2025:234 - Manorland 2 Division & Charterschoolland, Meath

Archaeological testing was carried out at Manorland 2 Division & Charterschoolland, Trim, Co. Meath. The site is located to the west of the R158 Summerhill Road, Trim and contains one monument (ME036-026, Enclosure). Archaeological testing was previously conducted by Judith Carroll in 2011 under licence number 11E0418 following a geophysical survey, which was carried out by Target Archaeological
Geophysics under licence numbers 05R0122 & 11R0127. A second phase of archaeological testing was carried out by Irish Archaeological Consultancy in 2024 under licence number 24E0373. Further testing was required, as no dateable evidence was recovered from any of the aforementioned archaeological investigations. It was
necessary to ascertain whether this RMP was, in fact, an archaeological monument.

Under the current phase of testing, two areas (Area A and Area B) measuring 15m by 15m were opened at the location of ME036-026, Enclosure. Area A was located along the western extent and Area B was located along the southern extent. The eastern and northern extent of this enclosure is aligned with a modern field boundary. In Area A the topsoil had an average thickness of 0.3m and was removed to reveal a natural, orange-brown boulder clay with grey gravel in places. A north-south aligned ditch (C4) was exposed and was visible along the entire length of Area A. Two sections were excavated across the ditch C4 – one was excavated in the northern extent of Area A, and one was excavated in the southern extent. C4 measured 3.4m in width at the top and 0.7m at the base and had a depth of 1.2m. It was U-shaped in profile with a sharp break of slope at the top and a more gradual break at the base. Two fills (C8 and C9) were contained within the ditch C4 in the southern extent. C9 was the primary fill and
consisted of a brown, loose clay that contained frequent inclusions of stone (as if intended for drainage). It had a thickness of 0.7m. Three body sherds of creamware (25E0149:9:1-3) and a fragment of a glass bottle (25E0149:9:4) were recovered from C9. A significant quantity of animal bone was also recovered from C9. C8 was the upper fill of C4 and lay above C9. It consisted of a finer brown clay with less stone. It had a thickness of 0.5m. No finds were recovered from C8. C10 was identified within the northern extent of C4. C10 was the same as C8. C10 was not as stony. A single sherd of black glazed earthenware was recovered from C10 (25E0149:10:1).
In Area B the topsoil had an average thickness of 0.3m and was removed to reveal
a natural, orange-brown boulder clay with grey gravel in places. An east-west aligned ditch (C3) was exposed and was visible along the entire width of Area B. One section was excavated across the eastern extent of C3.  C3 measured 3.8m in width at the top and 0.7m in width at the base and had a depth of 1.8m. It was U-shaped in profile, had a sharp break of slope at the top and a gradual break of slope at the base. Three fills were contained within C3 (C5-C7). C7 was the primary fill and consisted of a brown, loose clay with numerous medium-sized, rounded cobblestones, suggestive of drainage. It had a thickness of 0.5m. Two body sherds of black glazed earthenware (25E0149:7:1-2) and one sherd of creamware (25E0149:7:1-3) were recovered from C7. Some fragments of animal bone were also recovered from C7. C6 was the secondary fill and consisted of a loose, brown loam with some larger stones present. It lay above C7 and below C5. No finds were recovered, but some animal bone fragments were identified. C5, the upper fill, consisted of a sandier and finer brown clay with fewer stones than C6. It may represent a recut. One fragment of a green glass bottle
was recovered from C5 (25E0149:5:1). It lay above C6.

In conclusion, ME036-026, Enclosure, is not an archaeological monument but the remnants of a pre-existing square-shaped field that was removed in the post-medieval period. It is recommended that this site be delisted from the Record of Monuments and Places. The development will therefore have no archaeological impact.