UCC Library and UCC researchers have made this item openly available. Please let us know how this has helped you. Thanks!
Title Summary of a study of county Cork souterrains Author(s) McCarthy, J. P. Publication date 1983 Original citation McCarthy, J. P., 1983. Summary of a study of County Cork Souterrains. Journal of the Cork Historical and Archaeological Society, 88 (247), pp.100-105.
Type of publication Article (peer-reviewed)
Link to publisher's http://sfes.chez.com/publication.html#135 version http://www.corkhist.ie/wp-content/uploads/jfiles/1983/b1983-004.pdf https://www.pollfaoitalamh.ie/ Access to the full text of the published version may require a subscription.
Rights © Cork Historical and Archaeological Society
Item downloaded http://hdl.handle.net/10468/128 from Downloaded on 2021-10-06T05:35:20Z Summary of a Study of "- County Cork Souterrains 1
By J.P. McCARTHY
There are several thousand souterrains in second largest category of recorded sites. They Ireland, and in Co. Cork to date we have pose two questions which we have not as yet at records of the existence of approximately 500. tempted to answer scientifically. Were there, The scientific name souterrain is an anti at one time. surface structures above them of quarian's term for these monuments. Other which we now have no visible and no recorded names used in the past wete Dane's Hole and evidence? Did the builders of these souterrains Rtrth Cave. Folknames for sou terrains range intend that the locations of their sites should from the nondescript Cave or Poll Talaimh to, be unmarked? At a future date excavation and in specific cases, Tigh-faol~thalamh and possibly aerial photography may bring us some Carraig-an-tseomra. Dr Anthony Lucas states way towards answering these questions. in a recent paper' that probably, during the In the course of analysing the data collected period in which they were used, one of the during my study3 of Cork souterrains one in common names for a sou terrain was Uam teresting fact emerged relating to church (Uaimh in modern Irish). associated sites. This was that the largest There are a number of common misconcep recorded mnnelled souterrains in the county tions about these sites. When invest.igating Of had been found in the vicinity of churches. enquiting about sou terrains in Co. Cork I have These are Dunisky4 near Macroom, often been told that they run beneath rivers, Kilmocomogue' near Kealkil and that they join neighbouring ringforts Ot that Templebryan6 near Clonakilty. Though we do they honeycomb the interiors of ringforts. not have sufficient evidence to justify a similar While such statements may have a basis in statement regarding those built with sto,ne local folklore they are not founded in fact. To masonry, Kilclogh' near Blarney, Co. Cork expand slightly on one of these statements does encourage an open mind on the matter. gives some idea of how these assumptions This is the largest8 recorded stone-built souter arise. The idea that souterrains join ringforts is rain in the county. It is unassociated and a usually conceived when a site is discovered in a field adjacent to it is known as the 'graveyard' field between two ringforts which are known to field. have what are locally tetmed 'caves'. The Within ringforts there is no particular loca sourerrain is chen assumed. without investiga tion for souterrains. They can occut at the cen tion, to be a passage between two ringforts. tre or at the sides of the enclosure. Many are In Co. Cork sou terrains are found within or entirely contained within the bounds of the in in the vicinity of a variety of surface structures. terior though occasionally they may lead out Ringfort5 are by far the most commonly assoc into an adjoining field. Examples of soutet iated, though churches, promontory forts, rec rains connected with houses in ringforts have tangular earthworks and stoneforts also occur been discovered by excavation at Ballywee,' near or in connection with them. In -terms of Co. Antrim, Cush, 1O Co. Limerick and numbe'rs. unassociated souterrarns form the Leacanabuaile,1I Co. Kerry. In Co. Cork,
100 Summary ofa Study ofCounty Cork Soutefrains 101
Rock-cut soucerrain at Dunisky, Co. Cork. Chamber 3 with entrance to co nstruction shaft at centre and creephole at end of bench on right.
Knockdrum 12 stonefort near CastJetownsend is overhead to suppOtt a cavity the chambers were the only definite example . Twohig" records a then made by excavating outwards horizont possible association at Cas tlemagner in north ally. Cork though this was not substantiated by an Any examination of a souterrain.leaves one investigation of the ringfort interior . cl assifying its features into two categories. Influenced patti ally by geological facrors. These are structural features and functional sQurerrains are made in either of two ways. features. Sttuctural features to be noted may They can be built of stone masonry or they can be th e site's companmeDt plans and masonry be tunnelled in clay or rock. The procedure for characteristics or construction shafts. Func a stone-built souterrain was to excavate a tional features are those which reflect the usage uench ro the required depth. Within this the of the souterram. They are vents, drains, steps, structure was built, each course of masonry be ceiling shafts and entrances . ing suppotted on the outside by a packing of In p.lan souterrain compartments normally soil between the stones and the ttench wall. I. conform either crudely or sharply to one of Tunnelling for a clay or rock-cut souterrain was three basic shapes. These are long narrow done by means of excavating one or moce ver galleries. rectangular chambers and circular tical shafts to a suitable depth. Allowing for cells. Using this basic definition I have devised ceiling height and sufficient clay and soil a classification system for Cork souterrain 102 Cork Histoneal and Archaeological Society designs which will be described later. 4. Sleeping quarrers in ringforts. People in general, when enquiring about 5. Places of refuge. archaeological monuments ask two simple 6. Anchorites' cells. questions which are: how old are they and Most of these theories were pur forward in the what wete they used for? Archaeologists in the past based on the idea that all souterrains were not [00 distant past have also taken this ap one and the same kind of monument. Some proach to the study of sou terrains with regret· theories such as those of temporary and perm table consequences. Because sQurcrrains did anem dwellings, anchorites' ceUs and sleeping not provide clear-cut answers, studying them quarters cannot be reliably substantiated. That was regarded as an unproductive exercise. This they were used as places of storage, conceal has resulted in an impoverished scientific mem and refuge can be suggested on the basis record with the majority of discoveries either of finds ar~d features, or circumstantially , on poorly nored or dosed without a detailed ex the basis of associarion and early documentaty am ination having been made. Excavation in references. is Ringfort sou terrains could provide most cases is either a rescue operation or an ad a cool storage place for dairy produce. Wine ditional facror in a ringfoft dig. Therefore in could be stored in church souterrains. Coins making a statement abou t the dating and have been found as at Castlefreke,'6 Co. Cork, function of SQurcrrains I am emphasizing what and Knowth 17 in Co. Meath. Rock-cut benches we do not know. at Dunisky and the presence of vents and Dating and function are assessed 011 the drains in many sites all hint at the above three basis of association and finds. Dating by functions. But, taking IoutefTain as a blanket association means that we must accept a date term, I think that future tesearchers should ex range for the surface structure in quescion and amine individual sites in the context of assoc assume that the sQurerrain is contemporary. In iated surface structures. In other words. the in the case of ringforts, for which we do not know tended function of a small, single-chambered, the limits of the date tange, this means that ringfort souterrain may bear no relationship to their souterrains were built and in use between a seven or eight chambered rock-cut site built Early Christian and Medieval times (5th-13th to serve the,varied needs of a church. cent.). This does not however contribute to The matter of designs has influenced a lot of ward s an overall date range for sou terrains in my thinking about the interpretation of general regardless of the type of surface various aspects of these sites. What follows is associadon. Attempting to date souterrains by an ourline of my classification of Cotk souret means of finds poses the same problem. rains based on llO drawings and 155 repotts. Whereas artefacts, ogham Stones and radiocar There are essentially thtee types: bon dates, such as 670 A.D. and 690 A.D. for Type A. Stone-built cham bets and galleries. an excavated ringfoft souterrain at Raheen Type B. Beehive ce lls which rhough com namadra 14 in Co . Limerick, fit in well with the monly stone-built also occur in clay. Earl y Christian / Medieval time range, they do Type C. Earth-cut" aDd rock-cut chambers. not help us to decide when sou terrains were first built and when they went our of use. Each type has a thteefold subdivision: The following ate the suggested functions A1. A single chambet or gallery (27 ex for souterrains: amples) 1. Domestic storage places. A2. A site of two cham bets or galleries at 2. Places of concealment fot valuables. tight angles ro each other and having an 3. Temporary and petmanent dwellings. Lor T shaped plan (12 examples). Summary ofa Study of County Cork Souterrains 103
A3. Three or more galleries or chambers at C3. Series of 3 to 7 chambers with long axes right angles to each other (8 examples). of some parallel, at right angles or fol BI. A passage leading to a beehive cell (9 ex lowing in a line (32 examples). amples). B2. Two or three cells joined by creepways, All other designs, for which there are less than with or w.ithout a passage leading to 3 examples, have been classified as group 0 them (9 examples). which is a miscellany designed to take such B3. Four or more cells i.n a cluster formation sites unti] future discoverIes can allow for new or in a straight line (S examples). types or prove some to be oddities. Cl. Two chambers with their long axes Once the classification was completed I parallel and joined by a creepway (8 ex decided that it would be interesting to see amples). ., what the geographical relationship of in C2. Group of chambers arranged around one dividual sites within each type might be. A or two cemral columns (3 examples). distribution map gave the following results:
CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM fOR CO.CORK SoUTERRAINS. Al Bl Cl "
A2 B2 C2
A3 B3 C3 ,...... ' - I'
J. P. Me eARTHY 1977. DISTRIBUTION OF SOUTERRAIN TYPES, CO. CORK
~
~t _to Typology :- r r'~~.... - ..... -; ,~' \ AI A. Single chamber or gal1ery, stone- built. EN; '-, A2 £ Two chambers or gal1eries, at right angles having L or T - shaPed plan, or both aligned in one direction, stone built . mlmll!itfl~~' 1f~>,mq
90 JP. MCCARTHY 1977. CORRIGENDUM: For C2 above read 'chambers around one or two central columns'. Summary ofa Study ofCounty Cork Souterrains 105
Type A: These sites are mainly located in 7 Unpublished site. Surveyed J.P . McCarthy that area stretching east to west, border to 1976. Included in forthcoming publication of M.A. border of the county and defined to the north thesis. by the Blackwater River and to the south by 8 Large is defined for the purposes of my study as the Bandon River. Though this is the main either the total length of a sou terrain or the floor concentration area, outliers of all three sub plan size of particular compartments. Templebryan types occur. is not large in terms of length and neither is Type B: Excluding B3 the main concentra Kilclogh. tion is on both sides of the river Blackwater 9 Lynn, c.J. (1974) Ballywee, Co. Antrim. Ex with one outlier south of the River Lee . cavations 1974. Summary accounts 0/archaeological Type C: These are mainly located in that area work in Ireland, pp 4-6 . occupying the the west portion of the county 10 0 Rrordain, S.P. (1940) 'Excavations at Cush, defined to the north by the River Lee and to Co. Limerick', R.I.A. Pmc., Vol. xlv, C, pp 83-18l. the east by a north-south line from the Old 11 0 Rrordain, S.P. and Foy,].B. (1941) 'The ex Head of Kinsale to the River Lee. This distri cavation of Leacanabuaile stone fort near Caher bution is approximately coterminous with the civeen, Co. Kerry' ,jCHAS xlvi (1941) pp 85-99. newer glacial drift in this area and probably ex plains why clay-cut sites are so common here. 12 Somerville , B.T. (1931) 'The Fort on Knockdrum, West Carbery, Co . Cork', R.S.A.I. These distribution patterns indicate only the jn. , lxi, pp 1-9 . main areas of concentration. Secondly, the map depends for its accuracy on the standard 13 Twohig, D .C. (1976) 'Recent souterrain and extent of recording, which is poor general research in Co. Cork' ,JCHAS lxxxi (1976) pp 19-23. ly, undertaken over a two hundred and sixty 14 Stenberger, M. (1966) 'A ringfort at Raheen year period, i.e., c. 1717-1977 . namadra, Knocklong, Co. Limerick', R.l.A. Proc., lxv, C, pp 37-54. NOTES AND REFERENCES 15 Lucas, A.T. (1971-3) 'Souterrains: The literary 1 This summary was prepared for a talk given to evidence', Bealoideas, Vol. 39-41, pp 165-19l. the Cobh (Co. Cork) Historical and Archaeological 16 McCarthy, and Dolley, M. (1977) 'The Society in March 1982. J.P . Castle Freke (Rathbarry, Co. Cork) find of tenth 2 Lucas, A.T. (1971-3) 'Souterrains: The Literary century Anglo-Saxon coins', The Numismatic Cir- Evidence', Bealoideas, Vol. 39-41, p. 170. 3 McCarthy, J.P. (1977) The SouteTTains a/Co. Cork. (An M.A. thesis at present with the Pir, ::~r:::7 ~ ;:79;88,-;:0. Cork souterrains~ publisher). SubteTTanea Britannica, Bulletin No. 10 , pp 3-8 . . , ..\ 4 McCarthy, J.P. (1978) 'The Duniskey Souter 17 Dolley, M. (1969) 'The Anglo-Saxon pennies rain Co. Cork', SubteTTanea Britannica, Bulletin from the upper souterrain at Knowth', British No. 7, pp 5-8. Numismatic journal, Vol. xxviii, pp 16-2l. 5 Fahy, E.M. (1960) 'A sou terrain at Lisheen, 18 Variations of this method, and contradictions Co. Cork' ,jCHAS!xv (1960) pp 142-3. of it as explained here, also occur. Further excava 6 Twohig, D.C. (1976) 'Recent Soute;'rain tion is required to substantiate the norm - if one Research in Co. Cork',]CHAS!xxxi (1976) pp31 exists! 33 . 19 Term 'earth-cut' is synonymous with 'clay-cut' .