of the enclosure on one side, or whether the enclosure was instead more irregular in shape and represented by another nearby stone-filled ditch 3m wide on that eastern side. If the former preferred provisional interpretation is correct, then the stone-filled ditch may be the remains of a souterrain within the enclosure. No dating evidence was recovered, although typologically the site resembles a (early medieval) ringfort, but the discovery of a similar-sized enclosure of possible Neolithic date by Fintan Walsh at nearby Donoghmore (Excavations 2002, No. 1304, 02E0369), alongside evidence for other prehistoric archaeology on the development, indicates that a prehistoric origin cannot be ruled out. The site is inter-visible with other hilltop archaeology identified on the development, and with Lisdoo ringfort (LH007–016) just outside the development.
A subrectangular building, 5.6m north-northeast/south-south-west by 4.6m, was identified on the east slope of a small hill overlooking a lower elevation area where there is now a pond. Scattered nearby pits/possible post-holes, ditches and crosshatch ploughmarks were also identified in the vicinity. The typology of the building, consisting of a perimeter slot-trench with post-holes in and alongside it, as well as a dividing slot-trench partway across the interior and a hearth pit in the north-east corner, and the presence of five sherds of possible Neolithic pottery from these features suggest the structure may date from that era. This provisional date accords well with understood sea levels at the time and with other evidence from the testing that suggest the present-day pond may have been marsh, fen or fen-carr related to the Castletown River at that time. At least one of the ditches appears to be medieval, as it cut through the subrectangular building and contained several sherds of medieval pottery. A larger 2m-wide ditch at the base of the steeper hill slope nearby has the remains of a bank just upslope and may therefore be the remnants of another (lower) hilltop enclosure at the western edge of the present development. The crosshatch ploughmarks, in this instance, do not appear to be indicative of prehistoric farming, but they may still be early medieval/medieval and of archaeological significance.
Evidence for settlement was identified across the south-facing slope of the largest hill in the development. At least 5–6 round houses were identified, all with similar characteristics and dimensions. Two of the structures appear to overlap, suggesting not all the buildings were contemporary. The round houses were all oval and 5–6m across, slightly flattened east–west. They consisted of a perimeter slot-trench with post-holes in it, some interior post-holes, floor deposits and a central/slightly west-of-centre hearth pit. Other scattered pits/possible post-holes between the discernible buildings probably indicate both associated settlement activity and the truncated remains of further buildings that do not survive as well (building archaeology at this location that does survive is quite shallow itself). The structures were spread across a slightly flattened plateau on the hillside, with no evidence found of an enclosure. They extended down nearly to the boundary between drier ground and formerly boggy lands to the south. No dating evidence was recovered; the structures are perhaps most likely to date from either the Bronze Age or the early medieval period.
Similar hilltop activity/possible settlement archaeology was identified at four separate locations. In all cases, the archaeology was more ephemeral and consisted of scattered pits, possible post-holes, occasional spreads of archaeological soils and relatively narrow ditches. In all the locations no sharply distinctive pattern to the features could be recognised on the basis of the test-trenching, in part due to the very stony soil. However, there is a consistency to the characteristics of the features across all four locations and they are in similar topographic positions atop hills or hillocks. Most are inter-visible with each other.
Yet another location of activity/possible settlement was identified in another south-facing vale. Here again, the archaeology was more ephemeral and included scattered pits, possible postholes, a slot-trench and a spread of archaeological soil. Proximity and similarity to the aforementioned south-facing slope settlement evidence may indicate similar archaeology that has not survived as well.
A burnt mound/fulacht fiadh, with evidence for associated activity, was identified in the eastern part of the development some 60m from the development boundary with the Lisdoo ringfort, at a typical location along the border between drier and formerly boggy ground. The 3.5m by 1.9m+ portion of the burnt mound uncovered was clustered with nearby pits containing burnt-mound-type material as well as a slot-trench. A peculiar 3.9m by 3.4m stony feature identified in a slight south-west-facing hollow some 30m from the burnt mound and along the same dry/boggy ground boundary may be related to the mound. The stony feature contained one very large planar stone, embedded in an archaeological soil and covered with other medium-sized stones that appear to represent (later) field clearance.