UNDERWATER/INTERTIDAL
ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
OF
FETHARD HARBOUR, FETHARD ON SEA
CO. WEXFORD
ON BEHALF OF
TJ O CONNOR & ASSOCIATES, CONSULTING ENGINEERS
Moore Marine
Job Number: M10WX01
Author:
Date: November 2010
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... IV 1 SCOPE OF WORKS ...... 1 1.1 Introduction ...... 1 1.2 Purpose of the Project ...... 1 2 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PROJECT ...... 3 2.1 Description of the Project ...... 3 2.2 Site Layout/Location details ...... 6 3 DESCRIPTION OF THE EXISTING ENVIRONMENT ...... 6 3.1 Solid Geology ...... 6 3.2 Soil Type ...... 6 4 ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND ...... 6 5 BASELINE DATA ...... 9 5.1 Record of Monuments and Places ...... 9 5.2 Lewis Topographical Dictionary ...... 11 5.3 National Inventory of Architectural Heritage ...... 13 5.4 Aerial Photographs ...... 14 5.5 Previous Archaeological Fieldwork in the Area ...... 15 5.6 Historic Maps ...... 19 5.6.1 First Edition Ordnance Survey, 1838 ...... 19 5.6.2 Second Edition Ordnance Survey, 1893 ...... 20 5.7 The Maritime Sites and Monuments Record (MSMR), ...... 20 5.8 The Ports and Harbours Archive ...... 21 6 SITE SURVEY ...... 21 6.1 Survey Aims and Methodology: ...... 21 6.2 Site Conditions ...... 23 6.3 Fethard Harbour ...... 23 6.4 Site Survey ...... 23 7 DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 33 7.1 Discussion ...... 33 7.1.1 The Development Area ...... 33 7.2 Assessment of Potential Impacts ...... 33 7.3 Conclusions ...... 34 7.4 Recommendations ...... 34 APPENDIX 1 BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 35 APPENDIX 2 LEGISLATIVE BACKGROUND ...... 36 APPENDIX 3 IMPACT ASSESSMENT & THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCE ...... 39
TABLE OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Extract from Discovery Series Map # 76 with site location highlighted ...... 2 Figure 2. Plan of proposed development ...... 4 Figure 3. Profile of improvement area ...... 4 Figure 4. Detailed development plan ...... 5 Figure 5. Extract from RMP WX050 showing development site in red ...... 11 Figure 6. First Edition Ordnance Survey Map, 1838, showing development area ...... 19 Figure 7. Second Edition Ordnance Survey, 1893 ...... 20 Figure 8. Proposed survey grid in red ...... 22 Figure 9. Metal detection contact location map ...... 28
TABLE OF PLATES
Plate 1. NIAH Image of Fethard Harbour ...... 14 Plate 2. Aerial photograph of Ingard Point and Fethard Harbour ...... 15 Plate 3. View of southern survey area from the east ...... 29 Plate 4. View of southern access ramp from the east ...... 29 Plate 5. Additional view of southern access ramp ...... 29 Plate 6. View of eastern end of southern survey area...... 29 Plate 7. View of central section of southern survey area ...... 29 Plate 8. View of northern access ramp ...... 30 Plate 9. Metal bar on northern foreshore ...... 30 Plate 10. Concrete filled tyres on northern foreshore ...... 30 Plate 11. Two engine blocks on northern foreshore ...... 30 Plate 12. Lobster pot on northern foreshore ...... 30 Plate 13. Single arm anchor on mid foreshore ...... 30 Plate 14. Additional view of single arm anchor on mid foreshore ...... 31 Plate 15. Second single arm anchor on mid foreshore ...... 31 Plate 16. Vertical view of single arm anchor ...... 31 Plate 17. Partially buried anchor chain ...... 31 Plate 18. Gear wheel on upper foreshore ...... 31 Plate 19. Cluster of three single arm anchors on lower foreshore...... 31 Plate 20. Single arm anchor in cluster of three ...... 32 Plate 21. View of northern survey area ...... 32 Plate 22. Additional view of northern survey area ...... 32 Plate 23. Iron weights on northern foreshore ...... 32
TABLE OF TABLES
Table 1. Location details ...... 6 Table 2. Table of metal detector contacts in southern survey area...... 24 Table 3. Table of metal detector contacts in northern survey area ...... 27
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Moore Marine Services Ltd. was commissioned in its immediate vicinity, it was classified by the by TJ O Connor & Associates to carry out an National Inventory of Architectural Heritage as underwater/Intertidal archaeological impact being of regional significance. assessment of a proposed harbour Historically, the current Harbour/Pier is improvement works at Fethard Harbour, recorded as being 'constructed by Government Ramstown, Co. Wexford. in 1798' (Lewis 1837) as the successor to an Wexford County Council propose to carry out earlier quay (extant 1771). It was also improvement works to the existing harbour bombarded by the British naval gunboats facilities at Fethard Harbour, Co. Wexford. The "Louisa" and "Pakenham" during the only works proposed involve the construction of maritime episode of the 1798 Insurrection. new eastern and western concrete decks and The timing of the intertidal and sub tidal slipways, located on either side of the existing surveys coincided with low water Spring Tide, harbour. thus exposing the largest amount of foreshore The underwater/Intertidal archaeological and maintaining low water levels for the sub assessment was commissioned in order to tidal inspection. They recorded that there was locate, define and ascertain the character, a considerable quantity of maritime related condition and extent of any archaeological features on the proposed development sites, features, deposits or objects which may be none of which was archaeological. affected by the development. Despite this, there is potential for historic The assessment comprised a desktop maritime related material to be contained in assessment of all relevant archaeological, the underlying sands. Additionally, two access architectural, cartographic and historic data ramps situated on the exterior of both the relating to the site, coupled with a site visit. harbour mole walls are features of regional The desktop assessment is designed to provide architectural significance and as such should be the archaeological, architectural and historic recorded/protected. context to the site, whilst the site visit is Based on the results of the desktop assessment designed to identify any previously unrecorded and site visit, it is recommended that all ground archaeological, architectural or historic material works involving the impact of or removal of which may be on or in the vicinity of the sands be monitored by a suitably qualified proposed development. archaeologist. It is also recommended that the The desktop assessment concluded that two access ramps be recorded by a suitably although the development site was not an RMP qualified built heritage specialist. and that it did not have any known archaeology
M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
1 SCOPE OF WORKS
1.1 Introduction
Moore Marine Services Ltd. was commissioned by TJ O’ Connor Ltd & Associates, Consulting Engineers on behalf of Wexford County Council, to carry out an archaeological impact assessment of a proposed harbour improvement works at Fethard Harbour, Ramstown, Co. Wexford ( see figure 1 ).
This assessment addresses the location, nature, character, condition and extent of any cultural heritage which may be affected by the proposed harbour improvement works and assesses the likelihood of the project impacting previously unrecorded archaeological deposits or features. The following report documents the proposed project, the existing environment at the site, survey methodologies, results of the surveys, potential impacts and subsequent recommendations.
1.2 Purpose of the Project
The aim of the archaeological impact assessment was to:
• Ascertain the character, condition and extent of any archaeological areas, features or objects likely to be affected by the proposed works, including any associated temporary works and to ascertain the potential impact of the works on archaeological remains outside the immediate area of the proposed works as these may be vulnerable to impacts arising from consequent changes in hydrology and sediment formation
• Accurately locate these archaeological areas, features and objects and present the findings in map form
• Describe same and discuss their likely provenance
• Ascertain the potential impact of the proposed works on these remains
• Recommend appropriate measures for the avoidance of these remains or, where this cannot be achieved, to recommend measures to mitigate the impact of the works
• Incorporate all the above into a report
This is achieved through a three step process; the completion of a desktop assessment, a site visit and then final report dissemination.
The desktop assessment comprises a review of all relevant archaeological, architectural, cartographic and historic data relating to the site. It is designed to provide the archaeological, architectural and historic context to the site.
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 1 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
It reviewed data from a number of primary and secondary sources which included; The Record of Monuments and Places, The Topographical Files of the National Museum of Ireland, The Shipwreck Inventory of Ireland Archive, The National Inventory of Architectural Heritage and The Ports and Harbour Archive. It also reviewed Admiralty Chart No 1410 (St Georges Channel), maritime historical sources as well as annalistic sources for reference to the area. The aim of the review was to provide an archaeological and historic context to the site and to indicate the probability of archaeological material being present.
The second stage of the process it the completion of the site visit. The site visit is designed to identify any previously unrecorded material on or in the vicinity of the proposed development. It uses a combination of direct visual survey and metal detection survey to achieve this. Currently the National Monuments Act required that all survey carried out below the high water mark be licensed by the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. Consequently it is necessary to have a Dive Survey and Detection device licence in place before any site visit can begin.
The final section of the impact assessment process is the collation of all the recorded data into a report. This details the project, the archaeological, architectural and historic context to the site, the results of the site visit and formulates an impact assessment. It also provides suggested mitigation measures.
Figure 1. Extract from Discovery Series Map # 76 with site location highlighted
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 2 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
2 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PROJECT
2.1 Description of the Project
Wexford County Council propose to carry out improvement works to the existing harbour facilities at Fethard Harbour, Co. Wexford. The works proposed involve the construction of new eastern and western concrete decks and slipways, located either side of the existing harbour in Fethard, Co. Wexford. It is proposed to complete the works in two stages, namely i) works to the east of the existing harbour and ii) works to the west of the existing harbour (see figures 2-4) .
The scope of works included in the project is as follows:
• Construction of new concrete deck and slipway on fill to the east side of the existing harbour • Construction of associated reinforced concrete retaining walls • Construction of associated concrete access ramp and steps to the adjacent beach area • Construction of reflective wave wall at south end of existing eastern quay wall • Construction of new concrete deck and slipway on fill to the west of the existing harbour, incorporating service ducts, where required • Construction of associated reinforced concrete retaining walls • Construction of rock armour facing to exposed face of western concrete deck • Construction of wave wall along edge of concrete deck, where required • Demolition of existing concrete block and stone wall to accommodate lifeboat vehicle tracking movements • Excavation/dredging required for construction of above concrete works • Disposal of any surplus excavated material in accordance with the Waste Management Acts 1996-2007 • All ancillary works, fittings and services required
The fill material which the slipways and deck are to bear onto will be mainly quarry run stone sourced from commercial quarries in the southeast, but may also include some or all of any excavated material from the proposed works site.
The proposed works will increase the working area and storage area of the harbour, allowing a greater capacity for leisure use of the harbour, while also providing adequate launching facilities and turning areas for the lifeboat to be used at all levels of tide.
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 3 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
Figure 2. Plan of proposed development
Figure 3. Profile of improvement area
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 4 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
Figure 4. Detailed development plan
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 5 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
2.2 Site Layout/Location details
County Wexford Townland Ramstown OS Sheet number WX 009 RMP number N/A NIAH No. 15619016 NGR 280563, 105152 Height +/- 5m O.D
Table 1. Location details
3 DESCRIPTION OF THE EXISTING ENVIRONMENT
3.1 Solid Geology
The Geological Survey of Ireland classifies the solid geology surrounding Fethard as Palaeozoic Cambrian sandstone and slate. Sedimentary rocks deposited on the continental shelf in the SE.
3.2 Soil Type
The Geological Survey of Ireland classifies the soil in the area as being comprised mainly of gleys (80%) with associated grey brown podzolics (20%). The parent material is comprised of till of Irish Sea origin.
4 ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
O’Donovan, on behalf of the Ordnance Survey, undertook by far the most extensive early study of the county. Unfortunately when describing Co. Wexford, he notes “… it contains but little to interest the topographer or antiquarian ”, further adding “… Wexford is the most anglicised county in Ireland…and the Irish language has totally disappeared ”. This is reflected in the lack of information contained within his Ordnance Survey Letters (OSL) 1, which are normally a good point of reference. There is mention of Fethard parish and a short comment on its antiquities in the OSL. Its name is derived from the Irish Fiodh Ard , which translates as “high wood” 2. According to the OSL there are no remains of antiquity in the parish “… but two castles and an old monastic tower founded by the Anglo-Normans shortly after their arrival. The tower is still in good preservation, but all the monastery which is said to have been attached to it is destroyed. The other castle is in the townland of Dungulph. Strongbow’s camp is still traceable and should be shown on the OS map as a curious monument of antiquity …” 3.
1 Rev. M. O’Flanagan. Ordnance Survey Letters Containing Information Relative to the Antiquities of Co. Wexford Collected in 1840. 1933. 2 Ibid . 3 Ibid.
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 6 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
Fethard-on-Sea is one of the earliest built towns in Co. Wexford. It had been granted to Henry de Marisco 4, who in turn granted the manor of Fethard to Christ Church, Canterbury and was noted in a grant made in circa 1200 by Christ Church of Canterbury to Richard de London “… that we have granted to Richard de London and to his heirs our town of Fytharid, with its lands and other appurtenances. To be hold by us, paying yearly four marks of silver at the two terms…so that he ought to make a castle in the same town for the defence of the same land. But we retain also to ourselves of the same town, with the chapels and all ecclesiastical benefices of the aforesaid town…we reserve to ourselves a fit place to hold our court on the north side of the church and sixty acres of land for our table, twenty on the south side of the church next to my domain of Mechenan…” 5. The Bishop of Ferns contested the grant of the manor to Christ Church, who claimed that some of the lands belonged to the diocese of Ferns. On his success in contesting the grant, the bishop then founded the town in order to provide a seaport for the produce of six Episcopal manors 6. The grant was settled upon the Bishop of Ferns sometime between 1228 and 1232 7. A town developed although there is no evidence to suggest it was ever walled. It contained a parish church, of possible Early Christian origin, a small motte, which marks the site of an early castle, and the fourteenth century stone castle, all of which survive today. An account from the manor confirmed a burgess rent of £6, indicating that it may have been planned as the main Episcopal borough, which was probably due to its maritime location 8. Colfer suggests, given that 1s was the normal burgage rent, a figure of £6 would indicate that Fethard had a maximum of 120 burgesses which would suggest a burgess population of circa 600 people. He further notes income from mills were considerable, suggesting corn was a principal crop in the manor 9. The town remained under the control of the Bishop of Ferns until Nicholas Loftus acquired the manor of Fethard in 1634. In 1613, while still under the bishop’s control, it received a new charter constituting it as a free borough. The corporation comprised a provost, twelve burgessess and a commonalty. It was in a position to have a guild market; to send two members to parliament; hold a court on Thursdays, a free market on Wednesdays; and an annual fair on the 5 th and 6 th of August 10 . In common with many other areas, following the Cromwellian confiscations in the mid seventeenth century, lands in and around Fethard were acquired by Protestant tenants. A survey at the time indicated the town was in ruins, with only eight thatched cabins surviving in High St. and Church St. 11 . Regarding the parish church ( Pl.1 ), it is set within a rectangular graveyard south of the stone castle. References to the church date from circa 1200; however, it has been claimed this church is the earliest place of worship in the county. It includes elements of an Early Christian foundation associated with the pre-Norman Episcopal manor. An early origin is suggested by its dedication to St. Mogue, who is
4 P.H. Hore. History of the Town and County of Wexford. 1904. 5 Ibid. 6 B. Colfer. The Hook Peninsula. 2004. 7 M. Moore (ed.). Archaeological Inventory of Co. Wexford. 1996. 8 B. Colfer. The Hook Peninsula. 2004. 9 Ibid. 10 Ibid. 11 Ibid .
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 7 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
synonymous with Aidan, first bishop of Ferns 12 . It is now presently used by the Church of Ireland. The present structure incorporates some original fabric and earlier architectural fragments in the graveyard 13 . The other prominent medieval building in Fethard-on-Sea is the castle ( Pl.2 ), located just off the main street. It has been suggested it was built by the Suttons of Ballykerogue in the mid fourteenth century 14 . Other sources suggest it was built by the Bishop of Ferns in the fifteenth century 15 . It comprises an L- shaped structure with a main hall and circular tower at its southwest corner and an independent wing to the north. Elements of the earlier structure – gatehouse with drawbridge recess- are incorporated into the building. The tower has been used as a belfry and a bottle dungeon at its base. There is a large fireplace on the first floor and a stone stairway to a higher level 16 . The castle was occupied until the twentieth century. Nicholas Loftus gained control of the castle, having acquired the manor of Fethard in 1634 from the Bishop of Ferns in exchange for other lands. Loftus took up residence in Fethard, where he died in 1666 17 . Fethard castle was used by the Confederates as their headquarters during the 1640s. It was taken control of, after Loftus fled to England, by a group of rebels led by Dermot Mc Dowlin Kavanagh and held by a garrison commanded by Captain James Downes 18 . The motte, which is located behind the castle, may date to circa 1200, when Christ Church, Canterbury reserved the site to the north of the church as a suitable location to hold a court 19 . This motte comprises a small, circular flat-topped mound. It measures 13m in diameter at its top and 25m at its base and ranges in height from 1.4m to 2.2m. There are slight traces of a fosse, 6-11m wide, and an outer bank at its southeast side, 3m wide 20 . There is some confusion about the number of castles in Fethard-on-Sea. For instance, there are references to two castles in the Down Survey of the mid 1600s: one belonging to a Protestant; and the other to a Papist 21 . In 1684, a Mr. Leigh makes references to the town: “ a small straggling town, containing two or three small castles, a large parish church which is now unroofed, a stone house, a brick house built by Mr. Nicholas Loftus, father of Sir Nicholas who dwells in the stone castle, which was formerly the Bishop’s residence and 30 or 40 cabins or thatched houses ” 22 . A further survey in the mid 1600s recorded the town having two streets, seven proprietors, three thatched houses, five cabins and seven house-plots 23 . In the 1771 survey it was remarked “… here [the town of Fethard] are two castles,
12 Ibid . 13 M. Moore (ed.). Archaeological Inventory of County Wexford. 1996. 14 P. H. Hore. History of the Town and County of Wexford. 1904. 15 M. Moore (ed.). Archaeological Inventory of County Wexford. 1996. 16 B. Colfer. The Hook Peninsula. 2004. 17 Ibid . 18 Ibid . 19 B. Colfer. The Hook Peninsula. 2004. 20 M. Moore (ed.). Archaeological Inventory of County Wexford. 1996. 21 R.C. Simington. The Civil Survey, 1654-56. 1953. 22 P.H. Hore. History of the Town and County of Wexford. 1904 & B. Colfer. The Hook Peninsula. 2004. 23 M. Moore (ed.). Archaeological Inventory of Co. Wexford. 1996.
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 8 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
one in good repair, a walled garden, two orchards and a turret …” 24 . However, the castles are not marked on the survey’s map. It is also noted in the 1771 survey there was a pier and quay and the town had a king’s barge, a surveyor and a boatman. It was further noted the Loftus family, who lived in the castle, had intended to utilise Fethard as a port, but this was made more difficult due to the presence of a sandbar at the mouth of the bay 25 .
5 BASELINE DATA
5.1 Record of Monuments and Places
The proposed development is located in the vicinity of a number of monuments recorded in the RMP for County Wexford ( see figure 5). Monuments within 1km of the development include the following:
RMP No. Townland Parish N.G.R. Classification
Wx050-004 Connagh Fethard 27827/10554 Enclosure Site Description: Marked on both the 1 st (1839) and 2 nd (1925) edition OS maps, this site was removed in circa 1980. Traces of the monument are apparent on an aerial photograph where it is visible as a D-shaped crop mark enclosure measuring 40m (N/S) x 35m (E/W). There is no surface trace of this monument 26 . This site will not be impacted by the development.
RMP No. Townland Parish N.G.R. Classification
Wx050-010 Ralph Fethard 27856/10533 Ringfort Description: This ringfort is marked on both the 1 st and 2 nd edition OS maps. Set in dense scrub, the monument comprises a circular area with a diameter of circa 35m. It is defined by an earthen bank with a width of 4-5m, an internal height of 800mm and a maximum height of 2.3m. A fosse, 2.4m wide, is apparent around its external perimeter. There is no trace of an entrance 27 . This site will not be impacted by the development.
RMP No. Townland Parish N.G.R. Classification
Wx050-011 Fethard & Grange Fethard 27937/10502 Town Description:
24 P.H. Hore. History of the Town and County of Wexford. 1904. 25 B. Colfer. The Hook Peninsula 2004. 26 M. Moore (ed.). Archaeological Inventory of County Wexford. 1996. 27 Ibid .
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 9 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
A historic town founded in the early thirteenth century. Formerly it had two castles, one still surviving, a church (site) and a motte (possible) adjacent to the church site and the surviving ruined castle 28 . This site will not be impacted by the development.
RMP No. Townland Parish N.G.R. Classification
Wx050-01501 Ramstown Fethard 2803310317 Promontory Fort Description: Marked as Dundonnell on the 1 st and 2 nd edition OS maps, this site comprises a sea promontory fort set in pasture land on Baginbun Head. It measures 170m (E/W) x 14m (N/S) at its east side to 59m (N/S) at its west side. It is defended along its western side by an earthen bank, 53m long, 4m wide, an internal height of 1.7m and an external height of 1.4m. Its outer fosse has a width of 3-4m and an outer bank measures 91m long, 10-12m wide and 1.6m high. An entrance is apparent through its outer and inner banks and a causeway, 3m wide, over the fosse. Within the interior of the site there is a raised rectangular area measuring 6.4m x 4.7m and 300mm high. This may be a hut site 29 . This site will not be impacted by the development.
RMP No. Townland Parish N.G.R. Classification
Wx050-01502 Ramstown Fethard 28000/10316 Linear Earthwork Description: Marked as an Anglo-Norman Entrenchment on the 2 nd edition OS map, this site may be a ringwork (possible) within the confines of the above described promontory fort. It is known Raymond le Gros camped at Baginbun Head in 1170 and may have erected the fortifications which extend east/west across the headland enclosing circa 22 acres. The site comprises an earthen bank, circa 230m long, 5m wide and an internal height of 1.6m and an external height of 2.2m. There are traces of a slight fosse, 5m wide, separating it from an outer bank which is 6m wide and 2.2m high. There is an entrance both at its east and west ends. This site will not be impacted by the development. In addition there are three sites marked on the SMR map for Co. Wexford close to the development area, which have been de-listed ( see figure 5 ). These include Wx050-012, Wx050-013 and Wx050-018.
28 M. Moore (ed.). Archaeological Inventory of County Wexford. 1996.
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 10 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
Figure 5. Extract from RMP WX050 showing development site in red
5.2 Lewis Topographical Dictionary
Lewis’ topographical dictionary describes Fethard as “a small sea-port, post-town, and parish, in the barony of SHELBURNE, county of WEXFORD, and province of LEINSTER, 15 3/4 miles (S.) from New Ross, and 81 (S. W.) from Dublin, on the bay of Fethard; containing 2153 inhabitants, of which number, 320 are in the town. This place is supposed to have derived its ancient name, "Fiodh Ard," from the abundance of wood in the neighbourhood, though at present no part of the country is more destitute of timber. Robert Fitz-Stephen, on his first invasion of the country, landed his forces in a bay about a mile to the south of the town, since called Bagenbon bay, from the names of the ships Bag and Bon, both of which, immediately after his landing, he burnt in the presence of his men, telling them that they must either succeed in their enterprise or perish in the attempt. After the settlement of the English in Ireland, this place was given by Strongbow to Raymond le Gros, who had married his sister Basilia, and who is said to have erected a strong fortress here for the protection of his newly acquired territory. Basilia, with the concurrence of Fitz-Stephen, granted the church lands and tithes of the whole lordship to the abbey of St. Thomas near Dublin: and some of its earlier lords obtained for the inhabitants a charter of incorporation. The castle afterwards became the episcopal residence of the Bishops of Ferns, and here Alexander Devereux, the last abbot of Dunbrody, and the first Bishop of Ferns after the Reformation,
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 11 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
died in 1556, and was buried in the church, in the aisle of which his tombstone still remains. In 1648, the manor of Ferns was exchanged by Bishop Andrews for value belonging to the Loftus family. The town, which is neat and well built, consists principally of one wide street on the line of road from Ross to Bagenbon Head, and contains 50 houses, partly occupied by persons in the coast-guard department, of which a branch is constantly stationed here. Some trade is carried on in coal, timber, iron, and slates, and cattle and pigs are occasionally shipped from the port, for which its situation affords every facility. About 15 boats are employed in conveying limestone from the south-west side of the parish, near Loftus Hall, to this place, whence it is sent up the Scar river into the interior of the country. A considerable fishery of herrings, lobsters, and other fish of superior quality, especially plaice, is carried on off this coast. The harbour, which was constructed by Government in 1798, and is capable of receiving about four small sloops, is situated on the north side of Inguard Point. Between the pier heads are from 11 to 12 feet of water at high spring tides, and from 8 to 9 at ordinary neap tides. There is also a harbour for small craft at Slade, in the parish of Hook, between which and this place is Bagenbon bay, one of the best shipping stations on the coast, for vessels of any burden, both for its depth of water, and from its sheltered situation, from the west and north-west winds. Fairs for cattle are held on Jan. 31st, April 30th, July 28th, and Oct. 20th. The town was incorporated in 1613, by charter of Jas. I., by which the corporation was made to consist of a portreeve and 12 free burgesses, in whom was vested the right of nominating freemen to form a commonalty, and of returning two members to the Irish parliament. They had also the power of holding a court of record weekly, for the recovery of debts not exceeding five marks, with the privilege of a market and fair; but this corporation has long been extinct. The borough continued to send two members to the Irish parliament till the Union, when it was disfranchised, and the £15,000 awarded in compensation was paid to Charles, Marquess of Ely, and C. Tottenham, Esq. The parish, which is the property of the Marquess of Ely, is on the western side of Fethard bay, and with the parishes of Hook and Templetown forms a peninsula which separates Waterford harbour from Ballyteigue Bay. It comprises 3775 statute acres, of which the greater portion is under tillage, and the remainder good meadow and pasture land: the soil is fertile and the system of agriculture improved; the chief manure is sea-sand and lime. On the shore is a species of hard red granite, which is used for millstones and other purposes; several unsuccessful attempts to procure coal and slate have been made. Fethard Castle, the property of the Marquess of Ely, and in the occupation of the Rev. A. Alcock, is pleasantly situated on the left of the road to New Ross; and Innyard, the seat of the Lynn family, is situated in tastefully disposed grounds. The Turret, a bathing lodge, formerly the property of Mrs. Savage, has been recently taken down. There are numerous comfortable farmhouses and bathing lodges in the parish, which is much frequented, for the benefit of sea-bathing. The sands are firm and smooth; the surrounding country is pleasant, and the air salubrious; and the neighbourhood abounds with objects of interest, among which are the remains of the abbeys of Dunbrody, Tintern, and Clonmines. The living is a rectory, in the diocese of Ferns, and the corps of the prebend of Fethard in the cathedral of Ferns, in the patronage of the Bishop: the tithes amount to £330. The glebe-house, a handsome
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 12 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
building, was erected in 1830 by the Rev. C. W. Doyne, the present incumbent, at an expense of £1060, towards which the late Board of First Fruits contributed a gift of £277, and a loan of £461. The glebe comprised originally 1 3/4 Irish acres, to which 5 acres were added by purchase in 1834. The church, an ancient structure in a very dilapidated state, is about to be rebuilt. In the R. C. divisions the parish is part of the union or district of Hook; the chapel, on the lands of Dungulph, is a neat , cruciform edifice, recently built by subscription. About 70 children are taught in the public schools, which are supported by the Marquess and Marchioness of Ely; aided by an annual donation of £10 from the rector; there are also two private schools, in which are about 90 children, and a Sunday school supported by the rector. On the narrow promontory of Bagenbon Head are the remains of an encampment, said to have been formed by Fitz-Stephen on his landing; and at Fethard are the ruins of a castle, at one angle of which is a round tower in good preservation. Bagenbon Head projects considerably from the line of the coast; the land is high, and the shore bold; the water is deep, with a stiff clay bottom, covered with sand, extending nearly to the base of the cliffs. This bay has afforded refuge to many vessels in heavy gales, and the Milford packets have frequently put in and landed the mails, when it has been impracticable for them to reach Waterford; there is a Martello tower on the Head.”
5.3 National Inventory of Architectural Heritage
The National Inventory of Architectural Heritage records Fethard Harbour as Fethard Quay and as being of regional significance.
Name: Fethard Quay, County Wexford Reg. No. 5619016 Date 1795 - 1800 Previous Name N/A Townland RAMSTOWN County County Wexford Coordinates 280563, 105152 Categories of Special Interest ARCHITECTURAL HISTORICAL SOCIAL TECHNICAL Rating Regional Original Use harbour/dock/port In Use As harbour/dock/port Description Harbour, reconstructed 1798, including pair of piers with semi-coursed random "Old Red Sandstone" battered walls rising to parapets having rendered coping. Set extending into Fethard Bay Appraisal A small-scale harbour recognised as a particularly important component of the built heritage of south County Wexford having been 'constructed by Government in 1798' (Lewis, 1837) as
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 13 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
the successor to an earlier quay (extant 1771) bombarded by the British naval gunboats "Louisa" and "Pakenham" during the only maritime episode of the 1798 Insurrection.
Plate 1. NIAH Image of Fethard Harbour
5.4 Aerial Photographs
Aerial photographs are an invaluable resource in archaeology for the recognition of new sites and the contributing to the understanding of known sites. Features can be recognised from the air as earthworks in relief or as vegetation marks where a buried feature such as a wall or ditch affects the growth of the surrounding flora. The Geological Survey of Ireland, based in Dublin, holds a comprehensive archive of high level vertical photographs available for consultation by the public and researchers but may not be copied. Aerial images are also available from the Marine Institute of Ireland National Coastline Survey.
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 14 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
Plate 2. Aerial photograph of Ingard Point and Fethard Harbour
This aerial photograph shows the location of proposed development site, Fethard Harbour, on the sheltered eastern tip of the Ingard point. It also demonstrates how the southern side of the peninsula is significantly more exposed then the sheltered northern. Here, a steep cliff bounded rocky seashore is noted. This is a marked contrast to the low lying, well protected sandy northern side. This image details how the point is divided into linear agricultural plots, with a number of residential dwellings on located on the northern side of the point. It does not record the presence of any archaeological features in the area of the proposed development.
5.5 Previous Archaeological Fieldwork in the Area
The following section is a summary of previous archaeological fieldwork carried out in the town of Fethard on Sea and the adjacent Ingard Point for the period 1985 to present. All but one were located in the town of Fethard on Sea. The works carried out at Ingard was undertaken by the author in advance of the Fethard-on-Sea regional water supply scheme. It assessed a portion of the development area and did not record the presence of any archaeological materials or features in the area.
Wexford 1991:132 Grange (by Fethard Castle)
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 15 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
Test pits S 781052 Test pits excavated produced nothing of archaeological significance. , c/o City Engineer’s Dept., The Mall, Waterford.
Wexford 1996:402 Grange, Fethard on Sea Early Christian/medieval S790045 SMR 50:11 96E1 16 Testing was undertaken in advance of the proposed building of ten holiday cottages. All trenches but one were archaeologically sterile. One trench showed in section two cuts filled with shells. The middens contained a high frequency of cockle-shells, with some periwinkles and limpets. Also in this trench was a cut into the boulder clay to a max. depth of 1.05m, which at its widest point measured 5m. This possible ditch or pit had at its base two sherds of unglazed cooking ware. Further monitoring was recommended. Co. Waterford.
Wexford 1998:667 FETHARD-ON-SEA No archaeological significance 27937 10502 98E0393 An assessment was carried out at the football field in Fethard before the grant of planning permission for the erection of a residential dormer bungalow. Fethard-on-sea is on the eastern side of the Shelbourne Peninsula at the entrance to Bannow Bay, some 4km south of Duncannon. The placename is derived from Fiodh Ard, 'the high wood'. The Down Survey refers to the existence of two castles at Fethard, one of which can be identified as the existing structure, the other presumably being the episcopal castle first mentioned in a charter of c. 1200. An account of 1684 describes the town as having 'two or three small castles, a stone house, and also a brick house' (Hore, P.H. [1900-11] History of the town and county of Wexford, Vol. IV, 314).
Three trenches were opened by mechanical digger. All were identical in stratigraphy, consisting of topsoil over a light brown stony clay becoming more compact and stonier at a depth of 2.2m. There was no evidence of features/artefacts of an archaeological nature. , Dublin 7.
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 16 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
Wexford 1999:879 GRANGE, FETHARD Urban medieval 99E0092 Twenty-five test-trenches were excavated in Grange townland before a housing estate development, to comply with a planning condition. The southern section of the site is within the zone of archaeological potential for the historic town of Fethard.
No archaeological stratigraphy was recorded in any of the trenches, and no artefacts were recovered. Co. Cork.
Wexford 2002:1912 Sluice Lane, Fethard Urban 27941 10505 02E0965 Testing of a site at Sluice Lane, Fethard, was undertaken on 3 July 2002. Three trenches were excavated, representing an area of 37m2. No features of a definite archaeological nature were revealed. A subsoil- cut feature in Trench 2 toward the north-eastern corner of the site may be of antiquity. It may also, however, belong to a phase of activity indicated by upstanding stone walls that bounded the site. It extended from 0.9m to 1.5m below present ground level. Its full width, which exceeded 1.7m north– south, could not be established in the confines of the trench. It appeared to run across the trench in a roughly east–west direction and may be the remains of a linear feature or large pit with a steeply sloping southern edge and relatively flat base. It contained two deposits. The upper fill was a light grey clay with infrequent inclusions of 19th- and early 20th-century material. The lower fill was a dark brown/black organic silt containing frequent inclusions of butchered bone and seashell. , Stafford McLoughlin Archaeology, Unit 4, Enniscorthy Enterprise Centre, Milehouse Road, Enniscorthy, Co. Wexford.
Wexford 2004:1807 SLUICE LANE, FETHARD Urban 27941 10505
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 17 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
02E0965 ext. Testing of a site at Sluice Lane, Fethard, was undertaken in July 2002 (Excavations 2002, No. 1912). Three trenches were excavated throughout the areas to be affected by construction-related groundworks. No features or deposits of a definite archaeological nature were revealed. However, a subsoil cut feature, C7, located in Trench 2 towards the north-eastern corner of the site, was thought to be of possible archaeological significance.
Monitoring of the excavation of foundation trenches at the site was undertaken in 2004. The monitoring did not gain any further information on feature C7, nor were any further features of archaeological significance uncovered. , Stafford McLoughlin Archaeology, Unit 4, Enniscorthy Enterprise Centre, Milehouse Road, Enniscorthy, Co. Wexford.
Wexford 2006:2107 Neville’s Pub, Fethard-on-Sea No archaeological significance 104600 279570 WX050–011 06E0412 Test excavation as part of an assessment took place at Neville’s pub, Fethard-on-Sea, Co. Wexford, on 19 May 2006. Two 19th-century buildings were to be demolished to make way for a new development. Four trenches were excavated in an open area of the site, which is in the zone of archaeological importance of the medieval village of Fethard-on-Sea. Nothing of archaeological significance was found. Topsoil cover was extremely thin (30–45mm) and consisted of loose fill with 19th- and 20th-century deposits. Any possible archaeology had been removed by the building of the 19th-century houses. , Dublin 4.
Wexford 2007:1966 Ingard Point Underwater 105000 280100 07D36; 07R165 A programme of underwater assessments was carried out at the site of a number of proposed outfall pipelines associated with the Fethard-on-Sea regional water supply scheme. Desktop analysis of the historical, archaeological and cartographic sources relating to the proposed development recorded that the area has been the site of considerable human activity since earliest times. The assessment assessed
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 18 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
the route of five pipeline trenches which extended into the sea from four different sites at Ingard Point and one site along a small stream which travels easterly from Fethard Bridge to the sea close to Fethard Pier. The intertidal zones surrounding the four saltwater sites comprised a sandy gravel back-beach area which led to a kelp-covered bare bedrock intertidal zone. This topographical landform continued beneath the Low Water, where a more dense coverage of sand was noted. The survey did not record the presence of any visible archaeological features or deposits, although there remained the possibility that submerged cultural heritage may be present in the area. , Moore Marine Services, Corporate House, Ballybrit Business Park, Galway.
5.6 Historic Maps
5.6.1 First Edition Ordnance Survey, 1838
Figure 6. First Edition Ordnance Survey Map, 1838, showing development area
This map depicts Fethard Harbour as a quay, with Ingard Windmill situated close to the point. A land spit, recorded as ‘Rabbit Burrow’ is recorded as travelling across the mouth of the tidal stream on the northern side of Ingard Point. Land division in the area surrounding the point is also not very defined.
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 19 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
5.6.2 Second Edition Ordnance Survey, 1893
Figure 7. Second Edition Ordnance Survey, 1893
This edition of the Ordnance Survey depicts the development area as being quite different to the previous edition. Ingard Windmill is no longer represented, the field division at Ingard Point has advanced considerably since the previous map and now mooring posts and sand are recorded at Fethard Harbour. There are no features of archaeological significance noted in this map.
5.7 The Maritime Sites and Monuments Record (MSMR),
The Maritime Sites and Monuments Record (MSMR), is a database of all marine archaeological sites around the coast (including shipwrecks). The record includes data on historical wrecks contained in documentary sources such as Lloyd’s List, Commons Sessions Papers and Historic Newspapers, Cartographic sources and other sources are also used.
The Maritime Sites and Monuments Record have no record of any shipwrecks for the area surrounding Ingard Point, Baginbun or Fethard Harbour.
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 20 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
5.8 The Ports and Harbours Archive
Site Name Fethard “Fethard pier, erected by the Board of Customs, is kept in repair for the use of the Coast Guard. It is dry at low water”. First Report of the Commissioners of Inquiry into The State of the Irish Fisheries; with The Minutes of Evidence, and Appendix, p. 228. MDCCCXXXVI. His Majesty’s Stationary Office, Dublin.
Site Name Fethard Pier 1849-83 “Memorial to repair the pier and to remove rocks at the entrance to the harbour, engineer’s report, estimate for constructing a harbour, roadway and wharf, notice of intention to landlords and tenants to take away necessary materials for construction.” No. of items - 9. Item No. -144. Reference No. – OPW8/ OPW Archives Piers and Harbours.
“This was a repair of a very old but a very useful little basin “. (p. 48). CSP 1852-53, Vol. XLI, Reports from Commissioners, Twentieth Report from the Board of Public Works, Ireland, Piers and Harbours, p. 47-51.
1872 – “Reclamation of salt marsh and new road.” Ref: 1727.2 Board of Trade, Black Series – Navigation.
6 SITE SURVEY
6.1 Survey Aims and Methodology:
The aim of the survey was to investigate the development area for the presence of previously unrecorded archaeological materials or features. This involved intertidal and sub tidal visual and metal detection survey.
Prior to the commencement of the survey, the desktop assessment was completed. The results of the desktop assessment assisted in establishing an archaeological and historical context for the site.
The site survey comprised an intertidal and sub-tidal survey covering the full extent of the proposed development area and its immediate surrounds. The intertidal survey coincided with low water Spring Tide as this exposed the largest amount of foreshore. Similarly, the sub tidal survey was carried out at the same time using a bathyscope and metal detector. Low water levels at the time of the survey meant that a diver survey was not necessary to investigate the survey area.
Each site survey had two component parts; the first being the visual survey. This was a visual inspection of the survey area for upstanding and slightly submerged archaeological material. Any find is recorded
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 21 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
and photographed. Capabilities were available for the surveying archaeologists to ascertain the substrate composition and summarily investigate any archaeological material found during the survey.
The second component was the metal detection survey. It was designed to record the location of any ferrous and non-ferrous material buried in the survey area. All metal detector contacts were recorded and geo-referenced using either a terrestrial based EDM or a differential GPS system. This facility allowed for the generation of a contact distribution pattern in tandem with the topographical survey and facilitates relocation. With regard to the development, it was necessary to survey the immediate impact zone and the outlying area. In doing so, this ensured the protection of any nearby archaeological material from secondary impact.
Regarding the survey methodologies, a gridded transect investigation scheme was employed. It was based on parallel north-south orientated transects across the area of the proposed development. This technique ensured 100% coverage of the survey area.
Figure 8. Proposed survey grid in red
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 22 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
6.2 Site Conditions
The assessment took place in November 2010 at low water spring tide. Conditions on the day were good with clear skies.
6.3 Fethard Harbour
Fethard Harbour or Fethard Quay is located on the north-eastern end of Ingard Point on the entrance to Bannow Bay in South Wexford. The harbour was built in 1798 on the site of an earlier quay. It comprises a small tidally accessible harbour which has a narrow westerly facing entrance. The harbour is enclosed by two mole walls; a short western mole and a larger eastern and northern wall, both of which have alighting steps towards their outer ends. A number of now derelict storage buildings are also situated on the southern end of the pier. An inshore RNLI station is situated to the southeast of the harbour and boat launching facilities in the area are poor. There is no slipway and a nearby beach ramp only allows launching at high tide. At all other times, vessels are required to travel across soft sand to the rocky lower foreshore before launching.
A large number of unused moorings were noted on the seaward side of the harbour. This would appear to indicate that maritime activity in this area is seasonal and generally confined to inshore fishing. The small number of larger fishing boats noted in the harbour during the site visit appeared to confirm this.
6.4 Site Survey
For the purpose of clarity, the survey was divided into two distinct areas; east harbour area and west harbour area. The east harbour area is concerned with the area to the east of the existing harbour at the site of the proposed new slipway, beach access steps and harbour wall reinforcing works. The west harbour area deals with the area to the west of the harbour where the new concrete deck, slipway and harbour wall reinforcing works will be constructed.
6.4.1 East Harbour Area
The proposed development area to the east of the existing pier covered an area of 10 x 50m directly adjacent to the harbour mole wall (see figures 2-4). It was bounded to the west by the high, enclosing, eastern mole wall of the harbour, to the east by further sandy beach, to the north by Bannow Bay and to the south by the site access road and agricultural land.
Access to the site from the south was provided by a cobbled ramp. This ramp was constructed of coursed cobbles which had modern concrete pointing (see plates 4 & 5 ). The original construction style of the ramp appeared to be contemporary with the construction of the harbour thus indicating that it was probably built as a component of the original scheme. Whilst the feature is similar in form to a slipway, there are a number of important features which distinguish it as a ramp. A slipway is termed as “a slope built leading down into water, used for launching and landing boats and ships or for building
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 23 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
and repairing them”. This ramp is not covered by water at all stages of the tide. It is only covered close to high water. For the remainder of the time, people wishing to launch or recover boats must travel over the adjacent sandy shore. Additionally, the ramp feature is too small to allow vessel building or repair. Consequently the feature cannot be termed as a slipway.
Nonetheless, the construction of this ramp feature does appear to be contemporary with the adjacent harbour and as such it should be considered to be of architectural significance.
A flat sandy largely dissipative shore was noted immediately beneath the access ramp. It comprised fine and medium grained sand, and kelp fronds throughout the upper and mid foreshore (see plates 3 & 7 ). Close to the low water mark bedrock outcrops were noted. These consisted of angular and rounded striated rock, with sand filled crevices and variable kelp covering (see plate 6 ).
Bedrock outcrops were also noted in the sub tidal area. These continued in the same manner as those above the high water mark, angular and rounded striated rock, with sand filled crevices and variable kelp covering. There was however a greater covering of sand in this area than above the low water mark.
The visual survey did not record the presence of any features of archaeological significance in this area. It did however note that the construction of the access ramp appeared to be contemporary with the larger harbour and as such would be of architectural significance.
The metal detection survey of this area was carried out immediately after the visual survey. It carried out 14 east – west orientated and reciprocal transits, covering the entire survey area and the outlying area. It recorded eight metallic contacts. All of which were buried. Details are contained in the adjacent table 2 and figure 9.
Contact Number Description FH E1 Unknown FH E2 Unknown FH E3 Unknown FH E4 Unknown FH E5 Unknown FH E6 Unknown FH E7 Unknown FH E8 Unknown Table 2. Table of metal detector contacts in southern survey area
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 24 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
6.4.2 West Harbour Area
The proposed development area situated to the west of the harbour has been designed to be a 35m wide concrete deck which measures almost 40m m in length and has a 32m long and 7m wide slipway at the north western corner ( see figures 2-4). The visual survey noted that this area comprised a mixed foreshore with a flat sandy mid foreshore located between bedrock outcropped upper and lower shores (see plates 21 & 22) .
Access to this area from Fethard Harbour was only possible from the tidal harbour mouth and from a high wall at the south western corner of the harbour. A very steeply sloped coursed wall was noted on the outside of the harbour in this south western corner. It measured 3.2m in length and 2.2m in width and was built to course, on top of existing bedrock using roughly cornered stones (see plate 8) . It is probable that this feature is an access ramp, comparable to the larger ramp on the opposite eastern side of the harbour. The construction form and nature of this ramp feature appears to be contemporary with the adjacent harbour and as such it should be considered to be of architectural significance.
The western survey area was bounded to the east by the harbour, to the north and west by Bannow Bay and to the south by high clay cliffs. Immediately beneath these high cliffs was a cobble and bedrock upper foreshore, which consisted of large tracts of exposed bedrock overlain by rounded cobbles and kelp fronds. This upper foreshore also had a considerable quantity of discarded material as well as jetsam and flotsam. The material noted on the upper foreshore included corroded metal bars, damaged lobster pots and a cogged gear wheel with drive shaft (see plates 9, 18 & 23) . The cogged gear wheel measured 600 mm in diameter, had six spokes and a squared drive shaft that measured 50 mm in width and 250 mm in length. This feature appeared to be relatively modern in nature and there were no apparent visible associated materials nearby. Notwithstanding this the feature was partially buried and so further remains may lie underneath.
Immediately adjacent to the harbour, the mid foreshore was comprised of fine and medium sand with occasional bedrock outcrops. A number of features were noted on the mid and lower foreshore in this area. The most significant of these were two modern single fluke anchors (see plates 13-17) . Single fluked anchors are generally used for static mooring purposes and these two versions were manufactured from 100mm universal steel beams (I-beams or RSJ). The bedded-in anchors measured 1.5m in length, over 0.5m in height and 1.5m in width. They were clearly visible on the foreshore and had a covering of kelp. Two lengths of linked chain, one being connected to anchor, were also noted partially buried in the nearby sand. The shafts of both anchors were straight although they curved at the stock. The stocks measured 1.5m in length and were manufactured of 50mm diameter, rounded metal bar. The previously mentioned chains were connected to the anchors via a shackle which passed through the anchor eye. This was a small eye welded to the topside of the shaft. A second eye was noted on the crown of the anchor. This had small lengths of attached rope. Both anchors had only one
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 25 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
arm and these were partially buried. Consequently, it was not possible to measure either the size of the anchor flukes or arms.
Other materials noted on the mid foreshore in this area included a discarded lobster pot and small lengths of metal bar (see plates 9 &12) . None were considered to be archaeological in nature.
Further from the harbour, the sandy foreshore is superseded by a largely bedrock mid and lower foreshore, although there were sand filled crevices and considerable quantities of overlying kelp. Similar to the sandy foreshore, this area contained a large quantity of materials. All appeared to be related to maritime activity and a majority seemed to be concerned with anchoring. These included three single fluked anchors, two engine blocks, concrete filled tyre moorings, lobster pots and metal bars (see plates 10, 11, 19, 20 & 23) .
Three single fluked anchors were noted in this area, clustered together and sitting on the bedrock foreshore (see plates 19 & 20 ). They did not appear as substantial as the previously recorded examples and one was partially damaged. They were each composed of 50-60mm diameter rolled metal bar and appeared to be constructed to similar dimensions; 1.4m in length, 1.2m in width (stock) and 0.55m in width at the arm. All three had a covering of kelp and were clustered together with polypropylene rope and light linked chain. The partially damaged anchor had its one arm bent at an irregular angle, indicating that a large force must have been exerted on the anchor in the past. The light nature of these anchors and their rolled metal bar construction would appear to indicate that these were modern anchors, possibly designed to accommodate a floating pontoon or some other such structure.
Other features noted on the foreshore included two engine blocks which were chained together (see plate 11 ). They had a surface marker rope attached and appeared to have been mooring weights. Other similar features were two concrete filled car tyres which also had attached mooring rope (see plate 10 ). None of these features were archaeological in nature. They did however indicate that there was a strong maritime tradition in the area and that exploitation of the maritime resource was ongoing.
The metal detection survey of this area was carried out immediately after the visual survey. It carried out 20 east – west orientated and reciprocal transits, covering the entire survey area and the outlying area. It recorded twenty five metallic contacts. Details are contained in the adjacent table 3 and figure 9.
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 26 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
Contact Number Description FH W1 Short metal bar FH W2 Long metal bar FH W3 Gear Wheel FH W4 Unknown FH W5 Unknown FH W6 Single arm anchor FH W7 Chain FH W8 Single arm anchor FH W9 Chain FH W10 Unknown FH W11 Single arm anchor FH W12 Single arm anchor FH W13 Single arm anchor FH W14 Metal bar FH W15 Unknown FH W16 Metal bar FH W17 Metal plate FH W18 Chain FH W19 Metal bar FH W20 Concrete filled tyres with chain FH W21 Concreted metal FH W22 2x Engine Blocks FH W23 Chain FH W24 Unknown FH W25 Unknown Table 3. Table of metal detector contacts in northern survey area
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 27 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
Figure 9. Metal detection contact location map
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 28 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
Plate 3. View of eastern survey area from the north
Plate 6. View of northern end of eastern survey area.
Plate 4. View of southern access ramp from the north
Plate 7. View of central section of eastern Plate 5. Additional view of southern access survey area ramp
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 29 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
Plate 8. View of south western access ramp Plate 11. Two engine blocks on western foreshore
Plate 9. Metal bar on western foreshore Plate 12. Lobster pot on western foreshore
Plate 13. Single arm anchor on mid foreshore Plate 10. Concrete filled tyres on western foreshore
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 30 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
Plate 14. Additional view of single arm anchor Plate 17. Partially buried anchor chain on mid foreshore
Plate 15. Second single arm anchor on mid Plate 18. Gear wheel on upper foreshore foreshore
Plate 16. Vertical view of single arm anchor Plate 19. Cluster of three single arm anchors on lower foreshore
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 31 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
Plate 20. Single arm anchor in cluster of three Plate 23. Iron weights on western foreshore
Plate 21. View of western survey area
Plate 22. Additional view of western survey area
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 32 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
7 DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 Discussion
7.1.1 The Development Area
Fethard Harbour or Fethard Quay is located on the north-eastern end of Ingard Point on the entrance to Bannow Bay in South Wexford. The harbour was built in 1798 on the site of an earlier quay. It comprises a small tidally accessible harbour which has a narrow westerly facing entrance. The harbour is enclosed by two mole walls; a short western mole and a larger eastern and northern wall, both of which have alighting steps towards their outer ends. A number of now derelict storage buildings are also situated on the southern end of the pier. An inshore RNLI station is situated to the southeast of the harbour and boat launching facilities in the area are poor. There is no slipway and a nearby beach ramp only allows launching at high tide. At all other times, vessels are required to travel across soft sand to the rocky lower foreshore before launching.
A large number of unused moorings were noted on the seaward side of the harbour. This would appear to indicate that maritime activity in this area is seasonal and generally confined to inshore fishing. The small number of larger fishing boats noted in the harbour during the site visit appeared to confirm this.
7.2 Assessment of Potential Impacts
Direct Impacts
The intertidal and sub tidal survey recorded that although there were not visible archaeological deposits on the site, there is potential for historic maritime related material to be contained in the underlying sands. Additionally, the two access ramps are features of architectural significance. Consequently if the project were to proceed without appropriate mitigation, it would have the potential to have a permanent, long term and negative impact on these features.
‘Do nothing’ impact
If the proposed development were not to proceed there would be no negative impact on the archaeological or cultural heritage resource.
‘Worst case’ impact
Under a worst-case scenario, by way of its form and function, the redevelopment of this area would have a permanent and negative impact on archaeological and architectural material which may be contained within the area.
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 33 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
7.3 Conclusions
The desktop assessment concluded that although the development site was not an RMP and that it did not have any known archaeology in its immediate vicinity, it was classified by the National Inventory of Architectural Heritage as being of regional significance.
Historically, the current Harbour/Pier is recorded as being 'constructed by Government in 1798' (Lewis 1837) as the successor to an earlier quay (extant 1771). It was also bombarded by the British naval gunboats "Louisa" and "Pakenham" during the only maritime episode of the 1798 Insurrection.
The intertidal survey recorded that although there was a considerable quantity of maritime related features on the proposed development sites, none was archaeological. Despite this, there is potential for historic maritime related material to be contained in the underlying sands. Additionally, two access ramps situated on the exterior of both the harbour mole walls are features of regional architectural significance and as such should be recorded/protected.
7.4 Recommendations
Based on the results of the desktop assessment and site visit, it is recommended that all ground works involving the impact of or removal of sands be monitored by a suitably qualified archaeologist. It is also recommended that the two access ramps be recorded by a suitably qualified built heritage specialist.
Please note that all recommendations above are subject to approval by the Planning and Heritage Section of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government.
Please note that this report and accompanying recommendations are based on maps provided at the time of writing. Should changes be made, further assessment may be necessary.
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 34 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
APPENDIX 1 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bennet, I. (Ed.). (2000). Excavations Bulletin [online]. Available at: http://www.excavations.ie/Pages/HomePage.php . Date accessed 10.11.2010.
Bradley, J. (1988). ‘The interspersion of Scandinavian Settlement in Ireland’ in J. Bradley (ed.) Settlement & Society in Medieval Ireland , 49-78, Kilkenny.
Department of the Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht & the Islands (DAHGI), (1999). Frameworks and Principles for the Protection of the Archaeological Heritage , Government publications, Dublin.
Department of the Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht & the Islands (DAHGI), (1999). Policy and Guidelines on Archaeological Excavation. Government publications, Dublin.
Environmental Protection Agency, (1995). Advice notes on current practice in the preparation of Environmental Impact Statements. Dublin.
Joyce, P.W. (1913). Irish Names of Places. Vol. III . Dublin.
Killannin, Lord & Duignan, M. (1962) . The Shell Guide to Ireland . Edbury Press, London.
National Monuments Acts 1930-1994.
Nolan, W. & Simms, A. (Eds.). (1998) . Irish Towns, A Guide to Sources. Dublin.
The Heritage Council, (2000). Archaeology & Development: Guidelines for Good Practice for Developers . The Heritage Council of Ireland Series, Kilkenny.
The Planning and Heritage Section of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. Sites and Monuments Record, County Waterford.
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 35 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
APPENDIX 2 LEGISLATIVE BACKGROUND
The 1992 European Convention on the Protection of Archaeological Heritage was ratified by Ireland in 1997. The convention provides the basic framework for policy on the protection of the archaeological heritage. In summary, the obligations on the state under the convention relate to providing statutory protection measures authorisation and supervision of archaeological activities measures for the physical protection of the archaeological heritage providing consultation between archaeologists and planners providing financial support for research or rescue archaeology facilitating the study of archaeological discoveries by making or bringing up to date maps, surveys and inventories of archaeological sites facilitating national and international exchanges of elements of the archaeological heritage for scientific purposes educating the public in relation to the value of and threat to the archaeological heritage preventing the illicit circulation of elements of the archaeological heritage providing for the exchange of information and experts on the archaeological heritage between states party to the convention.
Irish Legislation
Irish legislation for the protection of archaeological heritage is based on the National Monuments Acts 1930-2004. This is in accordance with the Valetta Convention (as above). The Minister of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government has a specific role in relation to the protection of the archaeological heritage through powers provided by these acts and the National Cultural Institutions Act 1997. The overall state archaeological service is provided by the Department of Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands (DAHGI) and delivered through the Planning and Heritage Section of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and the National Museum of Ireland (Irish Antiquities Division) on behalf of the minister.
The National Monuments Acts secure the archaeological heritage in several key areas The Protection of Archaeological Monuments and Areas
Section 2 of the 1930 Act (as amended) provides that ‘monument’ includes any artificial building or structure, cave, stone or any natural object that has been altered, moved, or purposefully put in position, any prehistoric tomb, grave or burial or any ritual, industrial or habitation site or any traces of the above. The Planning and Heritage Section of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 36 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
Government advises the Minister on the protection of archaeological monuments and places. There are a number of mechanisms which can be applied to secure the protection of archaeological monuments and areas.
The Record of Monuments and Places – a list and maps of monuments and relevant places in each county maintained and updated by The Planning and Heritage Section of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. Monuments entered into it are referred to as Recorded Monuments. Owners or occupiers of Recorded Monuments are required to give two months notice to the Minister and obtain consent before carrying out any works in relation to the monument. The Register of Historic Monuments – a list of all historic monuments known to the Minister. Owners or occupiers must not, other than with consent, alter, deface, demolish or in any manner interfere with a historic monument entered in the register. Preservation Orders and Temporary Preservation Orders. – Where it appears to the minister that a monument, considered to be a national monument, is in danger or is actually being destroyed or falling into decay the minister may by preservation order or temporary preservation order, undertake the preservation of the monument. A temporary preservation order will remain in force for six months and then expire.
The Protection of Archaeological objects
Section 2 of the 1930 Act (amended) defines an archaeological object as (in summary) any chattel in a manufactured or partly manufactured state or an unmanufactured state but with an archaeological or historical association. This includes ancient human, animal or plant remains. The National Museum of Ireland advises the Minister on the protection of archaeological objects. The National Monuments Acts state the following regarding the archaeological objects. Archaeological objects must not be altered by any person unless issued with a licence to do so by the Minister. This includes cleaning, restoring, sampling, cutting or drilling. No archaeological object found after 1930 may be purchased or otherwise acquired or sold unless designated by the director of the Museum. It is unlawful to export or attempt to export archaeological objects other than with an export licence.
The Control of Archaeological Excavation
It is unlawful for any person to dig or excavate in or under any land for the purpose of searching for archaeological objects or particular structure or thing of archaeological interest known or believed to be under such land unless issued with, or in accordance with a licence issued by the Minister. The Planning and Heritage Section of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, in consultation with the National Museum, advises the Minister on the issuing of licences. In practice, for a
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 37 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
person to be issued with a licence to excavate, he or she will have to be considered eligible to hold one. This is generally determined by interview.
The Control of Detection Devices
Section 2 of the 1987 Act defines a detecting device as a device designed or adapted for detecting or locating any metal or mineral on the ground and under water. This does not include a camera. It is unlawful to use or be in possession of such a device At the site of a monument subject to a preservation order A monument in the ownership or guardianship of the Minister A monument entered in the Record of Monuments and Places A monument entered in the Register of Historic Monuments
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 38 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
APPENDIX 3 IMPACT ASSESSMENT & THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCE
Procedures relating to the carrying out of Cultural Heritage section of EISs.
Archaeological assessment has been described as “the overall process of assessing the impact of a development” (DAHGI, 1999). The principle aim of assessment is to anticipate and avoid impacts on the archaeological resource. Archaeological assessment may be required as part of the planning process in response to developments which may be located in the vicinity of archaeological monuments, which are extensive in terms of area or length, which are likely to have a substantial impact on present or former wetlands, unenclosed land, rivers, lakes, the inter-tidal zone or the sea-bed (The Heritage Council. 2000).
Impact Assessment and Archaeology.
Archaeological monuments can comprise identifiable above ground features or subterranean traces of previous activity. These monuments can be affected in the course of development in a number of ways. Potential impacts can be identified through the assessment procedure by carrying out a paper study/historical research. The documentary research can then be combined with existing baseline data, field assessment and non-intrusive methods to provide a pre-development risk appraisal study for developers. Further investigation or mitigation measures may subsequently be recommended prior to and during the course of construction work. Sources used by archaeologists show considerable variation (The Heritage Council, 2000). A number of primary baseline data sources and procedures must be considered. These are listed below. 1. The Register of Monuments and Places. The RMP is a database recording all archaeological sites in Ireland known to the National Monuments Service. It is based on the Sites and Monuments Record of each County. The record comprises Ordnance Survey 6” sheets which indicate the location of each monument or place of archaeological interest and files of further documentary and photographic data or information relating to an archaeological event such as a site visit, survey or excavation. These are housed in the National Monuments Services in Dublin. The record is constantly updated and principally focuses on monuments that pre-date 1700. 2. The National Museum of Ireland Topographical Files. The National Museum in Dublin houses an archive of antiquities cataloguing artefacts which were found and reported between 1928 and 1995. Artefacts can be used as a pointer to the levels of activity in an area in the past. As such they are a useful guide to the archaeological potential of a site
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 39 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
3. Cartographic evidence. Ordnance Survey maps and available early maps are consulted and examined. Historical maps are more easily available for urban sites. However, other sources, such as estate maps, are available for rural sites. 4. Previous archaeological work near to the subject site. Previous fieldwork carried out locally can provide further information on the surrounding landscape and help to determine the nature of the archaeological resource. A yearly excavations bulletin catalogues all licensed fieldwork carried out in the state. The Archaeological Survey of Ireland and local journals can also be used as sources for this purpose 5. Field inspection . A site visit is necessary in order to determine the nature of the archaeological resource and potential remains. Previously unknown archaeological sites can be identified through topographical observations. A site visit can also be helpful in researching local traditions/folklore which may help to indicate levels of activity in the area in the past. 6. Aerial photographs. The Geological Survey of Ireland, based in Dublin, holds a comprehensive archive of high level vertical photographs available for consultation by the public and researchers. This is an invaluable resource for the recognition of new sites and the contributing to the understanding of known sites.
Examination of the above sources and the undertaking of the above procedures can result in a detailed statement of the possible impacts on the archaeological resource of a proposed development and set out recommendations as how the impact can be avoided, minimized or negated. By ensuring the earliest identification of the archaeological impacts of a development these impacts can be minimized or avoided, thus reducing costs and/or delays.
Direct and indirect impacts resulting from the proposed development on the archaeological resource should be described and considered. This section of the cultural impact assessment should address the results of disturbance by excavation or deposition, topsoil stripping or passage of machinery and subsequent physical loss to a monument or its setting, desiccation of archaeological objects or remains due to groundwater level changes, visual impacts and visual amenity impact.
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 40 M10WX01 Fethard on Sea Harbour Improvement November 2010
Mitigation strategies and Archaeology
Although it is not always possible to detect archaeological sites prior to construction works, it is important to investigate the potential impacts at the earliest phase of development, if possible during site selection. The ideal mitigation for archaeological sites is avoidance/preservation in situ . This is, however, not always possible. If the risk of disturbing archaeological remains is considered minimal, no further archaeological work (other than monitoring of construction work) may be recommended. Recommendations in the impact statement can be offered as mitigation measures should preservation in situ prove impractical or impossible. These are as follows:
Archaeological Test Trenching. Test excavation has been defined as that form of archaeological excavation where the purpose is to establish the nature and extent of archaeological deposits and features present in a location which it is proposed to develop (though not normally to fully investigate those deposits or features) and allow an assessment to be made of the archaeological impact of the proposed development (DAHGI, 1999).
• Full Archaeological Excavation. Archaeological excavation has been described as being carried out in order to “mitigate the impact of development on archaeological deposits, features and objects through scientific recording … resulting in preservation by record …” (DAHGI, 1999).
• Archaeological Monitoring. Archaeological monitoring has been described as "involving an archaeologist being present in the course of the carrying out of development works (which may include conservation works), so as to identify and protect archaeological deposits, features or objects which may be uncovered or otherwise affected by the works" (DAHGI , 1999).
MOORE MARINE Ltd. – Archaeological, Environmental, Oceanographic and Geophysical Page__ 41