2017:632 - Blackhall Big, Meath

Planning permission was granted for the construction of equestrian stable blocks at Blackhall Big, Dunboyne, Co. Meath. The precise position and layout of the blocks had been designed to avoid impacting on the presence, along the eastern perimeter of the development area, of the possible remains of the trivallate ringfort, ME050:008, which although officially recorded as destroyed in 1970, does appear to have some ground expression in the adjacent grass-covered field, and its presence below ground was confirmed in a testing phase of works undertaken as part of the proposed development in April 2017.
The April testing consisted of three machine-dug test trenches, excavated to assess the nature of any surviving archaeological deposits associated either with the rath or the field system ME050:007. Trench 1 was 29m long and 2m in width and was aligned roughly north-south some 5m to the east of the existing factory. It was positioned so as to examine any features associated with the projected extent of the multi-vallate ringfort, which, from both cartographic and photographic sources, appeared to extend into the proposed development area. An average of 0.4m of modern overburden, consisting of imported stone and gravel hardcore, was removed down onto the surface of relatively undisturbed deposits. This overburden was deepest at the south end of the trench where it reached a depth of some 0.6m but reduced to some 0.3m at the northern end of the trench. Two substantial linear features were noted running east-west across the north-south line of the test trench. That to the south was a maximum of 10m in width, but this measurement is misleading as it was clear that the north-south line of the test trench had cut across the line of the feature at an angle, the projected, and more accurate, width of the feature is some 6m. The upper fill of the feature was a grey-brown, mottled, relatively stone-free clay silt. It was distinctly different from the deposits to the north and south. These consisted of a very hard and compacted, stony, silt clay, in which some charcoal flecking was noted.
Some 6m to the north, a second linear feature was noted, again running east-west across the test trench, and, like the feature to the south, this was also some 6m wide, with its upper fill defined by a brown-grey, stone-free clay silt. Again this feature was clearly cut into a layer of hard compact yellow brown stony silt clay.
A number of clearly modern features was noted in the trench. At the south end a deposit of old machinery was noted within a dark grey-black oily soil. Interestingly this deposit was located within the confines of the east-west linear feature. In addition a sewer pipe and a series of land drains were also noted.
Trench 2 was 42m in length and 2m in width and located to the north of the existing factory building. It was positioned along the projected line of the south wall of the ‘Option 2’ stable complex. Nothing of archaeological interest was noted.
Trench 3 was located some 15m to the north of, and ran parallel to, the line of Trench 2. It was positioned over the projected north wall of the ‘Option 2’ stable complex and extended for a distance of 44m and like Trench 2, was 2m in width. Nothing of archaeological interest was noted.

Nothing of archaeological interest was noted in either Trench 2 or 3. This would support the results from the CRDS testing of the site of the agricultural shed to the north, where no trace of the field system ME050:007 was uncovered (O’Connor 2008). Their conclusion, that more recent agricultural activity in the area had in all probability removed any surviving evidence, would also appear to hold true for this area of the development.
The area of Trench 1 produced potentially significant archaeology. Here, it is reasonable to interpret the two 6m wide linear features, running east-west across the trench, as the remains of two ringfort ditches. Due to the fact that some charcoal flecking was noted in the more compact soils between the ditches, is most likely evidence that some elements of the inter-ditch banks also survive. Superimposing the Ordnance Survey map onto the development area and adding the information from the test trench clearly shows that the sequence of bank, ditch, bank, ditch, indicated on the OS map, survives below ground. While no physical examination of the form of the ditch took place, apart from clarifying its width, it is likely that as much as 2m of its depth may still survive. It should also be noted that a number of the land drains uncovered, particularly at the north end of the trench, ran into the line of the ditch. This would suggest that the presence of a ditch was known about in the past and was used as a conduit for water management and drainage.
The scheme was re-designed to avoid impacting on the projected line of the rath ditches, and ground works associated with the construction of the new scheme were monitored in November and December 2018 under an extension to license 17E0358. Nothing of archaeological significance was noted with ground levels within and around the projected area of the rath increased as part of the overall development.

AHC Ltd, 36 Ballywillwill Road, Castlewellan. Co Down BT31 9LF