Archaeological Impact Assessment of a Proposed Development Site at Shankill, County Dublin

ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF A PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT SITE AT SHANKILL, COUNTY DUBLIN

ON BEHALF OF: ES SHAN LIMITED

AUTHOR: ROSS WATERS

OCTOBER 2020

IAC PROJECT NO: J3455

DOCUMENT CONTROL SHEET

DATE DOCUMENT TITLE REV. PREPARED BY REVIEWED BY APPROVED BY Archaeological Impact Assessment at 06.10.20 0 Ross Waters Grace Corbett Grace Corbett Abingdon, Shankill, Co. Dublin

Abingdon Shankill, Archaeological Impact Assessment Co. Dublin

ABSTRACT

IAC Archaeology Ltd has prepared this report on behalf of ES Shan Limited, to study the impact, if any, on the archaeological resource of the proposed strategic housing development at Shankill, Co. Dublin (ITM 725476/722791). The report was undertaken by Ross Waters of IAC Ltd.

The proposed development area is situated in an open field that was originally situated within the demesne of Abingdon House. The nearest recorded monument consists of Shanganagh Castle (RMP DU026-031001) situated 184m to the west.

The proposed development area was undeveloped until the mid-18th century when a structure is recorded to its immediate north, this likely represents an early form of Abingdon House. By the mid-19th century, the site was situated within the Abingdon demesne. No previously unknown archaeological features were identified on the aerial photographic coverage or during the field inspection.

Geophysical survey (Licence No. 20R0047) and archaeological testing (Licence No. 20E0532) were carried out at the site in 2020, however neither investigation identified any archaeological deposits or features at the site.

There may be an adverse impact on previously unrecorded features or deposits that have the potential to survive beneath the current ground level outside of the footprint of the excavated trenches. This will be caused by ground disturbances associated with the proposed development. Therefore, it is recommended that all ground disturbances associated with the proposed development be monitored by a suitably qualified archaeologist. If any features of archaeological potential are discovered during the course of the works further archaeological mitigation may be required, such as preservation in-situ or by record. Any further mitigation will require approval from the National Monuments Service of the DoCHG.

It is the developer’s responsibility to ensure full provision is made available for the resolution of any archaeological remains, both on site and during the post excavation process, should that be deemed the appropriate manner in which to proceed.

Please note that all recommendations are subject to approval by the National Monuments Service of the Heritage and Planning Division, Department of Culture, Heritage and the Gaeltacht.

IRISH ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LTD i Abingdon Shankill, Archaeological Impact Assessment Co. Dublin

CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ...... I CONTENTS ...... II List of Plates ...... iii 1 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 General ...... 1 1.2 The scheme ...... 1 2 METHODOLOGY ...... 2 2.1 Paper Survey ...... 2 2.2 Field Inspection ...... 4 2.3 Geophysical Survey ...... 4 2.4 Archaeological Testing ...... 5 3 ARCHAEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND ...... 6 3.1 General ...... 6 3.2 Summary of Previous Archaeological Fieldwork ...... 11 3.3 Cartographic Analysis ...... 12 3.4 County Development Plan ...... 13 3.5 Aerial Photographic Analysis ...... 13 3.6 Field Inspection ...... 14 3.7 Summary of Geophysical Results ...... 14 3.8 Summary of Testing Results ...... 14 5 CONCLUSIONS ...... 16 6 IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION STRATEGY ...... 17 6.1 Impact Assessment ...... 17 6.2 Mitigation ...... 17 7 REFERENCES ...... 18 APPENDICES ...... I Appendix 1 Geophysical Survey Report ...... i Appendix 2 Testing Report ...... ii Appendix 3 SMR/RMP Sites within the Surrounding Area ...... iii Appendix 4 Stray Finds within the Surrounding Area ...... v Appendix 5 Legislation Protecting the Archaeological Resource ...... vi Appendix 6 Impact Assessment and the Cultural Heritage Resource ...... ix Appendix 7 Mitigation Measures and the Cultural Heritage Resource ...... xi FIGURES PLATES

ii IRISH ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LTD Abingdon Shankill, Archaeological Impact Assessment Co. Dublin

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Location of the proposed development and surrounding heritage sites Figure 2 Plan of proposed development Figure 3 Results of geophysical survey Figure 4 Plan of excavated test trenches Figure 5 Extract from the Down Survey map and Taylor's map showing the approximate location of the proposed development Figure 6 Extract from 1826 Estate Plan and First Edition 6-inch OS map showing the proposed development Figure 7 Extract from the 25-inch 1912 and Cassini 6-inch OS maps showing the proposed development

LIST OF PLATES Plate 1 Proposed development, facing southwest Plate 2 Proposed development, facing northeast Plate 3 Trench 11, facing south Plate 4 Trench 12, facing east

IRISH ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LTD iii Abingdon Shankill, Archaeological Impact Assessment Co. Dublin

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 GENERAL The following report details an archaeological impact assessment undertaken in advance of the proposed Strategic Housing Development (SHD) in Shankill, Co. Dublin (ITM 725476/722791; Figure 1-2). This assessment includes all recorded archaeological sites within the study area of the proposed development. It was undertaken by Ross Waters of IAC Archaeology Ltd on behalf of ES Shan Limited.

The assessment involved a detailed study of the archaeological heritage background of the proposed development and the surrounding area. This included information from the Record of Monuments and Places of Dublin, the Register of Protected Structures, National Inventory of Architectural Heritage (Figure 1), the topographical files within the National Museum and all available cartographic and documentary sources for the area. A field inspection has also been carried out with the aim to identify any previously unrecorded features and structures of archaeological, historical, or architectural interest. The assessment has also been informed by a geophysical survey (Leigh 2020, Figure 3) and archaeological testing (O’Neill and Waters 2020, Figure 4) which were carried out at the site in 2020.

1.2 THE SCHEME It is proposed to develop the site to provide for residential development (Figure 2). This would take the form of four blocks, designated blocks A, B, C and D. These would be aligned north-south across the site, with block A towards the western end and block D towards the east. Blocks A and D are to be five storeys in height, block B is to be seven- storey at the southern end and five-storey at the northern end, while block C is to be eight-storey at the southern end and five-storey at the northern end.

In addition to the apartment buildings there is to be an amenity pavilion and surface car parking. Access to the site is to be from the adjacent estate road at Clifton Park, at the eastern end of the site and it is also proposed to have pedestrian access to the adjacent park to the south of the site.

1 IRISH ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LTD Abingdon Shankill, Archaeological Impact Assessment Co. Dublin

2 METHODOLOGY

Research for this report was undertaken in four phases. The first phase comprised a paper survey of all available archaeological and built heritage and cartographic sources. The second phase involved a field inspection of the site. The third phase involved a geophysical survey of the site, while the fourth phase involved the completion of archaeological testing.

2.1 PAPER SURVEY • Record of Monuments and Places for County Dublin; • Sites and Monuments Record for County Dublin; • National Monuments in State Care Database; • Preservation Orders List; • Register of Historic Monuments; • Topographical files of the National Museum of Ireland; • Cartographic and written sources relating to the study area; • Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Development Plan 2016-2022; • Place name analysis; • Aerial photographs; • Excavations Bulletin (1970−2018); and • National Inventory of Architectural Heritage (NIAH): Architectural & Garden Survey.

Record of Monuments and Places (RMP) is a list of archaeological sites known to the National Monuments Section, which are afforded legal protection under Section 12 of the 1994 National Monuments Act and are published as a record.

Sites and Monuments Record (SMR) holds documentary evidence and field inspections of all known archaeological sites and monuments. Some information is also held about archaeological sites and monuments whose precise location is not known e.g. only a site type and townland are recorded. These are known to the National Monuments Section as ‘un-located sites’ and cannot be afforded legal protection due to lack of locational information. As a result, these are omitted from the Record of Monuments and Places. SMR sites are also listed on a website maintained by the Department of Culture, Heritage and the Gaeltacht’ (DoCHG) – www.archaeology.ie.

National Monuments in State Care Database is a list of all the National Monuments in State guardianship or ownership. Each is assigned a National Monument number whether in guardianship or ownership and has a brief description of the remains of each Monument.

The Minister for the DoCHG may acquire national monuments by agreement or by compulsory order. The state or local authority may assume guardianship of any national monument (other than dwellings). The owners of national monuments (other than dwellings) may also appoint the Minister or the local authority as guardian of that monument if the state or local authority agrees. Once the site is in ownership or

IRISH ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LTD 2 Abingdon Shankill, Archaeological Impact Assessment Co. Dublin guardianship of the state, it may not be interfered with without the written consent of the Minister.

Preservation Orders List contains information on Preservation Orders and/or Temporary Preservation Orders, which have been assigned to a site or sites. Sites deemed to be in danger of injury or destruction can be allocated Preservation Orders under the 1930 Act. Preservation Orders make any interference with the site illegal. Temporary Preservation Orders can be attached under the 1954 Act. These perform the same function as a Preservation Order but have a time limit of six months, after which the situation must be reviewed. Work may only be undertaken on or in the vicinity of sites under Preservation Orders with the written consent, and at the discretion, of the Minister.

Register of Historic Monuments was established under Section 5 of the 1987 National Monuments Act, which requires the Minister to establish and maintain such a record. Historic monuments and archaeological areas present on the register are afforded statutory protection under the 1987 Act. The register also includes sites under Preservation Orders and Temporary Preservation Orders. All registered monuments are included in the Record of Monuments and Places.

The topographical files of the National Museum of Ireland are the national archive of all known finds recorded by the National Museum. This archive relates primarily to artefacts but also includes references to monuments and unique records of previous excavations. The find spots of artefacts are important sources of information on the discovery of sites of archaeological significance.

Cartographic sources are important in tracing land use development within the development area as well as providing important topographical information on areas of archaeological potential and the development of buildings. Cartographic analysis of all relevant maps has been made to identify any topographical anomalies or structures that no longer remain within the landscape.

• Down Survey Map of the Barony of Rathdown and Parish of Connough and Rathmichaell, c. 1655 • Rocque’s Map of County Dublin, 1760 • Taylor’s Map of the Environs of Dublin, 1816 • Estate map, 1826 • Ordnance Survey maps of County Dublin 1843, 1863-7, and 1906-9

Documentary sources were consulted to gain background information on the archaeological, architectural and cultural heritage landscape of the proposed scheme.

Development Plans contain a catalogue of all the Protected Structures and archaeological sites within the county. The Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Development Plan (2016-2022) was consulted to obtain information on cultural heritage sites in and within the immediate vicinity of the proposed development.

3 IRISH ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LTD Abingdon Shankill, Archaeological Impact Assessment Co. Dublin

Place Names are an important part in understanding both the archaeology and history of an area. Place names can be used for generations and in some cases have been found to have their root deep in the historical past.

Aerial photographic coverage is an important source of information regarding the precise location of sites and their extent. It also provides initial information on the terrain and its likely potential for archaeology. A number of sources were consulted including aerial photographs held by the Ordnance Survey and Google Earth.

Excavations Bulletin is a summary publication that has been produced every year since 1970. This summarises every archaeological excavation that has taken place in Ireland during that year up until 2010 and since 1987 has been edited by Isabel Bennett. This information is vital when examining the archaeological content of any area, which may not have been recorded under the SMR and RMP files. This information is also available online (www.excavations.ie) from 1970−2017.

The National Inventory of Architectural Heritage is a state initiative established under the provisions of the Architectural Heritage (National Inventory) and Historic Monuments (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1999 tasked with making a nationwide record of significant local, regional, national and international structures, which in turn provides county councils with a guide as to what structures to list within the Record of Protected Structures. The NIAH have also carried out a nationwide desk-based survey of historic gardens, including demesnes that surround large houses. This has also been partially completed for County Wicklow and was examined in relation to the surviving demesnes within the constraints area.

2.2 FIELD INSPECTION Field inspection is necessary to determine the extent and nature of archaeological, architectural, and historical remains, and can also lead to the identification of previously unrecorded or suspected sites and portable finds through topographical observation and local information.

The archaeological and architectural field inspection entailed - • Walking the proposed development and its immediate environs. • Noting and recording the terrain type and land usage. • Noting and recording the presence of features or structures of archaeological or historical significance. • Verifying the extent and condition of any recorded sites. • Visually investigating any suspect landscape anomalies to determine the possibility of their being anthropogenic in origin.

2.3 GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY Geophysical survey is used to create ‘maps’ of subsurface archaeological features. Features are the non-portable part of the archaeological record, whether standing structures or traces of human activities left in the soil. Geophysical instruments can detect buried features when their electrical or magnetic properties contrast measurably with their surroundings. In some cases, individual artefacts, especially

IRISH ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LTD 4 Abingdon Shankill, Archaeological Impact Assessment Co. Dublin metal, may be detected as well. Readings, which are taken in a systematic pattern, become a dataset that can be rendered as image maps. Survey results can be used to guide excavation and to give archaeologists insight into the pattern of non-excavated parts of the site. Unlike other archaeological methods, the geophysical survey is not invasive or destructive.

A geophysical survey was undertaken to inform this assessment in March 2020 within the proposed development (Leigh 2020, Licence 20R0047; Figure 3). A summary of the geophysical report is presented in Section 3.7 and the full text included in Appendix 1.

2.4 ARCHAEOLOGICAL TESTING Archaeological Test Trenching can be defined as ‘a limited programme... of intrusive fieldwork which determines the presence or absence of archaeological features, structures, deposits, artefacts or ecofacts within a specified area or site on land or underwater. If such archaeological remains are present test trenching defines their character and extent and relative quality’ (CIfA 2014a, 4). A program of archaeological testing based on the results of the geophysical survey was carried out within the proposed development area in October 2020. This was undertaken by John O’Neill of IAC under licence 20E0532 (O’Neill and Waters 2020, Figure 4). Detailed results of the archaeological testing are included in Section 3.8 and the full report is reproduced in Appendix 2 of this report.

5 IRISH ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LTD Abingdon Shankill, Archaeological Impact Assessment Co. Dublin

3 ARCHAEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND

3.1 GENERAL The proposed development is located in Shankill, Co. Dublin in an open field that was once situated in the demesne of Abingdon in the townland of Shanganagh within the Parish of Rathmichael and Barony of Rathdown. The site is bordered to the north by Abingdon House and grounds, to the west by Derwent House and to the east and south by residential estates.

There are no recorded monuments located within the site boundary, however there are five recorded monuments within the study area (Figure 1). The closest recorded monument is Shanganagh Castle (RMP DU026-031001) situated 184m to the west.

3.1.1 Prehistoric Period

Mesolithic Period (7000–4000 BC) Although very recent discoveries may push back the date of human activity by a number of millennia (Dowd and Carden 2016), the earliest widespread evidence suggests that Ireland was first occupied in the Mesolithic period by communities that subsisted on hunting, fishing and foraging. The most common evidence found to show the presence of Mesolithic communities at a site are scatters of worked flint material, a by-product from the production of flint implements. The current archaeological evidence suggests that south County Dublin was inhabited by the end of the Mesolithic period, however much of the artefactual and monumental evidence has been eliminated by a combination of the growth of the built-up area and coastal erosion (Stout and Stout 1997, 5). At this time people made crude flint tools known as Larnian Flakes. Small numbers of these flakes have been found at Dalkey Island, Dun Laoghaire and Rathfarnham and may indicate small-scale transient settlement along the riverbanks and seashores (Corlett 1999, 10). The earliest evidence comes from middens, collections of debris, which contained material relating to the manufacture of stone tools and the collection of coastal resources such as shellfish, fish and birds (Liversage 1968, 144). The lower and therefore earlier layers of the middens included ‘Bann flakes’ and other Larnian material representative of the Mesolithic period while the more recent layers include arrowheads and convex scrapers more typical of the Neolithic period.

Neolithic Period (4000–2500 BC) During the Neolithic period communities became less mobile and their economy became based on the rearing of stock and cereal cultivation. This transition was accompanied with major social change. Agriculture demanded an altering of the physical landscape; forests were rapidly cleared and field boundaries constructed. There was a greater concern for territory, which saw the construction of large communal ritual monuments called megalithic tombs, which are characteristic of the period. The most common type of megalithic tomb within the Rathdown area is the portal tomb. The earliest indicators of human occupation in the immediate vicinity of the proposed development area consist of a portal tomb, known as the ‘Shanganagh

IRISH ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LTD 6 Abingdon Shankill, Archaeological Impact Assessment Co. Dublin

Dolmen’ in the townland of Ballybrack (RMP DU026-030), 468m to the north. There are no traces of a covering cairn and a holed stone was recovered from the site (IA/82/76).

Bronze Age (2500–800 BC) The Bronze Age was marked by the widespread use of metal for the first time in Ireland. As with the transition from Mesolithic to Neolithic, the transition into the early Bronze Age was accompanied by changes in society. Megalithic tombs were no longer constructed and the burial of the individual became typical. Cremated or inhumed bones were often placed in a cist, which is a small stone box set into the ground or a stone-lined grave. These were often accompanied by pottery. Burials were sometimes accompanied by barrows, (mounds of earth set over the burial), stone cairns or marked with ring ditches. An example of a ring-barrow (RMP DU026-133) is located c. 1.4km to the northwest. Often these types of burials are found on high ground and may have acted as a marker for ritual or burial space to the surrounding populations. A number of burials were identified in the Dun Laoghaire Rathdown area in the 19th and 20th centuries, which may date to this period. Isolated stone-lined burials were noted during drainage works in Dalkey and two cist burials, possibly of Bronze Age date were identified at Stillorgan Park (NMI 1955:42-73) and Cabinteely (NMI R2454.1-3).

Burnt mounds, spreads of burnt stone, or fulachta fiadh, are the most common type of prehistoric site known in Ireland. They are characterised by a mound of burnt stones often associated with a trough (Waddell 1998, 183). Although burnt mounds of shattered stone and charcoal-rich soil occur as a result of various activities that have been practiced from the Mesolithic to the present day, those noted in close proximity to a trough are generally interpreted as Bronze Age cooking/industrial sites and the majority of radiocarbon dated fulachta fiadh date to the Bronze Age (Brindley and Lanting 1990, 55–6). The closest examples of fulachta fiadh were uncovered during monitoring in 1998 in the townland of Cherrywood (RMP DU026-141/2) c. 1.28-1.33km to the northwest of the proposed development.

Iron Age (800 BC – AD 400) There is increasing evidence for Iron Age settlement and activity in recent years as a result of development-led excavations as well as projects such as LIARI (Late Iron Age and Roman Ireland). Yet, this period is distinguished from the rather rich remains of preceding Bronze Age and subsequent early medieval period by a relative paucity of evidence for material culture in Ireland. The Iron Age had traditionally been associated with the arrival of the Celts and the Celtic language in Ireland. The Celts were an Indo- European group who are thought to have originated probably in east-central Europe in the 2nd millennium BC. They were among the earliest to develop an Iron Age culture, as has been found at Hallstatt, Austria (c. 700BC). There is no known evidence of Iron Age activity in the vicinity of the proposed development.

7 IRISH ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LTD Abingdon Shankill, Archaeological Impact Assessment Co. Dublin

3.1.2 Early Medieval Period (AD 400–1100) The early medieval period is depicted in the surviving sources as entirely rural characterised by the basic territorial unit known as túath. In this period Ireland was not a united country but rather a patchwork of minor monarchies all scrambling for dominance, with their borders ever changing as alliances were formed and battles fought. Byrne (1973) estimates that there were probably at least 150 kings in Ireland at any given time during this period, each ruling over his own túath. During this sometimes-violent period, roughly circular defensive enclosures known as ringforts were constructed to protect farmsteads.

The Rathdown area was well-populated during this period with a large number of ecclesiastical centres established in the area (Rathmichael, Tully, and Kilternan) and close proximity to the coastal resource. It is therefore surprising that there is not greater evidence for settlement in the form of ringforts within the area, the closest example is c. 1.8km to the west (RMP DU026-149). It is possible that there was no need for a large number of defended settlements within the area as Rathdown was out of reach of the constant attention of the Kings of Meath to the north of Dublin city and the Kings of Leinster to the west of the Wicklow Mountains. It is also possible that many of the sites were removed during the medieval period, when the arrival of the Anglo- Normans and their new techniques of warfare rendered the ringfort obsolete (Corlett 1999, 53). Potential ringforts were often recorded as enclosures, there are two examples (RMP DU026-032/3) within the study area of the proposed development, 191m to the northeast and 386m to the south.

In the early medieval period south Dublin and adjoining areas of north Wicklow formed part of the territory of Cualu, which was controlled by the Dál Messin Corb, a former royal family of Laigin. Following their loss of power, they withdrew over the mountains to the coast around Arklow and the Uí Théig became the leading tribe in the area. In the 8th century the Uí Théig were replaced by a branch of the Uí Briúin family lending the name Uí Briúin Chualann to the territory now known as Rathdown (Corlett 1999, 35). During the early medieval period powerful ecclesiastic and secular settlements expanded and a mosaic of kingdoms formed across the country. The Mac Turcaill dynasty controlled large tracts of land at this time, including lands in Uí Briúin Cualann stretching south from Tully to the Dargle River in Bray (Murphy and Potterton 2010, 88). It was at this time that important ecclesiastical centres were being founded across the country.

The early medieval period saw the introduction of Christianity to Ireland and with it the arrival of churches into the Irish landscape. Early medieval ecclesiastical enclosures are recorded at Killiney (RMP DU026-013001-8) c. 1.5km to the north, Shanganagh (RMP DU026-054001-4) c. 1.5km to the south, and Rathmichael (RMP DU026-050001-5/7- 13/15-17/19-23/26/27) c. 1.9km to the southwest of the development. The remains of the early medieval ecclesiastical complex at Shanganagh lie within the boundary of Shanganagh demesne. It is possible that the ecclesiastical site, known as Killtuck, was dedicated to Toca mAeda mSenaic brother of Crimthann Cualann, King of Leinster who died in the early 7th century (Corlett 1999, 137). A considerable portion of the walls of the church were standing along with another small square structure when the site was

IRISH ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LTD 8 Abingdon Shankill, Archaeological Impact Assessment Co. Dublin visited in the 19th century by Eugene O’ Curry of the Ordnance Survey (Ball 1902, 119). Today the remains of the church consist of the foundations of a small stone building. A number of stone monuments identified at the site have since been relocated. One, a small stone cross, is located in the grounds of St. Ann’s Church in Shankill while another cross is located beside a lane in Rathmichael (Corlett 1999, 137). A rectangular enclosure, visible on a vertical aerial photograph, once surrounded the church.

3.1.3 Medieval Period (AD 1100–1600) The beginning of the medieval period was characterised by political unrest that originated from the death of Brian Borumha in 1014 at the Battle of Clontarf. Diarmait MacMurchadha, deposed King of Leinster, sought the support of mercenaries from England, Wales and Flanders to assist him in his challenge for kingship. Norman involvement in Ireland began in 1169, when Richard de Clare and his followers landed in Wexford to support MacMurchadha. Two years later de Clare (Strongbow) inherited the Kingdom of Leinster and by the end of the 12th century the Normans had succeeded in conquering much of the country (Stout and Stout 1997, 53). Between 1170 and 1350 the Anglo-Norman influence was stamped on the Irish landscape. Initially this involved the construction of defensive earthworks, such as mottes and earth and timber castles. More permanent fortifications were constructed once the Anglo-Normans had consolidated their power, resulting in a great castle-building period between 1220 and 1310 (O’Keeffe 2000, 34). A medieval castle (RMP DU026- 029001) was originally located c. 965m to the northwest in Loughlinstown.

The arrival of the Anglo-Normans and ensuing social upheaval led to the significant changes in land ownership and settlement. Much of Rathdown was granted to Walter de Ridelesford before 1176 by Strongbow, however it appears that Henry II took back some of these lands though as he wanted to keep much of Dublin and its surroundings to himself. A large part of Rathdown then became part of the royal estate of Obrun (Murphy and Potterton 2010, 85). The greatest landowner within the region under the Norman regime was the Archbishop of Dublin, who retained those lands owned since before the invasion, including Dalkey, Rathmichael, and Shankill. The medieval borough of Shankill (RMP DU026-052) c. 1.8km to the southwest was founded in the 13th century. It was originally heavily wooded and obtained a permit in 1229 to clear woodland on the manor. A portion of the district of Shanganagh, then known as Rathsalchan and Kiltuck, belonged to the Priory of the Holy Trinity (Ball 1902, 117). Another portion of the land, known as the seigniory of Shanganagh, belonged to the Vicars-Choral of St. Patrick’s Cathedral.

By end of the 13th century many of the English settlers had withdrawn on account of the war in Scotland. The Irish tribes took advantage of this and carried out many raids on those that remained. During the course of the Scottish invasion under Edward Bruce during 1315-1317, Irish tribes occupied many outlying districts in County Dublin with the remainder being uncultivated and laid to waste. Towards the middle of the 14th century steps were made to restrict the military capacity of the Irish tribes and to protect the remaining area of Anglo-Norman influence. A military garrison was stationed at Bray and the lands in the area were re-invested with new tenants including the Lawless and Walsh families who remained in the area for many centuries.

9 IRISH ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LTD Abingdon Shankill, Archaeological Impact Assessment Co. Dublin

Between the 14th and the 16th centuries tower houses were the typical residence of the Irish gentry. There are a large number of fortified buildings within the Rathdown area and this was in part due to the presence of the Pale. The Pale was defined as a hinterland around the centre of Anglo-Norman rule based in Dublin. During the 15th century the ‘Subsidised Castles Act’ provided grants of ten pounds to encourage the construction of castles to defend the Pale against the native Irish. The partial remains of a tower house survive 184m to the west of the proposed development (RMP DU026- 031001). The tower house, Shanganagh Castle, was constructed in 1408 by Thomas Lawless but by the mid-15th century the family had, as elsewhere in the surrounding area, been supplanted by a member of the Walsh family. The structure was constructed of granite and remains of battlements and a wall-walk are visible on the northwest side (Turner 1983, no. 63).

3.1.4 Post-Medieval Period (AD 1600–1900) Although English landowners may have been losing their grip on Irish land during the medieval period, during the Elizabethan period, lands were regained and secured with English government control. The Elizabethan implementation of the ‘Surrender and Regrant’ policy allowed the monarch to continue colonising Ireland at a time when the treasury funds were too low to afford a war. After the Reformation the control of all churches in the diocese were transferred to the Protestant church, which impacted the parish heavily. The Civil Survey of 1654-56 (Simington 1945) was the first relatively comprehensive survey of land ownership in Ireland - dating from the Cromwellian confiscation of land after the rebellion of 1641 and the subsequent civil war. It can also include brief descriptions of major buildings such as castles, churches or mills. In 1641 the survey records John Walsh as the landowner of Shanganagh and James Walsh as the owner of the townlands Cork (Cork Great and Cork Little), Connagh (Old Connaught) and a portion of litle Brey (Little Bray) however by 1670 John Walsh owned them all. Shanganagh Castle (RMP DU026-031001) was described in 1654 as having two orchards, a garden, a grove of ash trees set for ornament, and a mill. The terroir of the Down Survey records that it was in disrepair. Ball (1902-1920) records that the thatched castle burnt down in 1763/83 and was repurposed as a barn. The Down Survey records a water mill (RMP DU026-031002) c. 215m to the west on a mill race at the Shanganagh River, this was likely built atop the site of an earlier medieval mill.

IRISH ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LTD 10 Abingdon Shankill, Archaeological Impact Assessment Co. Dublin disappeared, streams were diverted to form lakes and quite often roads were completely diverted to avoid travelling anywhere near the main house or across the estate. This was achieved at all scales, from a modest Rectory Glebe to demesne landscapes that covered thousands of acres. A number of large houses and demesne landscapes once surrounded the area containing the proposed development. These included Abingdon House (RPS 1785; NIAH 60260119), the demesne of which the proposed development was originally situated in, Laughlinstown House, Shanganagh House, Air Hill, St. Brendans and Beechlands House. These buildings were accompanied by naturalised demesne landscapes, which today have become substantially denuded due to suburban residential development.

In 1793 the newly established French Republic was at war with Great Britain and a number of other continental countries (Kerrigan 1974a, 107). In 1803 an Act of Parliament was passed to allow for the acquisition of land for costal defences in Britain and Ireland (Kerrigan 1974b, 148). Twenty-seven Martello towers were constructed between Bray in County Wicklow to Balbriggan in north County Dublin to protect the city and Dublin Bay from a possible French landing (Kerrigan 1974b, 148). There are two Martello towers recorded in the wider area at Killiney (RMP DU026-014002) c. 1km to the northeast and Shanganagh (RMP DU026-055001) c. 1.2km to the southeast. The towers along with their defensive batteries are depicted on John Taylor’s Map of the Environs of Dublin, 1816 and on the first edition Ordnance Survey map, 1843. The towers at Shanganagh is no longer extant and is likely to have been lost as a result of coastal erosion. A pair of earthen tree-lined banks running north-west to south-east through the green field area to the west of Shanganagh Cliffs Estate represented the remains of a path known as “Battery Wood” (Turner 1983). The path leads to a battery, the location of which was ill-chosen as it was to the rear of some rising ground and did not command a view of the shore (Joyce 1912, 62). The dwelling which accommodated the garrison was still standing in the early 20th century and is represented today by the remains of a stone-built wall to the east of the coastal path.

3.2 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL FIELDWORK A review of the Excavation Bulletin (1970–2019) has revealed five previous archaeological investigations have been carried out to date in within the study area.

Thirty test-trenches were excavated at the site of Shanganagh Castle (RMP DU026- 031001), Beechlands (RPS 1785), and Barn Close (RPS 1784) in 2014 c. 140m to the west (Licence 14E0341, Bennett 2014:481). The assessment did not identify any enclosing features associated with the castle and there is no surviving evidence of any castle bawn. The area around the castle was scarped or reduced as far as Beechlands with only limited deposits surviving within the interior of the castle itself. No archaeological deposits were recovered from Barn Close.

Testing was carried out at a site to the south of Shanganagh Castle (RMP DU026- 031001) and a water mill (RMP DU026-031002) c. 215m to the west of the proposed development (Licence 06E0794, Bennett 2006:701). This determined that the south side of the castle was unoccupied in the medieval period and encountered a 19th- century metalled surface.

11 IRISH ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LTD Abingdon Shankill, Archaeological Impact Assessment Co. Dublin

The following licences did not identify anything of archaeological significance; 05E0392, 07E0033, and 11E0304.

3.3 CARTOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS

William Petty’s Down Survey, Map of the Barony of Rathdown and Parish of Connough and Rathmichaell, c. 1655 (Figure 5) This map records the 400-acre townland of Shanganagh as being owned by John Walsh. The terrier records that there are a castle house and corn mill in disrepair in the townland (RMP DU026-031001/2). Both of these features are depicted on the northern edge of the townland on the Shanganagh River. The townland of Corke is depicted to the south and annotated as being owned by James Walsh.

John Rocque’s An Actual Survey of the County of Dublin, 1760 Rocque’s map depicts the proposed development area in more detail than Petty’s map, with roads and topographical features depicted. Shanganagh Castle is annotated on the map to the west of the proposed development. A house is depicted to the immediate north of the site, which is located in open fields at this time. This house may represent an early form of Abingdon House.

John Taylor’s Map of the Environs of Dublin, 1816 (Figure 5) There are now three structures to the north of the proposed development, likely to represent Abingdon House, and several structures to the immediate north of Shanganagh Castle. The Martello Towers to the northeast at Killiney and to the southeast at Shankill are depicted for the first time. There are no other significant changes in the study area.

Estate map, 1826 (Figure 6) This map shows Abingdon House to the north of the proposed development area, with the laneway and belt of trees running along the southern boundary of the site.

First Edition 6-inch Ordnance Survey Map, 1843, scale 1:10,560 (Figure 6) The site is shown as being located across two fields of the Old Abington (Abingdon) demesne landscape. The site is bordered to the north by the entrance laneway to the house. The southern border consists of a thick, wood-lined boundary that separates the demesne from the demesne of Shanganagh House. Shanganagh Bridge is depicted to the north and a corn mill is annotated among the structures to the north of Shanganagh Castle. An unlabelled small house and demesne landscape are depicted to the immediate east of Shanganagh Castle.

25-inch Ordnance Survey Map, 1863-7 scale 1:2,500 (Figure 7) Abingdon House has expanded to the north of the house as has Shanganagh House, now Shanganagh Park, to the south. Shanganagh Castle is marked in ruins and the corn mill is no longer depicted. The unlabelled demesne and structures beside Shanganagh Castle are labelled as Beechlands and Barn Close on this mapping, while the Martello Tower at Shankill is labelled as disused. The Dublin and South Eastern Railway has been

IRISH ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LTD 12 Abingdon Shankill, Archaeological Impact Assessment Co. Dublin constructed by this time and two branches of the railway pass the proposed development c. 425m to the east and c. 625m to the southwest. These two branches run between Bray and Kingstown (Dún Laoghaire) and Bray and Harcourt Street respectively.

Cassini 6-inch Ordnance Survey Map, 1906-9, scale 1:1560 (Figure 7) The proposed development area is now located within three fields to the south of Abingdon. A house named Derwent has been constructed to the immediate west of the site. A structure labelled as Abingdon Lodge is annotated at the entrance to the laneway of the main house. The railway branch to Dún Laoghaire now follows the same route as the modern DART and passes the proposed development c. 90m to the east.

3.4 COUNTY DEVELOPMENT PLAN

3.4.1 Archaeological Heritage The Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Development Plan (2016–2022) recognises the statutory protection afforded to archaeological sites included within the Record of Monuments and Places and seeks to protect those monuments, to including their setting, access, views and prospects. The Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council recognises the value and significance of the county’s archaeological heritage, and the importance of fostering a greater public appreciation of this heritage. Through policies contained in this Development Plan, they seek to ensure the effective protection, conservation and enhancement of archaeological sites, monuments and their settings (Appendix 4).

There are no recorded monuments located within the proposed development area, however, there are five within the study area. The nearest consists of a tower house, known as Shanganagh Castle (RMP DU026-031001) 184m to the west.

Table 1: Recorded Monuments located within the Study Area DISTANCE FROM STATUTORY SMR NO. TOWNLAND CLASSIFICATION DEVELOPMENT PROTECTION Castle - tower DU026-031001 Shanganagh 184m west RMP house Water mill - DU026-031002 Shanganagh 186m west RMP unclassified DU026-032 Shanganagh Enclosure 191m northeast RMP DU026-033 Shanganagh Enclosure 386m south RMP Megalithic tomb - DU026-030 Ballybrack 468m north RMP portal tomb

3.5 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS Inspection of the aerial photographic coverage of the constraints area held by the Ordnance Survey (1995, 2000, 2005), Google Earth (2005-2018), and Bing Maps did not reveal any previously unknown archaeological or architectural features.

13 IRISH ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LTD Abingdon Shankill, Archaeological Impact Assessment Co. Dublin

3.6 FIELD INSPECTION The field inspection sought to assess the proposed development area, its previous and current land use, the topography and any additional information relevant to the report. The field inspection was carried out on the 11th April 2019 in clear conditions.

The proposed development area comprises an open field in use for grazing and is bordered by mature trees and vegetation. The field undulates, rising to the north and south and dipping in the centre west and east (Plates 1-2). No archaeological features were noted.

3.7 SUMMARY OF GEOPHYSICAL RESULTS Geophysical survey was carried out at the site in March 2020 (Leigh 2020, Licence 20R0047; Figure 3; Appendix 1), which revealed no clear responses of potential archaeological interest. Parallel linear areas of disturbance were identified which most likely represent former field boundaries. A distinct area of magnetic disturbances has a indistinct rectilinear shape and may represent the remains of a building. Given the magnetic disturbance and ferrous responses, this is thought to be more recent on origin and not of archaeological interest.

3.8 SUMMARY OF TESTING RESULTS Test trenching took place on 5th October 2020 under licence 20E0532 and undertaken by John O’Neill of IAC (O’Neill and Waters 2020, Licence No. 20E0532, Figure 4; Appendix 2). Trenches were excavated using an 8 tonne 360-degree rubber tracked excavator equipped with a flat, toothless bucket under strict archaeological supervision. Any investigated deposits were preserved by record. This was by means of written, drawn, and photographic records.

A total of 15 trenches were excavated across the site measuring c. 395 linear metres (Figure 4, Plates 3-4). Trenches were mostly aligned east-west and north-south and evenly spaced across the area of the proposed development. A previous geophysical survey had not identified any features of likely archaeological significance.

Topsoil across the site was a loose silty clay which varied in depth from 0.35 m to 0.70 m. The greater depth of topsoil tended to be present towards the northern end of the site.

The topsoil overlay subsoil that varied between stiff orange-brown clay with outcrops of granite boulders and bands of sandy grey clay. A small number of drainage features of nineteenth and twentieth century date were present within the subsoil along with modern rubbish pits.

While no areas of archaeological potential were visible in the geophysical survey results, subsequently modern rubbish pits and drainage features could be identified with visible trends and anomalies interpreted from the geophysical survey data. There was little evidence for agricultural activity at the site. Traces of root burning and the increasing depth of topsoil at the northern end of the site appear to reflect landscaping associated with house at Abingdon and subsequent development of the area. No

IRISH ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LTD 14 Abingdon Shankill, Archaeological Impact Assessment Co. Dublin features or deposits of archaeological significance were identified during the course of the works.

15 IRISH ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LTD Abingdon Shankill, Archaeological Impact Assessment Co. Dublin

5 CONCLUSIONS

The proposed development area is situated in one open field that was originally situated within the demesne of Abingdon House, in the townland of Shanganagh, the Parish of Rathmichael and Barony of Rathdown. There are five recorded monuments within a 500m radius of the proposed development, the nearest of which is Shanganagh Castle (RMP DU026-031001) situated 184m to the west.

An inspection of the cartographic sources revealed that Shanganagh Castle and the nearby mill (RMP DU026-031001/2) were in disrepair by the mid-17th century. As early as Rocque’s map of 1760 there appears to have been structures to the immediate north of the proposed development, however it was not until the 1843 OS map that the structure was annotated as Old Abington (Abingdon). At this time the site is situated within the demesne of Abingdon and to the immediate north of the Shanganagh House demesne.

While the area developed throughout the post-medieval period a review of the photographic coverage of the site revealed that it has not changed since 1995 and no previously unknown archaeological nor architectural features were identified.

Geophysical survey and archaeological testing were carried out at the site in 2020, however neither investigation identified any archaeological deposits or features at the site.

IRISH ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LTD 16 Abingdon Shankill, Archaeological Impact Assessment Co. Dublin

6 IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION STRATEGY

Impacts can be identified from detailed information about a project, the nature of the area affected and the range of archaeological resources potentially affected. Archaeological sites can be affected adversely in a number of ways: disturbance by excavation, topsoil stripping; disturbance by vehicles working in unsuitable conditions; and burial of sites, limiting access for future archaeological investigation. Upstanding archaeology can be affected adversely by direct damage or destruction arising from development, from inadvertent damage arising from vibration, undermining etc. and also by indirect impacts to a building’s visual setting, view or curtilage.

6.1 IMPACT ASSESSMENT

• There may be an adverse impact on previously unrecorded archaeological feature or deposits that have the potential to survive beneath the current ground level. This will be caused by ground disturbances associated with the proposed development.

6.2 MITIGATION We recommend the following actions in mitigation of the impacts above.

• It is recommended that all ground disturbances associated with the proposed development be monitored by a suitably qualified archaeologist. If any features of archaeological potential are discovered during the course of the works further archaeological mitigation may be required, such as preservation in-situ or by record. Any further mitigation will require approval from the National Monuments Service of the DoCHG.

Please note that all recommendations are subject to approval by the National Monuments Service of the Heritage and Planning Division, Department of Culture, Heritage and the Gaeltacht.

17 IRISH ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LTD Abingdon Shankill, Archaeological Impact Assessment Co. Dublin

7 REFERENCES

Ball, F. E. 1902-1920 A History of the County of Dublin: The People, Parishes and Antiquities from the Earliest Times to the Close of the Eighteenth Century. Six Volumes, Dublin

Ball, F. E. 1902 ‘Rathmichael and its Neighbourhood’. Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquarians, Vol. XXXII, pps. 113-127.

Bennett, I. (ed.) 1987−2010 Excavations: Summary Accounts of Archaeological Excavations in Ireland. Bray. Wordwell.

Brindley, A.L. and Lanting, J.N. 1989/90 "The dating of fulachta fiadh", in V. Buckley (ed.) Burnt Offerings: International Contributions to Burnt Mound Archaeology, 55-56.

Byrne, F. J. 1973 Irish Kings and High Kings. London.

Corlett, C. 1999 Antiquities of Old Rathdown Wordwell: Bray

Chartered Institute for Archaeologists 2014a Standards & Guidance for Archaeological Excavation

Chartered Institute for Archaeologists 2014b Standards & Guidance for an Archaeological Watching Brief (Monitoring)

Chartered Institute for Archaeologists 2014c Standards & Guidance for Field Evaluation

Chartered Institute for Archaeologists 2014d Standards & Guidance for Desk Based Assessments.

Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht 2011 National Inventory of Architectural Heritage Handbook.

Dowd M., and Carden R. 2016 ‘First evidence of a Late Upper Palaeolithic human presence in Ireland’ Quaternary Science Reviews 139, 158-163.

Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Development Plan 2016-2022

Griffith, Richard, 1848, General Valuation and Rateable Property in Ireland – County of Dublin, Barony of Rathdown: Primary Valuation, Dublin.

Joyce, W St J. 1912 The Neighbourhood of Dublin. Skellig Press, Dublin

Kerrigan, P. 1974a ‘The Defences of Ireland 1793-1815’ in An Cosantoir, 1974, pgs. 107- 109

IRISH ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LTD 18 Abingdon Shankill, Archaeological Impact Assessment Co. Dublin

Kerrigan, P. 1974b ‘The Martello Towers’ in An Cosantoir, 1974, pgs. 148-149

Liversage, G. 1968 ‘Excavation at Dalkey Island, County Dublin’. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, LXVI C

Murphy, M. and Potterton, M. 2010 The Dublin Region in the Middle Ages: Settlement, Land-use and Economy. Four Courts Press, Dublin.

National Monument Service, Department of Culture, Heritage and The Gaeltacht. Sites and Monuments Record, County Dublin.

National Museum of Ireland. Topographical Files, County Dublin

O’ Keeffe, T. 2010 Medieval Ireland: An Archaeology. Tempus, Dublin

Registry of Deeds

Simington, R.C. 1945 The Civil survey AD 1654-1656 County of Dublin. Vol. VII, Dublin

Stout, G & Stout, M 1997 ‘Early Landscapes: from Prehistory to Plantation’ in Aalen, F.H.A et al (eds) 1997 Atlas of the Irish Rural Landscape Cork University Press

Turner, K. 1983 If You Seek Monuments – A Guide to the Antiquities of the Barony of Rathdown

Valuation Office cancelled books

Waddell, J. 1998 The Prehistoric Archaeology of Ireland. Bray: Wordwell.

CARTOGRAPHIC SOURCES Down Survey Map of the Barony of Rathdown and Parish of Connough and Rathmichaell, c. 1655

Rocque’s Map of County Dublin, 1760

Sherrard, Brassington and Green, 1826, Map of Shanganagh, the property of John Roberts, National Library of Ireland.

Taylor’s Map of the Environs of Dublin, 1816

Ordnance Survey maps of County Dublin 1843, 1863-7, and 1906-9

ELECTRONIC SOURCES www.excavations.ie – Summary publication of every archaeological excavation that has taken place in Ireland (1970–2018), edited by Isabel Bennett.

19 IRISH ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LTD Abingdon Shankill, Archaeological Impact Assessment Co. Dublin www.archaeology.ie – DoCHG website listing all SMR sites, National Monuments and sites with Preservation Orders. Database of archaeological sites known to the National Monuments Service. www.osiemaps.ie – Ordnance Survey aerial photographs dating to 1995, 2000 & 2005 and 6”/25” OS maps www.buildingsofireland.ie – Website listing the results of the NIAH building and garden survey for Dublin www.googleearth.com – Website containing aerial photographic datasets and street view www.bingmaps.com – Website containing aerial photographic datasets www.heritagemaps.ie – The Heritage Council web-based spatial data viewer which focuses on the built, cultural and natural heritage. www.logainm.ie – Placenames Database of Ireland launched by Fiontar agus Scoil na Gaelige and the DoCHG.

IRISH ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LTD 20 Abingdon Shankill, Archaeological Impact Assessment Co. Dublin

APPENDICES

APPENDIX 1 GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY REPORT

i IRISH ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LTD

GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY

REPORT

Shanganagh, Shankill, County Dublin

Date: 31/03/2020

Licence: 20R0047

J. M. Leigh Surveys Ltd. 124 Oaklawn West Leixlip County Kildare www.jmlsurveys.com 01 615 4647

. J. M. Leigh Surveys Ltd. . 124 Oaklawn West, . Leixlip, Co. Kildare . Tel: 01 615 4647 . Mobile: 0879062729 . www.jmlsurveys.com . .

GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY SUMMARY SHEET SHANGANAGH, SHANKILL , COUNTY DUBLIN . . Site Name Shankill Ref No. 20007

Townland Shanganagh Licence No. 20R0047

County Dublin Licence Holder Joanna Leigh

ITM (centre) E725474, N722805 Purpose Pre-planning investigation

Client IAC Ltd. Reference No. N/A

Ground Survey was conducted within a single field comprising of short grass. Areas at the Conditions outskirts of the survey area had bramble vegetation and could not be surveyed.

Survey Type Detailed gradiometer survey totalling c. 1.4 hectares.

Summary of Results The data is dominated by modern magnetic disturbance and ferrous responses. No clear responses of potential archaeological interest were recorded.

Parallel linear areas of disturbance most likely represent former field boundaries. A distinct area of magnetic disturbance has a vague rectilinear shape and may represent the remains of a building. Given the magnetic disturbance and ferrous responses, this is thought to be more recent in origin and not of archaeological interest.

Field Staff Joanna Leigh & Susan Curran

Report Date 31/03/2020 Report Author Joanna Leigh Contents

1. Introduction 1

2. Survey ground conditions and further information 1

3. Survey Methodology 2

4. Data Display 2

5. Survey Results & Conclusion 3

Geophysical Survey Shanganagh, Shankill, Co. Dublin ______

Geophysical Survey Report Shanganagh, Shankill, County Dublin

1 Introduction

1.1 A geophysical survey has been conducted by J. M. Leigh Surveys at a site in the townland of Shanganagh, Shankill, Co. Dublin. The survey was requested by IAC Ltd. on behalf of Corcom. The survey forms part of a pre-planning site investigation.

1.2 The application area is contained within a single field comprising of short pasture. The site is located adjacent to houses, with Rathsallagh Grove housing estate to the south. Figure 1 presents the site and survey location at a scale of 1:2,000.

1.3 There are no recorded monuments within the application area; however, there are five recorded monuments located within 500m of the site. A recorded ‘Enclosure’ (DU026-032) lies c. 155m to the east, a ‘Castle - tower house’ (DU026-031001) and ‘Water mill - unclassified’ (DU026-031002) are situated c. 170m to the west; a second ‘Enclosure’ (DU026-033) lies c. 355m to the south, and a ‘Portal tomb’ (DU026-030) is located c. 450m to the north.

1.4 The main aim of the survey was to identify any responses which may represent unknown archaeological remains within the application area. It is the objective of the survey to identify the location, nature and extent of any responses of potential archaeological interest.

1.5 The detailed gradiometer survey was conducted under licence 20R0047 issued by the Department of Culture, Heritage and the Gaeltacht.

2 Survey ground conditions and further information

2.1 The survey area was contained within a single field comprising of short grass. Mature trees bound the site, with areas of bramble vegetation at the survey extents. 2.2 The site was level with no topographical features to note. A metal post was located in the centre of the field and most likely represents the remains of a former modern field boundary.

J. M. Leigh Surveys Ltd. 1 31/03/2020 Geophysical Survey Shanganagh, Shankill, Co. Dublin ______

3 Survey Methodology

3.1 A detailed gradiometer survey detects subtle variations in the local magnetic field and measurements are recorded in nano-Tesla (nT). Some archaeological features such as ditches, large pits and fired features have an enhanced magnetic signal and can be detected through recorded survey.

3.2 Data was collected with a Bartington Grad 601-2 instrument. This is a specifically designed gradiometer for use in archaeological prospection. The gradiometer operates with a dual sensor capacity making survey fast and effective.

3.3 The instrument is calibrated in the field to ensure a constant high quality of data. Extremely sensitive, these instruments can detect variations in soil magnetism to 0.01nT, affording diverse application throughout a variety of archaeological, soil morphological and geological conditions.

3.4 All data was collected in ‘zigzag’ traverses. Grid orientation remained constant throughout to facilitate the data display and interpretation.

3.5 Data was collected with a sample interval of 0.25m and a traverse interval of 1m, providing 6400 readings per 40m x 40m grid. The survey grid was set-out using a GPS VRS unit. Survey tie-in information is available upon request.

3.6 The survey methodology, data presentation and report content adheres to the European Archaeological Council (EAC) (2016) ‘Guidelines for the use of Geophysics in Archaeology’.

4 Data display

4.1 A summary greyscale image and accompanying interpretation diagram are presented in Figures 2 and 3, at a scale of 1:1,000.

4.2 Numbers in parenthesis in the text refer to specific responses highlighted in the interpretation diagram (Figure 3).

4.3 Isolated ferrous responses highlighted in the interpretation diagram most likely represent modern ferrous litter and debris and are not of archaeological interest. These are not discussed in the text unless considered relevant.

4.4 The raw gradiometer data is presented in archive format in Appendix A1.01 and A1.02. The raw data is displayed as a greyscale image and xy-trace plot, both at a scale of 1:500. These are for reference only and supplied as a PDF upon request.

4.5 The display formats referred to above and the interpretation categories are discussed in the summary technical information section at the end of this report.

J. M. Leigh Surveys Ltd. 2 31/03/2020 Geophysical Survey Shanganagh, Shankill, Co. Dublin ______

5 Survey Results & Conclusion

5.1 The data is dominated by modern ferrous responses and magnetic disturbance. There were no responses of archaeological interest recorded. It is possible that subtle responses of interest are masked by the modern disturbance. 5.2 Parallel linear disturbance (1) and ferrous responses suggest former field boundaries. A metal post was evident in the field and corresponds with these ferrous responses. 5.3 An area of magnetic disturbance (2) has a vague rectilinear shape. It is speculated that a former building may be located here. The ferrous responses suggest this is more recent in origin and not of archaeological interest. 5.4 Faint linear and curvilinear trends (3) are visible in the data. However, these have no clear archaeological pattern and most likely represent more recent ground disturbance and activity. No clear archaeological interpretation can be provided. 5.5 Consultation with a licensed archaeologist and with the Department of Culture, Heritage and the Gaeltacht is recommended to establish if any additional archaeological works are required.

J. M. Leigh Surveys Ltd. 3 31/03/2020 Geophysical Survey Shanganagh, Shankill, Co. Dublin ______

Technical Information Section

Instrumentation & Methodology

Detailed Gradiometer Survey This is conducted to clearly define any responses detected during scanning, or can be applied as a stand-alone methodology. Detailed survey is often applied with a sample interval of 0.25m and a traverse interval of 1m. This allows detection of potential archaeological responses. Data is collected in grids 40m x 40m, and data is displayed accordingly. A more detailed survey methodology may be applied where archaeological remains are thought likely. A survey with a grid size of 10m x 10m and a traverse interval of 0.5m will provide a data set with high resolution.

Bartington GRAD 601-2 The Bartington Grad 601-2 instrument is a specifically designed gradiometer for use in archaeological prospection. The gradiometer operates with a dual sensor capacity making survey very fast and effective. The sensors have a separation of 1m allowing greater sensitivity.

Frequent realignment of the instruments and zero drift correction; ensure a constant high quality of data. Extremely sensitive, these instruments can detect variations in soil magnetism to 0.1nT, affording diverse application throughout a variety of archaeological, soil morphological and geological conditions.

J. M. Leigh Surveys Ltd. 4 31/03/2020 Geophysical Survey Shanganagh, Shankill, Co. Dublin ______

Gradiometer Data Display & Presentation XY Trace

The data are presented as a series of linear traces, enabling a semi-profile display of the respective anomalies along the X and Y-axes. This display option is essential for distinguishing between modern ferrous materials (buried metal debris) and potential archaeological responses. The XY trace plot provides a linear display of the magnitude of the response within a given data set.

Greyscale*

As with dot density plots, the greyscale format assigns a cell to each datum according to its location on the grid. The display of each data point is conducted at very fine increments, allowing the full range of values to be displayed within the given data set. This display method also enables the identification of discrete responses that may be at the limits of instrument detection. In the summary diagrams processed, interpolated data is presented. Raw un-interpolated data is presented in the archive drawings along with the xy-trace plots.

Interpretation

An interpretation of the data is made using many of the plots presented in the final report, in addition to examination of the raw and processed data. The project managers’ knowledge and experience allows a detailed interpretation of the survey results with respect to archaeological potential.

*XY Trace and raw greyscale plots are presented in archive form for display of the raw survey data. Summary greyscale images of the interpolated data are included for presentation purposes and to assist interpretation.

J. M. Leigh Surveys Ltd. 5 31/03/2020 Geophysical Survey Shanganagh, Shankill, Co. Dublin ______

Glossary of Interpretation Terms Archaeology

This category refers to responses which are interpreted as of clear archaeological potential, and are supported by further archaeological evidence such as aerial photography or excavation. The term is generally associated with significant concentrations of former settlement, such as ditched enclosures, storage pits and associated features. ? Archaeology This term corresponds to anomalies that display typical archaeological patterns where no record of comparative archaeological evidence is available. In some cases, it may prove difficult to distinguish between these and evidence of more recent activity also visible in the data. ? Industrial Such anomalies generally possess a strong magnetic response and may equate with archaeological features such as kilns, furnaces, concentrations of fired debris and associated industrial material. Area of Increased Magnetic Response These responses often lack any distinctive archaeological form, and it is therefore difficult to assign any specific interpretation. The resulting responses are site specific, possibly associated with concentrations of archaeological debris or more recent disturbance to underlying archaeological features. Trend This category refers to low-level magnetic responses barely visible above the magnetic background of the soil. Interpretation is tentative, as these anomalies are often at the limits of instrument detection. Ploughing/Ridge & Furrow Visible as a series of linear responses, these anomalies equate with recent or archaeological cultivation activity. ? Natural A broad response resulting from localised natural variations in the magnetic background of the subsoil; presenting as broad amorphous responses most likely resulting from geological features. Ferrous Response These anomalies exhibit a typically strong magnetic response, often referred to as ‘iron spikes,’ and are the result of modern metal debris located within the topsoil. Area of Magnetic Disturbance This term refers to large-scale magnetic interference from existing services or structures. The extent of this interference may in some cases obscure anomalies of potential archaeological interest.

J. M. Leigh Surveys Ltd. 6 31/03/2020 Geophysical Survey Shanganagh, Shankill, Co. Dublin ______

Bibliography

European Archaeological Council (EAC) (2016) ‘Guidelines for the use of Geophysics in Archaeology’ by Armin Schmidt, Paul Linford, Neil Linford, Andrew David, Chris Gaffney, Apostolos Sarris and Jörg Fassbinder.

English Heritage (2008) ‘Geophysical guidelines: Geophysical Survey in Archaeological Field Evaluation.’ Second Edition.

Gaffney, C. Gater, J. & Ovenden, S. (2006) ‘The use of Geophysical Techniques in Archaeological Evaluations.’ IFA Paper No. 6.

Gaffney, C & Gater, J (2003). ‘Revealing the buried past: Geophysics for Archaeologists.’ Tempus Publishing Limited.

National Soil Survey of Ireland (1980) General soil map second edition (1:575,000). An Foras Taluntais.

J. M. Leigh Surveys Ltd. 7 31/03/2020 Geophysical Survey Shanganagh, Shankill, Co. Dublin ______

List of Figures

Figure Description Paper Size Scale

Figure 1 Site & survey location diagram A4 1:2,000

Figure 2 Summary greyscale image A4 1:1,000

Figure 3 Summary interpretation diagram A4 1:1,000

Archive Data Supplied as a PDF Upon Request

A1.01 Raw data greyscale image A3 1:500

A1.02 Raw data XY-Trace plot A3 1:500

J. M. Leigh Surveys Ltd. 8 31/03/2020

Abingdon Shankill, Archaeological Impact Assessment Co. Dublin

APPENDIX 2 TESTING REPORT

IRISH ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANCY LTD ii

ARCHAEOLOGICAL TEST EXCAVATION AT ABINGDON, SHANKILL CO. DUBLIN

LICENCE: 20E0352

ON BEHALF OF: ES SHAN LIMITED

I.T.M.: 725476/722791

LICENCEE: JOHN O’ NEILL AUTHORS: JOHN O’ NEILL & ROSS WATERS

REPORT STATUS: FINAL DATE: OCTOBER 2020

IAC PROJECT REF.: J3455

DOCUMENT CONTROL SHEET

DATE DOCUMENT TITLE REV. PREPARED BY REVIEWED BY APPROVED BY Archaeological Test Excavation at J. O’Neill and 06.10.20 0 Grace Corbett Grace Corbett Abingdon, Shankill, Co. Dublin Ross Waters

Abingdon, Archaeological Test Excavation Shankill, Co. Dublin Licence No.: 20E0532

ABSTRACT

IAC Archaeology has prepared this report on behalf of ES Shan Limited, to study the impact, if any, on the archaeological and historical resource of proposed development, which is located at Abingdon, Shankill, Co. Dublin (ITM 725476/722791). The testing was undertaken by John O’ Neill under licence 20E0352. It follows a previous archaeological assessment (Waters and Goodbody 2019) and a geophysical survey (Leigh 2020).

Archaeological testing was carried out over the course of one day, the 5th October 2020 using a mechanical excavator fitted with a flat grading bucket. The trenches targeted geophysical anomalies and open green space to fully investigate the archaeological potential of the site. Testing revealed no areas of archaeological significance.

There may be an adverse impact on previously unrecorded archaeological feature or deposits that have the potential to survive beneath the current ground level outside of the excavated trenches. This will be caused by ground disturbances associated with the proposed development. Therefore, it is recommended that all ground disturbances associated with the proposed development be monitored by a suitably qualified archaeologist. If any features of archaeological potential are discovered during the course of the works further archaeological mitigation may be required, such as preservation in-situ or by record. Any further mitigation will require approval from the National Monuments Service of the DoCHG.

IAC Archaeology i Abingdon, Archaeological Test Excavation Shankill, Co. Dublin Licence No.: 20E0532

CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ...... I CONTENTS ...... II List of Figures...... iii List of Plates ...... iii 1 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 General ...... 1 1.2 The Development ...... 1 2 ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND ...... 2 2.1 Summary of Desktop Assessment ...... 2 2.2 Summary of Previous Archaeological Fieldwork ...... 4 2.3 Cartographic Analysis ...... 4 2.4 Summary of Geophysical Results ...... 6 2.5 Aerial Photographic Analysis ...... 6 3 ARCHAEOLOGICAL TESTING ...... 7 3.1 General ...... 7 3.2 Testing Results ...... 7 3.3 Conclusions ...... 8 4 IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION STRATEGY ...... 9 4.1 Impact Assessment ...... 9 4.2 Mitigation ...... 9 5 REFERENCES ...... 10 APPENDICES ...... I Appendix 1 Trench Results ...... i Appendix 2 Contexts ...... iv Appendix 3 RMP Sites within the Surrounding Area ...... v Appendix 4 Stray Finds within the Surrounding Area ...... vii Appendix 5 Legislation Protecting the archaeological Resource ...... viii Appendix 6 Impact Assessment & the Cultural Heritage Resource ...... xi Appendix 7 Mitigation Measures & the Cultural Heritage Resource ...... xiii FIGURES PLATES

ii IAC Archaeology Abingdon, Archaeological Test Excavation Shankill, Co. Dublin Licence No.: 20E0532

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Location of proposed development and surrounding archaeological sites Figure 2 Plan of proposed development Figure 3 Plan of excavated test trenches Figure 4 Extract from 1826 Estate Map and First Edition OS maps showing proposed development Figure 5 Results of geophysical survey

LIST OF PLATES Plate 1 Trench 11, facing south Plate 2 Trench 12, facing east

IAC Archaeology iii Abingdon, Archaeological Test Excavation Shankill, Co. Dublin Licence No.: 20E0532

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 GENERAL The following report details the results of a programme of archaeological testing undertaken at Abingdon, Shankill, Co. Dublin, prior to proposed development. This assessment has been carried out to ascertain the potential impact of the proposed development on the archaeological resource that may exist within the proposed development area. The assessment (Licence 20E0532) was undertaken by John O’ Neill of IAC Archaeology (IAC), on behalf of ES Shan Limited.

Test trenching commenced at the site on the 5th October 2020 and continued for one day. This was carried out using an 8 tonne 360-degree rubber tracked excavator, with a flat, toothless bucket, under strict archaeological supervision. A total of 15 trenches were mechanically investigated across the test area which measured c. 395 linear metres. This report follows on from an archaeological assessment and geophysical survey (Waters and Goodbody 2019; Leigh 2020). The geophysical survey did not identify any clear responses of potential archaeological interest.

1.2 THE DEVELOPMENT It is proposed to develop the site to provide for residential development (Figure 2). This would take the form of four blocks, designated blocks A, B, C and D. These would be aligned north-south across the site, with block A towards the western end and block D towards the east. Blocks A and D are to be five storeys in height, block B is to be seven-storey at the southern end and five-storey at the northern end, while block C is to be eight-storey at the southern end and five-storey at the northern end.

The proposal includes landscaping provision and it is intended to retain the trees around the perimeter of the site.

1 IAC Archaeology Abingdon, Archaeological Test Excavation Shankill, Co. Dublin Licence No.: 20E0532

2 ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

2.1 SUMMARY OF DESKTOP ASSESSMENT The proposed development is located in Shankill, Co. Dublin in an open field that was once situated in the demesne of Abingdon in the townland of Shanganagh within the Parish of Rathmichael and Barony of Rathdown. The site is bordered to the north by Abingdon House and grounds, to the west by Derwent House, and to the east and south by residential estates.

Prehistoric Period The earliest indicators of human occupation in the immediate vicinity of the proposed development area consist of a portal tomb, known as the ‘Shanganagh Dolmen’ in the townland of Ballybrack (RMP DU026-030), 468m to the north. There are no traces of a covering cairn and a holed stone was recovered from the site (IA/82/76).

Early Medieval Period (AD400–1100) The Rathdown area was well-populated during this period with a large number of ecclesiastical centres established in the area (Rathmichael, Tully, and Kilternan) and close proximity to the coastal resource. It is therefore surprising that there is not greater evidence for settlement in the form of ringforts within the area, the closest example is c. 1.8km to the west (RMP DU026-149). It is possible that there was no need for a large number of defended settlements within the area as Rathdown was out of reach of the constant attention of the Kings of Meath to the north of Dublin city and the Kings of Leinster to the west of the Wicklow Mountains. It is also possible that many of the sites were removed during the medieval period, when the arrival of the Anglo-Normans and their new techniques of warfare rendered the ringfort obsolete (Corlett 1999, 53). Potential ringforts were often recorded as enclosures, there are two examples (RMP DU026-032/3) within the study area of the proposed development, 191m to the northeast and 386m to the south.

The early medieval period saw the introduction of Christianity to Ireland and with it the arrival of churches into the Irish landscape. Early medieval ecclesiastical enclosures are recorded at Killiney (RMP DU026-013001-8) c. 1.5km to the north, Shanganagh (RMP DU026-054001-4) c. 1.5km to the south, and Rathmichael (RMP DU026-050001-5/7-13/15-17/19-23/26/27) c. 1.9km to the southwest of the development. The remains of the early medieval ecclesiastical complex at Shanganagh lie within the boundary of Shanganagh demesne. It is possible that the ecclesiastical site, known as Killtuck, was dedicated to Toca mAeda mSenaic brother of Crimthann Cualann, King of Leinster who died in the early 7th century (Corlett 1999, 137). A considerable portion of the walls of the church were standing along with another small square structure when the site was visited in the 19th century by Eugene O’ Curry of the Ordnance Survey (Ball 1902, 119). Today the remains of the church

IAC Archaeology 2 Abingdon, Archaeological Test Excavation Shankill, Co. Dublin Licence No.: 20E0532 consist of the foundations of a small stone building. A number of stone monuments identified at the site have since been relocated. One, a small stone cross, is located in the grounds of St. Ann’s Church in Shankill while another cross is located beside a lane in Rathmichael (Corlett 1999, 137). A rectangular enclosure, visible on a vertical aerial photograph, once surrounded the church.

Medieval Period (AD1100–1600) The arrival of the Anglo-Normans and ensuing social upheaval led to the significant changes in land ownership and settlement. Much of Rathdown was granted to Walter de Ridelesford before 1176 by Strongbow, however it appears that Henry II took back some of these lands though as he wanted to keep much of Dublin and its surroundings to himself. The medieval borough of Shankill (RMP DU026-052) c. 1.8km to the southwest was founded in the 13th century. It was originally heavily wooded and obtained a permit in 1229 to clear woodland on the manor. A portion of the district of Shanganagh, then known as Rathsalchan and Kiltuck, belonged to the Priory of the Holy Trinity (Ball 1902, 117). Another portion of the land, known as the seigniory of Shanganagh, belonged to the Vicars-Choral of St. Patrick’s Cathedral.

Between the 14th and the 16th centuries tower houses were the typical residence of the Irish gentry. There are a large number of fortified buildings within the Rathdown area and this was in part due to the presence of the Pale. The Pale was defined as a hinterland around the centre of Anglo-Norman rule based in Dublin. During the 15th century the ‘Subsidised Castles Act’ provided grants of ten pounds to encourage the construction of castles to defend the Pale against the native Irish. The partial remains of a tower house survive 184m to the west of the proposed development (RMP DU026-031001). The tower house, Shanganagh Castle, was constructed in 1408 by Thomas Lawless but by the mid-15th century the family had, as elsewhere in the surrounding area, been supplanted by a member of the Walsh family. The structure was constructed of granite and remains of battlements and a wall-walk are visible on the northwest side (Turner 1983, no. 63).

Post-medieval Period (AD1600-1900) The Civil Survey of 1654-56 (Simington 1945) was the first relatively comprehensive survey of land ownership in Ireland - dating from the Cromwellian confiscation of land after the rebellion of 1641 and the subsequent civil war. It can also include brief descriptions of major buildings such as castles, churches or mills. In 1641 the survey records John Walsh as the landowner of Shanganagh and James Walsh as the owner of the townlands Cork (Cork Great and Cork Little), Connagh (Old Connaught) and a portion of litle Brey (Little Bray) however by 1670 John Walsh owned them all. Shanganagh Castle (RMP DU026-031001) was described in 1654 as having two orchards, a garden, a grove of ash trees set for ornament, and a mill. The terroir of the Down Survey records that it was in disrepair. Ball (1902-1920) records that the thatched castle burnt down in 1763/83 and was repurposed as a barn. The Down Survey records a water mill (RMP DU026-031002) c. 215m to the west on a mill race at the Shanganagh River, this was likely built atop the site of an earlier medieval mill.

3 IAC Archaeology Abingdon, Archaeological Test Excavation Shankill, Co. Dublin Licence No.: 20E0532

Even with the turmoil of the English civil war and arrival of Cromwell in Ireland, the population of southeast Dublin and northeast Wicklow prospered. The 17th century saw dramatic rise in the establishment of large residential houses around the country. The large country house was only a small part of the overall estate of a large landowner and provided a base to manage often large areas of land that could be located nationwide. Lands associated with the large houses were generally turned over to formal gardens, which were much the style of continental Europe. Gradually this style of formal avenues and geometric gardens designs was replaced during the mid-18th century by the adoption of parkland or demesne landscapes – which enabled the viewing of a large house within a designed ‘natural’ setting. Although the creation of a parkland landscape involved working with nature, rather than against it, considerable constructional effort went into their creation. Earth was moved, field boundaries disappeared, streams were diverted to form lakes and quite often roads were completely diverted to avoid travelling anywhere near the main house or across the estate. This was achieved at all scales, from a modest Rectory Glebe to demesne landscapes that covered thousands of acres. A number of large houses and demesne landscapes once surrounded the area containing the proposed development. These included Abingdon (RPS 1785; NIAH 60260119), the demesne of which the proposed development was originally situated in, Laughlinstown House, Shanganagh House, Air Hill, St. Brendans and Beechlands House. These buildings were accompanied by naturalised demesne landscapes, which today have become substantially denuded due to suburban residential development.

2.2 SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL FIELDWORK A review of the Excavations Bulletin (1970–2019) has revealed that five previous archaeological investigations have been carried out to date in within the study area.

The following licences did not identify anything of archaeological significance; 05E0392, 07E0033, and 11E0304.

2.3 CARTOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS William Petty, Down Survey, Map of the Barony of Rathdown and Parish of Connough and Rathmichaell, c. 1655

IAC Archaeology 4 Abingdon, Archaeological Test Excavation Shankill, Co. Dublin Licence No.: 20E0532

This map records the 400-acre townland of Shanganagh as being owned by John Walsh. The terrier records that there are a castle house and corn mill in disrepair in the townland (RMP DU026-031001/2). Both of these features are depicted on the northern edge of the townland on the Shanganagh River. The townland of Corke is depicted to the south and annotated as being owned by James Walsh.

John Rocque, An Actual Survey of the County of Dublin, 1760 Rocque’s map depicts the proposed development area in more detail than Petty’s map, with roads and topographical features depicted. Shanganagh Castle is annotated on the map to the west of the proposed development. A house is depicted to the immediate north of the site, which is located in open fields at this time. This house may represent an early form of Abingdon House.

John Taylor, Map of the Environs of Dublin, 1816 There are now three structures to the north of the proposed development, likely to represent Abingdon House, and several structures to the immediate north of Shanganagh Castle. The Martello Towers to the northeast at Killiney and to the southeast at Shankill are depicted for the first time. There are no other significant changes in the study area.

Sherrard, Brassington and Green, Map of Shanganagh, the property of John Roberts, National Library of Ireland, 1826 (Figure 4) This map shows Abingdon House to the north of the proposed development area, with the laneway and belt of trees running along the southern boundary of the site.

First Edition 6-inch Ordnance Survey Map, 1843, scale 1:10,560 (Figure 4) The site is shown as being located across two fields of the Old Abington (Abingdon) demesne landscape. The site is bordered to the north by the entrance laneway to the house. The southern border consists of a thick, wood-lined boundary that separates the demesne from the demesne of Shanganagh House. Shanganagh Bridge is depicted to the north and a corn mill is annotated among the structures to the north of Shanganagh Castle. An unlabelled small house and demesne landscape are depicted to the immediate east of Shanganagh Castle.

25-inch Ordnance Survey Map, 1863-7 scale 1:2,500 Abingdon House has expanded to the north of the house as has Shanganagh House, now Shanganagh Park, to the south. Shanganagh Castle is marked in ruins and the corn mill is no longer depicted. The unlabelled demesne and structures beside Shanganagh Castle are labelled as Beechlands and Barn Close on this mapping, while the Martello Tower at Shankill is labelled as disused. The Dublin and South Eastern Railway has been constructed by this time and two branches of the railway pass the proposed development c. 425m to the east and c. 625m to the southwest. These two branches run between Bray and Kingstown (Dún Laoghaire) and Bray and Harcourt Street respectively.

5 IAC Archaeology Abingdon, Archaeological Test Excavation Shankill, Co. Dublin Licence No.: 20E0532

Third Edition 6-inch Ordnance Survey Map, 1906-9, scale 1:1560 The proposed development area is now located within three fields to the south of Abingdon. A house named Derwent has been constructed to the immediate west of the site. A structure labelled as Abingdon Lodge is annotated at the entrance to the laneway of the main house. The railway branch to Dún Laoghaire now follows the same route as the modern DART and passes the proposed development c. 90m to the east.

2.4 SUMMARY OF GEOPHYSICAL RESULTS Geophysical survey was carried out at the site in March 2020 (Leigh 2020, Licence 20R0047; Figure 5), which revealed no clear responses of potential archaeological interest. Parallel linear areas of disturbance were identified which most likely represent former field boundaries. A distinct area of magnetic disturbances has a indistinct rectilinear shape and may represent the remains of a building. Given the magnetic disturbance and ferrous responses, this is thought to be more recent on origin and not of archaeological interest.

2.5 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS Inspection of the aerial photographic coverage of the constraints area held by the Ordnance Survey (1995, 2000, 2005), Google Earth (2005-2018), and Bing Maps did not reveal any previously unknown archaeological or architectural features.

IAC Archaeology 6 Abingdon, Archaeological Test Excavation Shankill, Co. Dublin Licence No.: 20E0532

3 ARCHAEOLOGICAL TESTING

3.1 GENERAL Test trenching took place on 5th October 2020, using an 8 tonne 360-degree rubber tracked excavator equipped with a flat, toothless bucket under strict archaeological supervision. Any investigated deposits were preserved by record. This was by means of written, drawn, and photographic records.

A total of 15 trenches were excavated across the site measuring c. 395 linear metres (Figure 3, Plates 1-2, Appendix 1). Trenches were mostly aligned east-west and north- south and evenly spaced across the area of the proposed development. A previous geophysical survey had not identified any features of likely archaeological significance.

The proposed development is currently under grass and is bounded by mature trees and hedges on the north, east and west. On the southern side a wire fence and trees separate the site from a green area and public pathway.

The details for individual trenches are included in Appendix 1.

The test trenches were excavated to determine, as far as reasonably possible, the location, extent, date, character, condition, significance and quality of any surviving archaeological remains threatened by the proposed development. Test trenching was also carried out to clarify the nature and extent of existing disturbance and intrusions and to assess the degree of archaeological survival in order to formulate further mitigation strategies. These are designed to reduce or offset the impact of the proposed development scheme.

3.2 TESTING RESULTS Topsoil across the site was a loose silty clay which varied in depth from 0.35 m to 0.70 m. The greater depth of topsoil tended to be present towards the northern end of the site.

Non-Archaeological Features While no areas of archaeological potential were visible in the geophysical survey results, subsequently modern rubbish pits and drainage features could be identified with visible trends and anomalies interpreted from the geophysical survey data. There was little evidence for agricultural activity at the site. Traces of root burning and the increasing depth of topsoil at the northern end of the site appear to reflect landscaping associated with house at Abingdon and subsequent development of the area.

7 IAC Archaeology Abingdon, Archaeological Test Excavation Shankill, Co. Dublin Licence No.: 20E0532

3.3 CONCLUSIONS The testing did not identify any archaeologically significant features that are likely to be impacted by the proposed development. The earliest identifiable modification of the area appears to post-date the development of Abingdon House to the north with some drainage features and landscaping associated with nineteenth and twentieth century use of the site.

IAC Archaeology 8 Abingdon, Archaeological Test Excavation Shankill, Co. Dublin Licence No.: 20E0532

4 IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION STRATEGY

4.1 IMPACT ASSESSMENT

4.2 MITIGATION We recommend the following actions in mitigation of the impacts above.

Please note that all recommendations are subject to approval by the National Monuments Service of the Heritage and Planning Division, Department of Culture, Heritage and the Gaeltacht.

9 IAC Archaeology Abingdon, Archaeological Test Excavation Shankill, Co. Dublin Licence No.: 20E0532

5 REFERENCES

Ball, F. E. 1902-1920 A History of the County of Dublin: The People, Parishes and Antiquities from the Earliest Times to the Close of the Eighteenth Century. Six Volumes, Dublin.

Ball, F. E. 1902 ‘Rathmichael and its Neighbourhood’. Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquarians, Vol. XXXII, pps. 113-127.

Bennett, I. (ed.) 1987−2010 Excavations: Summary Accounts of Archaeological Excavations in Ireland. Bray. Wordwell.

Brindley, A.L. and Lanting, J.N. 1989/90 "The dating of fulachta fiadh", in V. Buckley (ed.) Burnt Offerings: International Contributions to Burnt Mound Archaeology, 55-56.

Byrne, F. J. 1973 Irish Kings and High Kings. London.

Chartered Institute for Archaeologists. 2014a. Standards & Guidance for Field Evaluation.

Chartered Institute for Archaeologists. 2014b. Standards & Guidance for Archaeological Excavation.

Chartered Institution of Field Archaeologists. 2014c. Standards & Guidance for an Archaeological Watching Brief (Monitoring).

Corlett, C. 1999 Antiquities of Old Rathdown Wordwell: Bray.

Department of Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands. 1999a. Framework and Principles for the Protection of the Archaeological Heritage. Government Publications Office, Dublin.

Department of Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands. 1999b. Policy and Guidelines on Archaeological Excavation. Government Publications Office, Dublin.

Dowd M., and Carden R. 2016 ‘First evidence of a Late Upper Palaeolithic human presence in Ireland’ Quaternary Science Reviews 139, 158-163.

Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Development Plan 2016-2022.

Environmental Protection Agency. 2017. Draft Advice Notes on Current Practice (in the preparation of Environmental Impact Statements). Government Publications Office, Dublin.

IAC Archaeology 10 Abingdon, Archaeological Test Excavation Shankill, Co. Dublin Licence No.: 20E0532

Environmental Protection Agency. 2017. Draft Guidelines on the Information to be Contained in Environmental Impact Statements. Government Publications Office, Dublin.

Joyce, W St J. 1912 The Neighbourhood of Dublin. Skellig Press, Dublin

Kerrigan, P. 1974a ‘The Defences of Ireland 1793-1815’ in An Cosantoir, 1974, pgs. 107-109

Kerrigan, P. 1974b ‘The Martello Towers’ in An Cosantoir, 1974, pgs. 148-149

Leigh, J. 2020 Geophysical Survey Report, Shanganagh, Shankill, County Dublin. Licence 20R0047. Unpublished report by J.M. Leigh Surveys on behalf of IAC Archaeology.