House — Neolithic in Loughgur

In rocky pasture under and adjacent to a low rock cliff on the W-facing slope of Knockadoon Peninsula, 80m W of and overlooking Lough Gur. The Neolithic settlement, Bronze Age Smithy and Early Medieval settlement was discovered (Site F) during a campaign of archaeological excavations over 18 seasons led by Professor Seán P. Ó Ríordáin at Lough Gur (1954, 415-28). The site is located within an area of dense archaeological activity dating principally from the Neolithic and Bronze Age up to the present day around the lake (Cleary 2018). A semi-circular enclosure known as Seeaghanmnatee (LI032-022002-) is located 45m to NW of Site F. Archaeological excavations by Ó Ríordáin at Site G (LI032-022005-) are located c. 50m to NNE. A circular enclosure (LI032-022007-) is located on the terrace above the rock cliff 45m to NE. Archaeological excavations by Ó Ríordáin at Site 10 (LI032-022003-) are located c. 60m to SSW. Many other archaeological sites are located on the peninsula, including Circle K (LI032-022028-) located 130m to NE. The archaeological site (LI032-022004- Site F) is not depicted on historic OSi maps. The wall defining the excavated structure is visible on OSi orthoimages taken 2005-12 and on Digital Globe orthoimages taken 2011-2013. Ó Ríordáin (1954, 415-25) described Site F as follows: ‘near the W end of Knockadoon at the upper edge of a slope which falls towards the lakeshore about 73m distant. The site is at the foot of a bare rock face about 1.82m in height, above which the ground again rises gradually towards the centre of Knockadoon. Before excavation the house showed as an approximately rectangular outline (int. dims. 8.23m N-S; 6.4m E-W) defined by a bank from which stones protruded in places. The E side of the house was defined by the rock-face which clearly served as one of its walls. Excavation showed the outline of the house to be more irregular than was apparent from surface indications. The N and S walls curved slightly inwards near the rock-face, this curve being much more pronounced in the S wall. The walls were everywhere of poor construction. The underlying rock had a very irregular surface and no attempt had been made by the wall builders to level this or to place the wall-stones firmly on the rock. Almost everywhere under the wall there was a layer (D 0.1-0.15m) of rubble and bones. The method of building consisted essentially of piling stones together and only occasionally did these appear to be placed in such a way as to suggest any attempt at a facing. Natural bosses of rock were utilised as part of the wall when these were in suitable positions. In places there was a layer of compact yellow clay over the bed-rock, but clay had not been utilised as packing between the stones and the only material which remained in the spaces between them was rubble and humus. Because of the irregular surface of the limestone it was sometimes difficult to distinguish between artificially constructed post-holes and natural holes which may or may not have been utilised to take uprights. On the plan, only those of which we felt reasonably definite have been marked and these are mainly near the wall or set in it. A large hole (diam. 0.53m; D 0.25m) at the middle of the line of rock-face was probably deliberately cut, at least in part, and would have served to carry a large post, a companion for which would have stood in the similar but slightly smaller hole (diam. 0.30m; D 0.15m) which was NE of the middle of the west wall. The number of post-holes found is insufficient for the posts that would be required to carry a structure of this size and others were presumably set directly on the rock or in natural crevices in its surface. The poor quality construction of the walls made it unlikely that these could have been built to a sufficient height and it is likely that they served as footings only, more perishable material being used to complete the walls in the manner suggested for other sites (A, D-House I, E). As there was no trace of a wall construction on the E side of the house, the roof on this side must have rested on the rock shelf. Within the house the rock was covered in some parts by a layer of humus only; in other parts, where the rock surface dipped (especially towards the W wall) a layer of rubble lay between the humus and the rock surface. Hearths were found at two places within the house and at one under the wall. At the centre of the house a hearth was marked by a spread of charcoal. A second hearth occurred S of the hollow in the NE quadrant, and was marked by a spread of charcoal and a setting of small stones to level the surface. The entrance to the house was at the N end of the W wall, where there was a gap about 2.44m wide between the end of this wall and the N wall of the house. On the S side of this gap was a post-hole in the wall.’ A relic field-bank orientated NW-SE runs down the slope towards the lake from the W end of the N wall of the house. Parallel to this c. 70m N is a second roughly parallel field bank; the two enclose a field which were completed by the rock outcrop on the E and by the old lake edge to the NW. Ó Ríordáin suggested that the field boundaries at the site are Early Medieval in date. He suggested that the house structure may be Bronze Age but could not be certain and remained open to the possibility that the structure was Bronze Age based on the discovery of course flat bottomed Class II pottery. The artefacts recovered from the excavations at Site F range in date from a small number of Neolithic objects through to finds from the Early Medieval Period. A large collection of Middle Bronze Age (1500-1000 BC) clay casting moulds were recovered from under the field boundary indicating bronze smithing at the site. The wall foundations of the house structure and field boundaries are visible on Google Earth orthoimages taken 07/05/2006; 16/03/2016 and 28/06/2018. See attached Google Earth orthoimage Compiled by: Edmond O’Donovan Date of upload: 9 November 2020