10
Wood and Charcoal Research in Ireland
Abstract
This paper explores the value of wood and charcoal analysis to archaeological investigation. Following a description of former research, a short introduction into the methodology is given, together with a section on sampling strategies. Wood and charcoal are among the most frequent materials found during archaeological excavations. Wood was readily available in prehistoric times and hence was used for a range of purposes, from the building of structures to the crafting of domestic and artistic objects. Much of this wood ultimately ended up in domestic fires, leaving behind charcoal and ashes. Outside Ireland, the study of wood and charcoal has long been an integrated part of archaeological excavations. These studies have provided much insight into wood usage, woodland management and woodland changes over time. In Ireland, however, there have been few studies of large wood assemblages until recently. Investigations have concentrated mostly on species identification and wood working. Wooden artefacts, because of their archaeological value as objects, have tended to remain within the arena of the archaeologist rather than the wood specialist. Species identification has been the main goal of charcoal analysis, notably prior to radiocarbon dating. The last ten years has seen a growing interest in environmental archaeology, however, including wood and charcoal analysis. This has resulted in some very interesting studies. Three examples of wood and charcoal research in Ireland are presented; a wetland site, an urban site and research on material from marginal areas. Understanding wood usage goes beyond species identification, however. Future archaeological research in Ireland should incorporate more aspects of wood analysis, such as the examination of annual ring patterns, wood quality and insect damage. There is also a need for more research of vernacular sites. It is only through the full integration of environmental analysis and archaeological excavation that a deeper understanding of the life and environment of prehistoric people will be realised.
Introduction to the Study of Wood and Charcoal from Archaeological Sites
The identification of wood is of great importance for archaeological research as wood was one of the most significant raw materials in prehistoric and early historical times. From a biological point of view, the anatomical study of wood may provide information on vegetation history, especially woodland history. However, trees not only grew in woodlands and bog margins, but also on field boundaries and in pasture woodland. These resources may have been exploited when found in the living environment of prehistoric people.
Within a prehistoric community wood was used for a multitude of purposes, indoors as well as outdoors. It can be assumed that large timbers, used for the building of houses and farms, were obtained as close to a settlement as possible to avoid transport problems. The choice of a specific wood species depended on the quality, the strength, the speed and regularity of growth and the durability. The choice of wood also depended on the availability of a tree species. This could be physical (was the tree species growing locally?) or social (who owned the woodland?). In most cases oak was used for large constructions.
Inside a settlement many objects were needed for normal household functions, from tools to kitchen utensils and furniture. These objects were all used for specific tasks and therefore required particular qualities from the wood from which they were made. The requirements varied from durability in dry and wet environments (ovens, hearths, fishing equipment, buckets and scoops), flexibility (axe handles, bows) and smoothness (bowls and spoons) to beauty (the use of burr wood for bowls). It is clear that this group could include a greater variety of wood species than structural timber, and this is reflected in the selection of certain wood species. Objects with the same function were usually made of the same or similar wood species.
Firewood was usually gathered as close as possible to, or even within, a settlement. It is for this reason that the wood species found within charcoal hearths often provides information on the local vegetation directly surrounding settlements or activity areas. Other activities could also produce wood suitable for firing purposes. Local felling of trees for timber, for example, would leave a large proportion of the tree available for other purposes, such as firewood. If convenient, waste material such as chips or discarded building material or woodworking waste could also be used. The composition of charcoal assemblages might thus be influenced by other patterns of wood use. Charcoal studies can often give evidence for the kind of wood usage, through, for example, the presence of charred chips or twigs. It should be mentioned, however, that especially in historical times part of the local woodland may have been managed specifically to provide wood fuel or material for charcoal burning for metalworking. Oak and ash both produce good fuel, and are also excellent trees for timber. It is likely therefore, that ash and oak would have been encouraged in managed woodland.
History of Wood Identification and Analysis in Ireland
Prior to the 1980s, there was limited research on wood and charcoal in Ireland. Mitchell (1986; 1989) analysed charcoal from Valencia Island. Other charcoal identifications occurred prior to radiocarbon dating of samples. In general, however, little attention was given to this research area, until the initiation of Barry Raftery’s excavations of bog trackways in Co. Longford in the late 1980s and the establishment of a student training course in wetland archaeology. This was coordinated by University College Dublin (UCD) and Exeter University and funded by the European Social Fund. From this group, some students emerged who have since been involved in wood and charcoal studies.
These developments are exemplified by the work on Corlea Bog, Co. Longford (Raftery 1996), which can be considered one of the first major adventures in multi-proxy research in Ireland. This study incorporated the results of the impressive Iron Age trackway as well as detailed descriptions on wood working by Aidan O’Sullivan, wood identification by Aonghus Moloney, pollen work by Chris Caseldine and Jackie Hatton and peat stratigraphical research by Wil Casparie (Raftery 1996). This work was the inspiration for later work on, for example, Derryville Bog, Co. Tipperary, aspects of which are described below.
A further development from Raftery’s work was the establishment in 1990 of the Irish Archaeological Wetland Unit (IAWU) as a joint initiative between UCD and the then Office of Public Works. The IAWU performed extensive research in the bogs of the Midlands of Ireland. Over the years, this group collected important information on the archaeology of bogs including wooden remains, and they have published the results on a regular basis (IAWU 1993a; 1993b; 1995). The IAWU ceased operations in 2005.
Since the mid 1990s, there has been a growth in the number of projects carried out in wetlands and bogs. Besides institutions such as Queen’s University Belfast, where wetland research was already being carried out, other research institutions such as the Discovery Programme have developed an interest in wetland studies (e.g. the Lake Settlement Project). A number of other agencies and companies have developed wetland expertise and have undertaken significant projects, such as ADS, CRDS, Headland Archaeology and Margaret Gowen and Co. Ltd. amongst others. There is now a broader recognition of the importance of wetland research (see Plunkett and McDermott, this volume).
Excavations in towns and cities have been carried out on a regular basis in advance of building activities and drainage works since the 1970s and 1980s. These produced large quantities of material including wood from the Viking, Norman and Medieval periods. In recent years many of these results have been published. These publications mostly concentrate on the wood identifications of artefacts. Examples include publications on Cork (Hurley and Tierney 1994; Hurley and Jones 1997), Dublin (Cross 1997; O’Sullivan and Deevy 2000) and Waterford (Hurley and McCutcheon 1997). Articles on aspects of woodworking and woodmanship were published by Wallace (1982) and O’Sullivan (1998; 2000). Other publications on wood and charcoal research include, amongst others, Hawthorne (1991) and O’Carroll (2001a; 2002b). McKeown (1994) worked on material from the Bronze Age mining site at Mount Gabriel, Co. Cork, and was also involved in work on Mesolithic material from Ferriter’s Cove, Co. Cork (1999). Her charcoal studies are among the few that used sampling of charcoal following a regular grid system. This grid system is used on the continent on a regular basis in archaeological excavations (Johansen et al. 2000; Carrion 2002; Dufraisse 2002).
Due to the pressures of commercialisation, a significant amount of work that is currently undertaken by wood and charcoal specialists is not being published. This is a regrettable situation that is also developing on mainland Europe at the moment. There is a need for a centralised structure within Ireland where unpublished (and published) wood and charcoal data can be stored for future studies.
Methodology
Microscopes are needed for the identification of wood and charcoal. Only wood from oak (Quercus) can be identified on site by trained archaeologists. Observations of growth patterns and the number of annual rings or age of the wood are usually made using stereo microscopes with low magnifications of up to x 40. For the identification of non-charred wood, thin slices are cut with razor blades and put onto a microscopic slide beneath a cover slip. For temporary slides, water is used as a medium, while for more permanent slides glycerine is used. Magnifications of x 100 to x 200 are generally sufficient for identification. For specific characteristics, magnifications of x 400 times are needed. Charcoal is broken along the three major axes (cross-section, radial and tangential) to expose a clear surface. After temporary mounting on clay, or in sand the surfaces are studied under indirect light. Magnifications of x 200 to x 400 times are normally required. There are some very good publications that describe the methodology of wood identification and include photographs of microscopic sections. The best known of these is Schweingruber’s (1978) Microscopic Wood Anatomy.
In Ireland, relatively few wood species occur naturally in the prehistoric period when compared with assemblages from mainland Europe. In historic times, with imported wood species and plantations, a more diverse pattern can be expected.
Sampling Strategies
Archaeological sites in themselves often determine the conditions of wood and charcoal survival. Most wood will be found in waterlogged conditions. Charcoal is also found in dry conditions, provided roots have not been able to penetrate too much. Wood can also be mineralised. This is often the case in river sediments, cesspits or lime-rich areas. When charcoal incorporates minerals such as calcium and iron it becomes almost stone-like in character. This occurs, for example, in waterlogged conditions at the bottom of troughs in fulachta fiadh and may make identification impossible. How much attention is given to the study of wood and charcoal depends to a large extent on the information archaeologists would like to receive from the material. In itself, the study can be very interesting from a biological point of view, but this aspect has not yet been fully explored in Ireland.
Before a razor blade comes in contact with wooden remains, a license is required. For wood and charcoal identifications a ‘License to Alter’ should be obtained. For identifications leading to radiocarbon or dendrochronological dating a ‘License to Export’ may also be required. These licenses are obtained through the National Museum of Ireland. When wood and charcoal are sampled for dating purposes, the sampling area should be clean, as should the tools used to take samples. There should be no eating or smoking in the area. Chemicals should not be used. Identification should take place prior to conservation of artefacts because these techniques and chemicals permanently alter the structure of the wood.
Based on wood research in Ireland over the last ten years, the following suggestions for wood and charcoal sampling can be made.
Wood
Ideally all wood should be sampled. When large areas are excavated, this is not feasible. A discussion with the wood specialist is advisable when large excavations are planned to determine a budget and the formulation of a strategy. This consultation should occur prior to excavation.
Several sampling methods are possible. One may choose to sample randomly one third of the exposed area. In this way, a good overview will be obtained. Otherwise, one may choose to sample a limited area including a few structures in detail (such as Viking wattle-work houses). For prehistoric sites with limited wood remains the preference may be to sample using a grid system, following a fixed pattern. This system is often used for shallow sites with unclear features, such as activity areas with flint and charcoal or an area with many pits. Small features, such as troughs from fulachta fiadh, should be sampled in their entirety. Ditches or moats can be bulk sampled to get maximum information on the local vegetation. Analysis of small environmental charcoal remains requires considerable work because of the small size and condition of the pieces, but can be very informative, especially when combined with the analysis of other macro-remains, such as beetles and molluscs.
It is important to pack any sampled wood carefully. Generally, a plastic bag should contain a single wood item. In some cases more pieces, such as rods or sails, can be rolled in plastic with the number of pieces to be identified noted on the bag. Prehistoric wood is soft and fragile, and therefore should not be packed too tightly. This is to prevent the wood being broken. It is good practice to put some water inside the bag, or protect objects by embedding them in stone-free sediment (peat or clay). Storage should be cold and dark (such as in a refrigerator at 4 °C).
The size of the wood samples may vary, depending on the questions to be answered. For the identification of brushwood, pieces with a width up to 6 cm and a hand length are sufficient. A length of 20 cm from larger timbers is advisable. Both can serve later for radiocarbon dating and/or dating through dendrochronological methods. Woodworking aspects are usually studied separately from the identification process. Identifications can be made using tiny slivers of wood, barely visible to the naked eye, and there is thus no excuse for not identifying artefacts.
Charcoal
It is important to stress that charcoal should not be sampled by collecting individual pieces. The usual method is bulk sampling. Standard plastic buckets of 10 litres with lids are very suited for this purpose. For conventional radiocarbon dating, 5 gm are generally necessary, and this may require a large bag of charcoal (but see caveats of dating charcoal, as outlined in Barratt and Reimer, this volume). Charcoal research usually follows after the samples are examined for macrofossil remains. Sieving can be undertaken through wet sieving or flotation or a combination of both. This procedure can be performed on site after consultation with the macrofossil specialist. For charcoal, the larger sieves (2 or 4 mm) are used. The floating pieces and residues are usually dried on paper and stored in strong plastic bags. After macrofossil analysis the charcoal is forwarded to the charcoal specialist for identification.
The sampling strategy depends on the questions to be addressed and on the budget. A single context may contain charcoal from a single event, and its composition may therefore be biased by one particular factor. If the objective is to gain information on which species were generally being used for fuel it is probably better to take bulk samples for charcoal from a wide range of contexts rather than just from one charcoal-rich hearth. The preferred method for charcoal research is sampling following a grid system, such as has been used for Palaeolithic and Mesolithic sites (Johansen et al. 2000; Stuijts 2006). For structures such as fulachta fiadh, bulk samples from a few areas such as the mound, the bottom of the trough and the top of the trough, are advisable.
Irish Case Studies
The assemblages cited were studied by the author and are as yet unpublished with the exception of the Bronze Age aspects of Derryville Bog (Stuijts 2001; Stuijts and Gowen 2003).
Wetland site: Derryville Bog, Co. Tipperary
Derryville Bog lies in Co. Tipperary, close to the county boundaries with Kilkenny and Laois. Between 1995 and 1998, Margaret Gowen and Co. Ltd. carried out extensive excavations in this area, on behalf of the Minorco-Lisheen mining company. The excavations in Derryville Bog, revealed horizons dating from the Late Neolithic to the Medieval period, and produced large quantities of wood, of which more than 8000 pieces were identified from 56 sites. Wood sampling occurred in close co-operation with the archaeologists, Sarah Cross, Cara Murray, John Ó Néill and Paul Stevens. Almost all of the wood assemblage was derived from structural wood. Most of the structures were not intended to cross the bog but instead to provide access to the marginal areas. Only three trackways were more substantial in length because these attempted to cross the bog, although they failed to do so. Most of the samples were derived from small access paths leading into the bog, platforms and fulachta fiadh.
A number of observations were made on the material from Derryville Bog. Apart from wood identification, the annual rings were counted. The tree ring counts served to establish how old the actual trees were rather than to produce the precise date of the samples. For dating purposes, dendrochronology should be used (see Brown and Baillie, this volume). In Derryville Bog it was noted whether the pieces were of fast growth or slow growth, and whether there were specific periods of extremely slow growth. These qualities may indicate the most likely origin of the wood, for example from bog margins or dry land. The condition of the wood, the degree of rot and the presence of roots in the samples was also noted. The quantity of roots indicates the degree to which the wood was exposed to oxygen.
The wood identifications from Derryville Bog provided considerable information on the individual sites excavated. Thanks to the quantity of wood analysed, it was also possible to look at the overall trends in wood usage at Derryville Bog. These were compared with the results of wood analysis of un-worked (prehistoric) wood remains from Derryville Bog, sampled from trees preserved in peat and originally growing in situ in bog margins (Fig. 10.1), dated to the Bronze Age.
Figure 10.1: Wood identifications of natural wood from peat deposits.
More than 3500 identifications from 25 sites across Derryville Bog can be dated to the Bronze Age, based on radiocarbon dates and dendrochronological analysis (Gowen et al. 2005). However, when the wood identifications are grouped into the Early, Middle and Late periods (Figs. 10.2–10.4), some surprising results emerge. In the Early Bronze Age (Fig. 10.2), the general wood picture closely resembled the pattern shown by natural wood samples derived from peat deposits, with a dominance of alder (Alnus) and low values for hazel (Corylus). This period produced the only archaeological find of pine (Pinus sylvestris). The Early Bronze Age was the only period in which yew (Taxus) was represented in quantity. The Middle Bronze Age (Fig. 10.3), was characterised by a marked reduction in alder and an expansion of hazel. Yew had virtually disappeared. This period also saw conspicuously low values for oak. Willow (Salix) was used much more frequently, which might indicate increased wetness. The Late Bronze Age (Fig. 10.4) witnessed a strong reduction in alder and further expansion of hazel accompanied by a noticeable rise in the use of oak. Quantities for ash (Fraxinus) declined.
Although the quantity of natural wood samples was low compared with the archaeological wood remains, it is here assumed that the natural wood samples are representative of the woodland composition on the fringes of Derryville Bog in the past. It is suggested that the changes observed in wood usage over time may point to the impact of anthropogenic changes in the local landscape in the marginal areas surrounding Derryville Bog.
The Early Bronze Age exploitation mirrors the natural environment where the marginal woodland was still fairly intact. There was, however, some human impact in the area based on the use of ash in the archaeological material. Ash is usually found in dry-land contexts in mixed woodland with oak and elm. An expansion of ash is noted in pollen diagrams from Ireland, especially after woodland cover is opened (Caseldine et al. 1996). It should be mentioned, however, that ash, with its colonising abilities, often expands into bog margins, especially when enough nutrients are available. It has been suggested that ash may have formed an integral part of the fen vegetation (Koot and Bakels 2002). It is thus possible that during the Early Bronze Age ash was collected from the fen margins.
Figure 10.2: Early Bronze Age wood identifications (N=601).
Figure 10.3: Middle Bronze Age wood identifications (N=2265).
Figure 10.4: Late Bronze Age wood identifications (N=809).
Based on the wood identifications, the usage of the local landscape appears to have changed in the Middle Bronze Age. During this period, part of the marginal woodland disappeared, resulting in open areas for easier access or pasturage. This is particularly witnessed by the increased use of hazel and a reduction in alder. Also, an increase in the number of fulachta fiadh suggests that prehistoric people were living close to the margins of the bog.
There are strong indications of management in the form of coppicing by the Late Bronze Age, shown not only by the high values for hazel but also the age distribution and growth pattern of this wood species. The bog margins appear to have been cleared to a large extent, as evidenced by the low values for alder, and there may have been direct access to the bog. The increased usage of oak is notable. It remains to be seen to what extent this feature is restricted to Derryville Bog and whether other Late Bronze Age sites will show a similar pattern.
Figure 10.5: Charcoal from fulachta fiadh total weight.
Marginal Areas: Charcoal from Fulachta Fiadh
These are one of the commonest monuments in Ireland and many are excavated every year. Their function was to capture clean water that was subsequently heated. Their purpose may have been varied as suggested by the range of structures found associated with them. Fulachta fiadh are usually poor sites for the recovery of environmental material, apart from some exceptions, as discussed below. Usually neither pollen nor seeds are associated with them and macro-remains often post-date the sites’ use. Some hazelnuts and leaves have occasionally been found. Remnants of the trough may be present and these are usually made from wood, roundwood, posts, planks or rods. Charcoal is usually found in all fulachta fiadh and is one of the defining characteristics of this site type (Brindley et al. 1989/90, 25). In some troughs bone fragments have been found, while other finds include fragments of grinding stones and some flints. Generally few artefacts are associated with these features. Because fuel tended to be collected as close as possible to the firing spot, these monuments lend themselves well to charcoal studies of the immediate landscape surrounding the sites.
Archaeologists working for Margaret Gowen and Co. Ltd. (Edmond O’Donovan, Ian Doyle, John Ó Néill, Red Tobin and Paul Stevens) provided most of the material that has been analysed so far by the author. Steven Reed, working for Judith Carroll and Co., excavated Cootehill in Co. Cavan, while Fiona Reilly, for Valerie J. Keeley Ltd., directed the excavation of the site at Carrigoran in Co. Clare. Charcoal from 25 fulachta fiadh has been analysed by the author, most of which has been dated. Most samples were from Counties Dublin, Tipperary, Kilkenny and Cork. The results show a great difference between the counties and offer considerable potential for further study. It can be said that a variety of wood species occurred in most fulachta fiadh. Figure 10.5 shows collated results of the charcoal analyses to date. Although a wide range of species has been identified, only a limited number of wood species are of significance. These include hazel, alder, oak, ash, apple type (Pomoideae) and to a lesser extent yew and willow. Many charcoal fragments were parts of twigs or small branches of poor quality; it can therefore be assumed that most material was locally gathered.
The charcoal assemblage of the fulacht fiadh sites includes some species that are not represented in wood assemblage from Derryville Bog such as gorse (Ulex), ling (Calluna), traveller’s joy (Clematis), spindle-tree (Euonymus) and ivy (Hedera). These can be explained by the fact that twiggy brush-woods such as gorse and ling do not lend themselves well for building purposes for trackways in bogs and therefore were not selected. In this sense, the wood results from Derryville Bog show a bias towards wood species growing in marginal woodlands surrounding the bog with diameters larger than 1–2 cm. and smaller shrub species are under-represented. In contrast, the charcoal assemblages from fulachta fiadh very often reflect the preference for smaller-sized brush-woods.
Urban Sites: West End, Dublin
Linzi Simpson, on behalf of Margaret Gowen and Co. Ltd., carried out extensive excavations in West End, Dublin, in the 1990s. The site was in use over a long period of time, and included houses dating to the Viking Age, but also more recent structures, such as plank-lined pits from Anglo-Norman contexts (Simpson 1999).
Most of the wooden remains examined derived from wattle houses, cattle pens, pathways and floors associated with the period roughly from 860–1100 cal. AD, based on radiocarbon dates and archaeological artefacts. A large part of the structural wood was of hazel, and the general wood usage pattern, based on the analysis of wood from houses, was unremarkable (Fig. 10.6). Apart from hazel, the only other significant wood species were alder, ash and willow. Oak was almost completely absent.
In contrast, a much more dynamic picture emerged when the wooden artefacts were examined. Approximately 200 objects were available for wood identification. Dowels hammered into artefacts, bucket staves and worked planks were also included in the analyses of artefact composition (Fig. 10.7). The proportion of artefacts made of oak was higher when compared with the structural wood results. Considering that oak is usually one of the three most commonly used wood species in urban sites on the Continent (along with alder and ash), this is a fact that deserves further study.
Equally important amongst the artefacts was the use of yew. The occurrence of some non-indigenous wood species, such as spruce (Picea), silver fir (Abies), box (Buxus), possibly juniper (Juniperus) and Scots pine is also noteworthy. These clearly represent imported objects or wood. It is worth pointing out that the imported artefacts might not have been identified as such without the species information.
In conclusion, it can be said that although the analysis of the wood used in construction indicated the usage of local wood species and a scarcity of oak, the identification of the wooden artefacts suggested a more complex picture. Perhaps oak was reserved for specific purposes or people or was scarce and therefore especially prized. The use of oak may have been regulated by those who owned the rights to the woodland, and especially the rights to the use of larger timber from such woodland. The artefact analysis points to the presence of trade goods, re-used timbers from overseas and wood working in situ (wood turning). The artefacts made of yew and oak possibly reflect transport to Dublin of these wood species from the local woodlands rather than imports, in either raw form or as finished articles. It should be noted that not all of the objects were dated to the Viking Age, and that some came from later periods.
Figure 10.6: Identifications of structural wood from West End, Dublin.
Figure 10.7: Identifications of the wood derived from artefacts from West End, Dublin.
Conclusions
Wood and charcoal research in Ireland has increased in recent years, with a consequent increase in the number of publications. The examples presented here have concentrated on species identification to highlight the possibilities of this kind of research. It should be stressed that other aspects of wood research such as annual ring counts, measurements, abnormalities in growth patterns etc. offer even greater potential for the interpretation of a wood assemblage.
Although the number of native wood species in Ireland is relatively low, this does not diminish their potential for further research. The large stretches of bog, for example, preserve a vast wealth in wood remains containing information on the environments of prehistoric peoples. When exposed, this material should be collected and investigated not only for identification purposes, but also for information on woodland management. The level of preservation of wooden remains can also be informative, indicating a horizontal or vertical position in the ground, the length of exposure on the bog surface and usage or the degree of wetness on the mire.
Species identification and ring counts can be useful for identifying suitable samples for dendrochronological analysis. Although dendrochronology tends to rely on oak dating, it is possible to use the same method for other wood species, such as ash or pine. This may be especially fruitful when establishing a relative internal chronology of a given site.
There is a clear need for a landscape approach, where the wood assemblage is used to reconstruct the local woodland composition. To achieve this, large quantities of wood are required and bogs in Ireland lend themselves well to this type of study. The future for landscape studies may lie in a multi-proxy approach, in which a series of environmental disciplines, each with its own particular strengths, produces independent data sets. These studies may include pollen analysis, plant and seed studies, dendrochronology, beetles and molluscs. As shown in this article, wood and charcoal studies would certainly benefit this type of research.
From an urban point of view, much research remains to be undertaken. The focus has been on large structural timbers at the expense of brushwood assemblages. The latter lend themselves well to the reconstruction of local environments. To achieve this, remains from well-dated contexts such as moats, ditches and wells should be bulk sampled and fully investigated. Wells in particular are suitable for such studies as they also provide complementary plant and insect macrofossil assemblages.
It has also become clear that there is need for further work on imported wooden artefacts. It is curious that on the one hand, Ireland seems to have been very outward looking, yet on the other hand, only a limited number of imported wooden objects have yet been identified. The wooden vessels made of fir and spruce, which were in widespread use on the Continent over a prolonged period and which so far have not been identified in Ireland, demonstrate this.
Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank the support of the Discovery Programme. Special thanks go to Conor McDermott (UCD), Dr. Annaba Kilfeather and the anonymous referee for improving the English text and valuable comments. Much appreciation goes to all the archaeologists who extracted the wood and charcoal from their sites and allowed the author to use the results for this publication. Here, the author is especially grateful to Margaret Gowen and Linzi Simpson.
References
Brindley, A. L., Lanting, J. N. and Mook, W. G. 1989/90. Radiocarbon dates from Irish fulachta fiadh and other burnt mounds. Journal of Irish Archaeology 5, 25–33.
Carrion, Y. 2002. Charcoal analysis at La Falaguerra rockshelter (Alcoi, Alacant, Spain) from the Mesolithic to the Bronze Age: landscape and the use of plant resources, pp. 103–8, in Thiébault, S. (ed.), Charcoal Analysis. Methodological Approaches, Palaeoecological Results and Wood Uses (BAR International Series 1063). Oxford: Archaeopress.
Caseldine, C. J. and Hatton, J. M. 1996. Early land clearance and wooden trackway construction in the third and fourth millennia BC at Corlea, Co. Longford. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 95 B, 1–9.
Cross, S. 1997. Wooden objects, pp. 159–62 in Walsh, C., Archaeological Excavations at Patrick, Nicholas and Winetavern Streets, Dublin. Dingle: Brandon Book Publishers.
Dufraisse, A. 2002. Charcoal analysis in a lake dwelling site (Chalain 19, Jura, France): a sampling model for Neolithic lacustrine contexts, pp. 17–24 in Thiébault, S. (ed.), Charcoal Analysis. Methodological Approaches, Palaeoecological Results and Wood Uses (BAR International Series 1063). Oxford: Archaeopress.
Gowen, M., Ó Néill, J. J. and Phillips, M. (eds.) 2005. The Lisheen Mine Archaeological Project 1996–8. Bray: Wordwell.
Hawthorne, M. 1991. A preliminary analysis of wood remains from Haughey’s Fort. Emania 8, 34–8.
Hurley, M. F. and Jones, P. 1997. Wooden artefacts, pp. 274–310 in Cleary, R. M.; Hurley, M. F. and Shee Twohig, R. (eds.), Skiddy’s Castle and Christ Church, Cork Excavations 1974–77 by D. C. Twohig. Cork: Cork Corporation.
Hurley, M. F. and McCutcheon, S. W. J. 1997. Wooden artefacts, pp. 553–636 in Hurley, M.; Scully, O. and McCutcheon, S. (eds.), Late Viking Age and Medieval Waterford, Excavations 1980–1992. Waterford: Waterford Corporation.
Hurley, M. F. and Tierney, J. 1997. Wooden artefacts, pp. 136–41 in Hurley, M. F. and Cleary, R. M. (eds.), Excavations at the North Gate, Cork, 1994. Cork: Cork Corporation.
Irish Archaeology Wetland Unit, 1993a. Survey of the Raised Bogs of County Longford (Transactions of the Irish Archaeology Wetland Unit 1). Dublin: Crannóg Publications.
Irish Archaeology Wetland Unit, 1993b. Excavations at Clonfinlough, County Offaly (Transactions of the Irish Archaeology Wetland Unit 2). Dublin: Crannóg Publications.
Irish Archaeology Wetland Unit, 1995. Blackwater Survey and Excavations, Artefact Deterioration in Peatlands, Lough More, Co. Mayo (Transactions of the Irish Archaeology Wetland Unit 4). Dublin: Crannóg Publications.
Johansen, L., Lanting, J. H., Lauwerier, R. C. G. M., Niekus, M. J. L. Th., Stapert, D. and Stuijts, I.-L. M. 2000. De Federmesser-vindplaats bij Doetinchem (Gld.): natuurwetenschappelijk ondersoek. Paleo-aktueel 11, 9–14.
Koot, C. W. and Bakels, C. C. 2002. Wood resources and their exploitation during the Iron Age occupation of the Fens of Midden- Delfland, the Netherlands. Journal of Wetland Archaeology 2, 1–23.
McKeown, S. 1994. Wood remains, pp. 265–81 in O’Brien, W., Mount Gabriel: Bronze Age Mining in Ireland. Galway: Galway University Press.
McKeown, S. 1999. Charred wood, pp. 213–7 in Woodman, P.; Andersen E. and Finlay, N. Excavations at Ferriter’s Cove, 1983–95: Last Foragers, First Farmers in the Dingle Peninsula. Bray: Wordwell.
Mitchell, G. F. 1986. The Shell Guide to Reading the Irish Landscape. Dublin: Country House.
Mitchell, G. F. 1989. Man and Environment on Valencia Island. Dublin: Royal Irish Academy.
O’Carroll, E. 2001a. Analysis of archaeological wood found in Irish bogs, pp. 27–35 in Raftery B. and Hickey J. (eds.), Recent Developments in Wetland Research (Seandálaíocht: Monograph 2, Department of Archaeology, University College Dublin and WARP Occasional Paper 14). Dublin: Department of Archaeology, University College Dublin.
O’Carroll, E. 2001b. The Archaeology of Lemanaghan. The Story of an Irish Bog. Bray: Wordwell.
O’Sullivan, A. 1998. Woodmanship and the supply of underwood and timber to Anglo-Norman Dublin, pp. 59–71 in Manning, C. (ed.) Dublin and Beyond the Pale. Bray: Wordwell.
O’Sullivan, A. 2000. The wooden waterfronts: a study of their construction, carpentry and use of trees and woodlands, pp. 62–92 in Halpin, A., The Port of Medieval Dublin. Dublin: Four Courts Press.
O’Sullivan, A. and Deevy, M. 2000. Wooden Artefacts, pp. 162–7 in Halpin, A., The Port of Medieval Dublin. Dublin: Four Courts Press.
Raftery, B. 1996. Trackway Excavations in the Mountdillon Bogs, Co. Longford, 1985–1991 (Transactions of the Irish Archaeological Wetland Unit 3). Dublin: Crannóg Publications.
Schweingruber, F. H. 1978. Microscopic Wood Anatomy. Birmensdorf: Swiss Federal Institute of Forestry Research.
Simpson, L. 1999. Director’s Findings–Temple Bar West. Dublin: Temple Bar Properties.
Stuijts, I. 2001. Bronze Age landscape changes in the Midlands of Ireland, pp. 527–37 in Metz, W. H., van Beek, B. L. and Steegstra, H. (eds.), PATINA, Essays Presented to J. J. Butler on the Occasion of His 80th Birthday. Drachten: Metz, Van Beek and Steegstra private publishing.
Stuijts, I. 2006. Charcoal sampling sites and procedures: practical themes from Ireland, pp. 25–33 in Dufraisse, A. (ed.), Charcoal Analysis: New Analytical Tools and Methods for Archaeology. Papers from the Table-Ronde held in Basel 2004 (BAR International Series 1483). Oxford: Archaeopress.
Stuijts, I. and Gowen, M. 2003. Trackways and Fulachta fiadh in rural Ireland: wood results from Derryville Bog, County Tipperary, Ireland, pp. 13–24 in Bauerochse, A. and Haßmann, H. (eds.), Peatlands; Proceedings of the Peatland Conference 2002 in Hannover, Germany. Rahden/Westf: Verlag Marie Leidorf.
Wallace, P. F. 1982. Carpentry in Ireland AD 900–1300: the Wood Quay evidence, pp. 263–99 in McGrail, S. (ed.), Woodworking Techniques Before AD 150 (BAR British Series 129). Oxford: British Archaeological Reports.