1

Medieval settlement hierarchy in Carlow and the ‘Carlow

Corridor’ 1200-1550.

Linda Doran

The significance of the region now covered by the modern county of Carlow1 in the

medieval period is indicated in the La geste de Engleis en Yrlande, traditionally

known as the Song of Dermot and the Earl.2 Diarmait Mac Murchadh, victorious in

battle, is advised by Robert fitz Stephen to pursue those who had fought against him.

Rejecting this council Diarmait says ‘instead, shall we go to Leighlinbridge straight

along the direct route and take our wounded with us’.3 These lines contain the key to

the region’s importance; through this area passed the major route way going north-

south — the Sligh Chualann — as well as the navigable Barrow river (figure1).4 In

addition the territory formed the mid-section of the Carlow Corridor, a

communication channel starting from Ardscull Motte, Co. Kildare and terminating in

the town of New Ross. For any medieval leader hoping to hold sway over the

Lordship of Leinster control of this corridor was vital. When Prendergast and his

Flemings offered their services to Mac Gilla Patraic, after Mac Murchada prevented

them returning to Wales, the former agreed to meet then at St Mullins. This was also a

strategic fording place on the Barrow. The Song recounts how Mac Gilla Patraic

swore an oath with the Flemings ‘on altar and reliquary’. The latter would have

contained the relics of St Moling, whose veneration has continued in the area to the

present day.

Both of these places were significant in the pre-Norman period. Leighlinbridge is

located close to the early historic site of Dinn Rig, although the earliest evidence for

settlement is at Old Leighlin, just 1.6 km to the west.5 This Early Christian site

Molaise is likely to have been centred on St Lazarian’s Cathedral; a curve can be seen 1 For a discussion of area and composition of the medieval county of Carlow see Adrian Empey, ‘The liberty and counties of Carlow in the high middle ages’, in this volume. 2 Evelyn Mullally (ed.), The deeds of the Normans in Ireland. La Geste des Engleis en Yrlande: a new edition of the chronicle formerly known as The song of Dermot and the Earl (Dublin, 2001). 3 Ibid., 802-6, p. 73. 4 The routeways shown on this map follow those isolated by Colm O Lochalinn in his paper ‘Roadways of ancient Ireland’ in John Ryan (ed.), Féil-sgríbhinn Eóin Mhic Néill: essays and studies presented to Professor Eóin MacNeill (Dublin, 1940, reprinted, 1995), pp 465-474. 5 For the early history of Leighlin see Colm Kenny ‘New Leighlin: a forgotten Anglo-Norman settlement’, in this volume; A. Gwynn and R. Hadcock, Med. relig. houses, pp 89-90; AU.

2

in the south and east boundary wall of the churchyard reflected the line of the early

enclosure (plate i). In addition the base of an early cross lies in the graveyard, while a

small granite ringed cross is located within the modern enclosure of St Molaise’s well

to the west of the cathedral. The distinction of the monastery is indicated by the

notices of its abbots who are recorded from 737 to 1045. The monastery was

plundered by the Vikings in 916, using the navigable Barrow en route from Waterford

to refound Dublin.6 In 1060 the annals tell us that ‘Lethglenn was burned entirely,

except the oratory’, indicating that there was an established settlement at the site.7 In

1111 it was chosen at the Synod of Rathbresaill as one of the five bishoprics of

Leinster. Following the arrival of the Normans the seat was offered to Giraldus

Cambrensis, chronicler of the Norman adventure in Ireland, but he turned it down.8 A

borough may have been established here by Herlewin, the first Norman bishop. The

location was not ideal for such endeavours, however, as it was situated ‘among a

wicked and perverse nations, at the far edge of the diocese, in a mountainous,

inconvenient and barren place’.9 By the fourteenth century the settlement here appears

to have been gradually abandoned, overshadowed by the more successful borough at

Leighlinbridge established in the shadow of the motte, built by Hugh de Lacy as part

of a series of fortifications at strategic locations in Leinster that included Carlow and

Tullow.

St Mullins, a site of high strategic importance, occupied a prominent ridge that

commanded the first shallows on the River Barrow after the sea (figure 1, plate ii). All

traffic moving along the Carlow Corridor en route to New Ross or Waterford, whether

by land or water, passed through this narrow collar or the corresponding channel at

Inistioge, Co Kilkenny. This was certainly what attracked the Scandinavians, who had

a short-lived settlement there in the ninth century when the monks fled to Kildare and

established themselves at Timolin.10 The location would later draw the Anglo-

Normans seeking the same strategic advantage. The monastery appears to have been

6 AFM. 7 AU. 8 In the interest of following a long established pattern this paper will use the terms ‘Anglo-Norman’ or ‘Norman’ to describe those coming into Ireland initially as part of Diarmait Mac Murchadha’s army in 1169. In the second section, 1350-1550, they will be referred to as Anglo-Irish. 9 Maurice Sheehy (ed.), Pontificia Hibernica: medieval Papal chancery documents concerning Ireland, 640-1261, 2 vols ( Dublin, 1965), p. 141. Quoted from a request to the archbishop of Dublin to have the see transferred to a more convenient location. 10 John Bradley and Heather King, Urban Archaeology Survey: Carlow, (unpublished report, Dublin, 1990), p. 54.

3

founded as a refuge and hermitage; Moling was one of the first named Célí Dé and

while a number of nature poems are attributed to him very little is actually known of

his life.11 Although St Mullins was to grow into a sizeable settlement it never acquired

the importance of Leighlin. In c. 1160-2 the monastery was granted to the newly

founded Augustinian house at Ferns.12 The initial Anglo-Norman grant of St Mullins

was made in c. 1170 by Richard fitz Gilbert (Strongbow) to Peter Giffard.13 It was

subsequently granted to Raymond le Gros and passed from him to his nephew

William de Carew, who held it with Dunleckny. Sometime before 1207 he granted the

tithes of both St Mullins and Dunleckny to the nunnery of Graney, Co. Kildare. It is

not clear which of these grantees built the motte located to the north-west of the

monastery on a promontory overlooking the shallows in the Barrow.

A number of economic and social changes followed in the wake of these incoming

Anglo-Normans, particularly in areas, such as north Carlow, where there was

sufficient intensity of settlement. Some of these developments, for example the

establishment of a number of successful towns linked to the river and road network,

were genuinely revolutionary in an Irish context. Although some urbanization had

taken place in Ireland around major monastic settlements, such as Armagh, Kildare

and Clonmacnoise, within Carlow there is no evidence to suggest that either St

Mullins or Old Leighlin functioned as towns in the pre-Norman period. New

agricultural techniques and practices were also introduced allowing for expansion in

tillage production, there was also a growth in sheep farming. In other cases — the

augmentation of the parish network or transformations within Gaelic Irish society —

developments that were already underway were accelerated.

1200-1350

Let us turn first to look at the towns — successful and otherwise — founded in

Carlow by these entrepreneurs. A glance at figure 2 indicates the crucial role of the

river network in the establishment of a flourishing urban centre. In 1300 almost all the

inland towns of any significance in Ireland were situated on the larger rivers, which,

in addition to their historic role in the partition of territories, took on a new

importance as the main arteries of trade in a period of increased commercial activity.14

11 See ?, de Paor ‘…….’, in this volume. 12 Gwynn and Hadcock Med. relig. houses,s p. 44. 13 St John Brooks, Knight’s fees, p. 61, n. 1. 14 H.B. Clarke, ‘Decolonization and the dynamics of urban decline in Ireland, 1300-1550, in T.R. Slater (ed.), Towns in decline, A.D. 100-1600 (Aldershoot, 2000). p. 175.

4

In addition smaller towns were established along lesser rivers, which, while not

navigable, provided water power for milling. In medieval Carlow towns of various

sizes and sophistication were associated with the river network, including Carlow

itself, Dunleckny and Leighlinbridge on the Barrow, while Forth and Tullow were

situated close to the Slaney.

Towns depended for their economic lifeblood on trade, both in the agricultural

produce of the manors in their hinterland and from further afield. Ease of transport as

well as freedom from outside interference was essential for such commercial activity

to flourish. The success of New Ross, the focus of this corridor, was based, not only

its location on the Barrow which allowed its traders to travel right up through the

lordship as far as Athy, but also because its founder, William Marshal, secured the

right for ships to by-pass the royal city of Waterford and sail directly into his lordship.

A recurring feature in the history of these towns was the granting of permission to

trade with the local Gaelic Irish population. Urban centres were supplied with

essentials, particularly food, from outside. Over time, as the colony receded in areas

such as Carlow, trade with their Gaelic Irish hinterlands was increasingly important to

the survival of these towns.

The lordship of Leinster was the first Anglo-Norman lordship established in

twelfth-century Ireland when Strongbow assumed the kingdom of Leinster in 1171 on

the death of his father-in-law Diarmait Mac Murchadh. Five years later Strongbow

himself was dead and the lordship passed into the custody of the king, Henry II, who

divided responsibility between various barons. It was re-united again in 1189 when

William Marshal, one of the most illustrious and well-connected courtiers of his time,

was given Isabel, Strongbow’s daughter and heir, in marriage. In 1247, following the

death of the last of Marshal’s four sons, all of whom failed to leave a male heir, the

lordship was divided among William Marshal’s daughters and their offsprings. Most

of the early colonial settlement assemblage in Carlow, however, was laid down during

the regime of Marshal the elder. Leinster was organised into administrative units

attached to their principal castles of Kildare, Kilkenny, Carlow and Wexford. The

lordship of Leinster owed 100 knights to the crown but the lords of Leinster created

181 knights’ fees there; underlining the economic advantage to whoever held the

lordship if he could settle the land. The figure that the lordship owed the crown

represents a knights’ fee for every 35 sq. mile, while the latter one every 20 miles. In

Normandy, for comparison, which had somewhere around 13,000 sq miles, there were

5

perhaps 2,500 knights’ fees in 1172, one for every 5 sq. mile. So by Angevin

standards the proposed settlement of the lordship of Leinster was sparse.15

Within the lordship of Leinster the town of Carlow was an important economic and

strategic asset. The most prominent reminder of the importance of the town of Carlow

in the Middle Ages is the surviving ruin of a thirteenth-century donjon. This form of

castle was common in northern France at this period and examples can be seen at

Alleuze, Montbrun and Aisey-le-Duc.16 The castle was built by William Marshal, who

spent much of his life in France. He also appears to have founded the town, some time

before 1210, since its earliest charter mentions that its burgess rent was fixed in the

time of Geoffrey fit Robert, Marshal’s seneschal, about 20 years before this date.17

There was an earlier earth and timber castle at the site built in all probability by John

de Clahull.18 During the excavations the western section of a half-moon ditch and

palisade were uncovered running across the low rise on which the stone castle was

later built. The form of this timber castle is unclear since the edges of the ridge were

quarried away in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The excavator suggests,

however, that it consisted of a partial ringwork with a bailey to the north and a service

area and farm buildings outside the defences of the castle. Alternatively it could have

been a low motte formed using the natural rise with its broad summit partitioned into

two sections by the palisade and ditch.19

While there is no independent date for the stone castle that succeeded this timber

fortification, O’Conor has suggested that it was begun shortly after the establishment

of the borough, between 1210 and 1215.20 The castle is sited a low natural rise at the

confluence of the Barrow and Burren rivers. Throughout the medieval period the

castle was in fact on an island separated from the town by an expanse of bog known

as Moneen — an ideal defensive location. This bog was reclaimed in the eighteenth

century and built over thereby linking the castle and town.21 A bridge across the

15 Robert Bartlett, The making of Europe (London, 1993), p. 53. 16 Hervé Mouillebouche, Les maisons forts en Bourgogne du nord du XIIIe au XVIe siécles (Dijon, 2002), p. 69, fig. 19; p. 138. 17 Gearóid Mac Niocaill, Na Buirgeisi, xii-x aois, 2 vols (Dublin, 1964), ii p. 134; see also Empey ‘Liberty and county of Carlow’, in this volume. 18 Kieran O’Conor, ‘Castle of Carlow’, in Carloviana (1998), pp 37-41; Brooks, Knights’ fees, p. 56. 19 O’Conor, ‘Castle of Carlow’, p 38; Kieran O’Conor, ‘The origins of Carlow Castle’, in Archaeology Ireland, (Autumn, 1997), pp 14-15. 20 Ibid., p. 15. 21 This development can be traced cartographically see A.A. Horner, ‘Two eighteen-century maps of Carlow town’, in RIA Proc., lxxviii C (1978), p 124; p. 127, Pl. 1.

6

Barrow stood close to the castle.22 Morphologically the stone castle at Carlow

belonged to a style popular throughout the Angevin Empire at the start of the

thirteenth century (plate iii). Towards the beginning of the 1230s these castle types

multiplied in Burgundy, they seem, however, to have been in existence over a long

period and numerous proto-types can be found in eleventh-century forms.23 Their

popularity coincided with the emergence of various social, economic and political

factors.24 There is little doubt that Carlow, and similar Irish castles such as Lea, Ferns

and Terryglass belong to this milieu that reached its peak in the 1230’s.

First mention of the castle at Carlow occurs in a charter of c.1223.25 It was the seat

of administration for the liberty of Carlow during the thirteenth and fourteenth

centuries. The town had 160 burgages and was valued at £24. 12s. 6d. in 1247 when it

passed into the hands of the earls of Norfolk following the death of Anselm Marshal.

In 1283 the treasurer of Carlow returned £23 6s. 8d. for the farm of the oven and mill

at Carlow, comparatively the mills at New Ross for the same period returned £33. 6s

8d. Roger, fifth earl of Norfolk made an arrangement with Edward I whereby he was

cleared of his debts by surrendering his estates and on his death in 1306 Carlow

returned to the crown.26 It was administered by the crown until 1312, when the lands

were granted by Edward II to his half-brother Thomas de Brotherton, reverting to the

crown on his execution in 1338. The fact that the town was in the hands of the crown

probably explains why the town was chosen by Lionel, duke of Clarence, as the seat

of government in Ireland between 1361 and 1394.27

The castle was the location of the government exchequer during this period.

Discussion of the role of the castle in the settlement hierarchy of the medieval world

often concentrates on defensive or architectural aspects. Yet, one of the most

important function of a castle is as the administrative core of a lordship. The survival

of account rolls of the Bigods, earls of Norfolk for the period 1279-1294 allow us to

appreciate the significance of this governmental role and to grasp the interdependence

22 This was in existence in 1569. Horner, ‘Two eighteen-century maps of Carlow town’, p. 125, fn 36. 23 Mouillebouche, Maisons fortes en Bourgogne , p. 445 24 Ibid. 25 Mac Niocaill, Na Buirgeisi, xii-xv aois, ii pp 131, 133. 26 For an intriguing discussion of the relationship between Roger and Edward I see Marc Morris, The Bigod earls of Norfolk in the thirteenth century (Woodbridge, 2005). pp 153-171. 27 For the context and implications of this decision see Philomema Connolly, ‘“the head and comfort of Leinster”: Carlow as the administrative capital of Ireland, 1360-1394’, in this volume.

7

between the caput and other manors in a lordship.28 Towns, such as Carlow with their

great castles, were frequently centres for the receipt of revenue and the holdings of

courts. One of the most important rooms in the castle was the great hall. Lordship was

a public function and the great hall of the lord’s castle was the principal setting. Here

the lord’s tenants and followers periodically assembled at the great feasts of the

Church and on judicial and fiscal occasions. As Coulson noted ‘The banquets of

popular romances were but one of the uses of the great hall’.29

In examining the history of settlement we are confined by the forms of evidence

available to us. In the case of documentary sources these are in the main fiscal

records, designed to record expenditure and obligations not social interaction.

Nevertheless accounts such as those maintained by the Bigod ministers provide a

route to understanding the multifaceted role of castles and offer a balance to a purely

military image. Within the accounts maintenance and upkeep were cited as a frequent

outlay, in Carlow, for example, extensive repairs were carried out to the great hall. It

was roofed with wooden shingles 12,000 of which came from the wood of

Dunleckny, at a cost to the exchequer of 8s per 1000.30 Timber, boards and laths were

also brought from Dunleckny and from Tullow for repairs to the hall and to the wall

of the kitchen, located in one of the towers and also to the prison. The exchequer

house of the castle was refurbished with 130 boards brought from Tullow. This office

may have been accommodated in one of the towers, where the lower part would form

the treasurer’s bureau and court and the upper floors contain the treasury and records

office. A chest was bought for 4s. 6d. to hold the rolls of assizes and county records.

Despite all this effort when the castle and hall passed into the hands of the crown in

1306 the castle is described as ‘badly roofed’ and the castle had to be refurbished

again in order to accommodate the exchequer in the fourteenth century. The 1306

account also notes that ‘opposite the castle is a hall in which pleas of the county and

of assize are hold; in the [castle and hall] there are many defects, as well in the roof

28 James Mills, ‘Accounts of the earl of Norfolk’s estates in Ireland 1279-1294’, in JRSAI, xxii (1892) pp 50- 65; for a discussion of the general administration of the Bigod lordship of Carlow see Margaret Murphy ‘The profits of lordship: Roger Bigod, earl of Norfolk and the lordship of Carlow’, in Linda Doran and James Lyttleton (eds), Lordship in medieval Ireland: image and reality (Dublin, 2007), pp 79-85; Connoly ‘“the head and comfort of Leinster”’, in this volume. 29 Charles Coulson, Castle in medieval society: fortresses in England, France and Ireland in the central middle ages (Oxford, 2003), p. 85. 30 Mills, ‘Accounts of the earl of Norfolk’s estates in Ireland 1279-1294’, pp 52-3.

8

and as in the walls, so that they can be extended at no price; no one would rent

them’.31

Two of the settlements supplying materials for the repair of the earl’s caput —

Dunleckny and Tullow — provide examples of different forms of rural boroughs

within the lordship of Carlow which enjoyed contrasting levels of success.

Dunleckny, now a deserted medieval borough, was originally granted by Strongbow

to Raymond le Gros.32 He in turn bestowed it to his nephew, William de Carew and it

remained in the hands of that family until 1324.33 We know that the borough was

established before 1207 since there was a grant of burgages there and at St Mullins to

the nunnery of Graney, Co. Kildare.34 Similar grants were made to St Marys’ Abbey,

Dublin at around the same time.35 Murphy has noted that there was an attempt at

Dunleckny in 1288 to emulate the success of the agricultural expansion at the manor

of Fennagh in the early 1280s.36 This was not a success since in 1306-7 a jury

examining the Bigod lands reported that ‘There are at Dunlek and Leghlyn 55 acres of

land whereof 14 are worth 7s. a year; the residue lies waste for defect of tenants and

the poverty of the land’.37 To the west of the graveyard at Dunleckny there is remains

of a large oval-shaped mound; this may be a motte marking the administrative centre.

Tullow like Old Leighlin was an important centre prior to the arrival of the Anglo-

Normans.38 Situated in the east of the county, seven miles from the seat at Carlow,

surviving monuments and documentary sources suggest that Tullow was the site of an

early monastery founded by Fortchern, a disciple of St Patrick.39 The death of

Diarmuid Ó Cele, erenagh of Tealach Foirtcheirn and Aghowle is recorded in 1050.40

The initial Norman grant at Tullow was to William de Angulo but he dones not

appear to have taken up the grant since in 1181 Hugh de Lacy built a castle there for

John de Hereford.41 The location of this castle has been a matter of debate; Bradley

has suggested that it was at the site of a castle which was illustrated in the seventeenth 31 Cal. doc. Ire., v, no. 617. 32 Mullally (ed.), The deeds of the Normans in Ireland, 3064-5, p. 131. 33 Brooks, Knight’s fees, pp 60-2. 34 Ibid., p. 61. 35 John T. Gilbert (ed.), Chartularies of St Mary’s Abbey, Dublin, 2 vols (1884), i, pp 112-3. 36 Murphy ‘The profits of lordship: Roger Bigod, earl of Norfolk and the lordship of Carlow’, pp 89-91. 37 Cal. doc. Ire. 1203-7, p. 175. 38 For a detailed study of the settlement see Margaret Murphy, ‘Tullow — from medieval manor to market town’, in this volume. 39 Gwynn and Hadcock, Med. relig. houses, pp 408, 390. 40 AFM. 41 Cambrensis, Expugnatio, p. 195.

9

century by Thomas Dineley, while O’Keefe believes that it is marked by a mound in

the townland of Mountwolseley to the south of the town.42 There is a castle mentioned

at Tullow 1294, remnants of which O’Keeffe suggests can be seen in the Dineley

drawing. Five years later while Carlow, as part of the fitz Gilbert de Clare lands, was

held by the crown, Tullowphelim (Tullow Ofelan) was grant by Prince John to

Theobald Walter, who had accompanied John to Ireland in 1185. He was part of a

group of advisers intended by Henry II to form a court around John. Theobald held

the office of Butler of Ireland, an office from which his descendants later took their

name.

The trail of the grants at Tullow illustrates the difficulties William Marshal had in

gaining possession of his Irish lands following his marriage to Isabel de Clare because

John had already granted them to his followers in a manner similar to the grant at

Tullow. Marshal appealed to Richard I, who insisted on seisin being given to him.

Nevertheless John obtained an exception for Theobald Walter, who would keep his

Irish lands but would hold them of William Marshal. A renewal of the grant to Walter

of Tullow in 1192 indicates that there was an earlier grantee, named Jordan,43 who

held Tullow from Strongbow — the term of Walter’s grant were to be the same as

those of Jordan that is the service of four knights.44 Tullow remained in the hands of

the Butlers throughout the Middle Ages.45 There is no definite date for the foundation

of the borough but it was probably within Theobald’s lifetime.46 In 1302 there were

around 93 burgesses accounting for £ 4.13s annually.47 In 1305 a tavern is recorded in

the town and an Augustinian friary was founded in 1314 indicating that there was a

level of prosperity in the settlement.48

One of the most successful of these market settlements was that at Leighlinbridge,

mentioned above. This was attributable in its location as an important crossing point

on the Barrow. The earliest direct reference to a borough at Leighlin is in 1292 when

42 Bradley and King, Urban Archaeology Survey: Carlow p. 69; Tadhg O’Keeffe ‘The castle of Tullow, Co. Carlow’, in Journal of the Kildare Archaeological Society, xvi (1985-6), pp 528-9; E.P. Shirley, ‘Extracts from the journal of Thomas Dineley, esquire, giving some account of his visit to Ireland in the reign of Charles II’, in JRSAI, vi (1862-3), pp 38-52. 43 Perhaps Jordan de Cantitune, a son of Mabilla a sister Raymond le Gros, see G.H. Orpen ‘The castle of Raymond de Gros at Fodredunolan’, in JRSAI, xxxvi (1906), p. 369. 44 St John Brooks, Knight’s fees, p. 97. 45 James Mills Cal. justic.rolls Ire. 1305-1307, p. 344. 46 C.A. Empey, ‘Theobald Walter’, in The journal of the Butler society, iii (1986-7), pp 18-21. 47 Red Book of Ormond, p. 45. 48 Cal. justic. rolls Ire. 1305-1307, p. 36; Gwynn and Hadcock, Med. relig. houses, p. 302.

10

a Bibald Castiner, burgess of Leighlin is mentioned.49 A account of fracas involving

the burgesses of Leighlin and the bishop of Ossory in 1303 provides a picture of a

lively, if somewhat disorderly town. During the episode the bishop and his retinue

were attacked as they passed through the town on their way to Castledermot —

Leighlinbridge in addition to its importance as a crossing point was the focus a

number of early routeways, including the Sligh Chualann.50 Among those accused are

Roger the smith, Ric. Le Tayllour and Adam le Tannere. The provost of the town, one

Thomas le Chapman, is also named. The settlement is called New Leghelyn,

presumably to distinguish it from Old Leighlin. The account mentions particularly the

house of Ralph le Tannere which was protected by a strong door, since it resisted the

attempts of the bishop’s servants to break it down. It had a yard behind which had

access to the street, indicating that the house occupied a burgage plot of the standard

form.51

The principal focus of the town appears to have been on the east bank of the river,

although streets are mentioned in the account cited above unfortunately none are

named. While it is likely that there was some form of settlement on the western side

of the Barrow it was probably too small to be regarded as a suburb in the true sense.52

It is an indication of the importance of the routeway along which Leighlinbridge stood

—the highway from Dublin to Carlow and Kilkenny — that it was among the first

towns to have a stone bridge in 1320.53 This would, of course have been a costly

exercise and a sign of a continuing prosperity in the region, despite the recent

devastation cause by the Bruce wars. It is also a mark of the importance of the Carlow

Corridor to the crown that investment in such expensive infrastructure was seen as

worthwhile at a time when the colony in general was in decline and revenue down.

Another signal of the prosperity of the town was the foundation of the earliest

Carmelite foundation in the country; the house was established sometime before 1272

by one the Carews.54 It was situated on the east bank of the river and, following its

49 Cal. doc. Ire. 1252-1284, no. 1087. 50 Kenny, ‘New Leighlin’, in this volume; O Lochalinn in his paper ‘Roadways of ancient Ireland’, map. 51 John Bradley, ‘Planned Anglo-Norman towns in Ireland’, in H.B. Clarke and Anngret Simms (eds), The comparative history of urban origins in non-Roman Europe (Oxford, 1985), pp 417-20; Kenny suggests that the initial settlement may have been located close to the motte at Ballyknockan, ‘New Leighlin’, in this volume. 52 Bradley and King, Urban Archaeology Survey: Carlow p. 34. 53 Orpen, Normans, iv, p. 209. New Ross, for example, still had a timber bridge in 1841. 54 Gwynn and Hadcock, Med. relig. houses, p. 291.

11

construction, the friars received a royal grant to maintain the bridge and its associated

castle.55

Another successful boroughs was that at Forth, today little remains, however, to note

this former importance. After Carlow it was the largest Anglo-Norman settlement in

the county but its location was unknown until Orpen succeeded in identifying it with

Castlemore in the early years of the twentieth century.56 Throughout the middles ages

it was know as Fothereth or Fodredunolan (Fotharta Uí Nuallain) rather by than the

modern name of Castlemore, which was derived from the castle of Raymond Gros; in

the Register of St Thomas, Dublin it is referred to as terra de villa Castri.57 In a grant

of land by Raymond le Gros and his wife Basilia to St Mary and St David at Forth the

church is described as ‘de castello nostro de theud de Radcilla’— ‘of our castle of the

tuath of Radcillan’.58 This earlier name, sometimes given as Rathsilan or Radsalin,

may point to a pre-Norman settlement at the site.59 The fact that Lemanah graveyard,

which Orpen has identified with the church mentioned above, is at the confluence of a

number of roads enhances this possibility.

According to Giraldus Cambrensis the motte here was constructed in 1181 by Hugh

de Lacy for Raymond le Gros (plate iv).60 The remains are of a truncated mound

surrounded by a deep fosse some 4-5m in diameter.61 Orpen noted north-west of the

mound a roughly square raised platform enclosed by a ditch, this was probably the

bailey of the castle. He also observed indications of masonry, these, he was told, were

taken from a low mound north-east of the castle. This mound contained large blocks

of hammer-dressed granite which Orpen believed came from a later Bigod castle;

O’Donovan thought that they were remains of a castle associated with the Eustace

family. An inquisition of 1306 on the death of the earl of Norfolk contains an account

of Forth including a descriptions of ‘A stone chamber covered with shingles and

boards and valued at nothing, and no one will hire it, a grange of ten principal beams

(furcis), almost fallen, of no value except the beams’.62 This building may be related

to the masonry seen by Orpen. Forth, an area larger than the modern barony, was

55 Chartae, privilegia et immunitates (Dublin, 1829), p. 92. 56 G.H. Orpen ‘The castle of Raymond de Gros’, pp 369-370 ; Empey is unconvinced by the identifiction, ‘Liberty and counties of Carlow’, in this volume. 57 J.T. Gilbert, Register of the Abbey of St Thomas, Dublin (London, 1889), no cxxxviii, p. 119. 58 Ibid. no. cxxxi, p. 114. 59 Ibid. no. cxxxvi, p. 117; no. cxxxviii, p. 119. 60 Cambrensis, Expugnatio, p. 195. 61 Brindley and Kilfeather, Archaeological inventory of County Carlow, p. 78. 62 Cal. justic .rolls Ire. 1305-1307, p. 346.

12

granted by Strongbow to Raymond in 1174 following the latter’s marriage to Basilia,

who was Strongbow’s sister. Raymond died without leaving a male heir, sometime

after 1201, and Forth reverted to the Marshals as the legatees of Strongbow.63 It later

passed to the earls of Norfolk.

Most of our information on the early development of the manor at Forth is connected

with the generosity of Basilia, her husband and their family to the Abbey of St

Thomas in Dublin. In Carlow, in common with practices in general in the Corridor

and elsewhere, the revenues and advowsons of churches were granted to religious

houses outside the immediate area. This practice was popular because it achieved two

key objectives of the incoming Anglo-Norman lords: the creation of a functioning

parish system — essential to their way of life — by handing the day-to-day provision

of pastoral care over to the houses endowed with the tithes, and the economic

provision for newly founded religious houses. At a time of intense military activity

the system permitted lords to be about the business of making the revenue they were

granting available. The church of St Mary and St David at Forth was granted to St

Thomas, Dublin and over time various parcels of land were added to the bequest.64

Similarly St Thomas received grants of the ecclesiastical rights of Straboe from

Raymond’s sister Mabilla, wife of Nicholas de Cantitune, from her son Raymond the

benefices with a carucate of land which he held of his uncle in Odrone, while Robert

de Cantitune granted the church at Barrack with a half carucate of land.65 The tenants

of Theobald Walter dealt with their benefices in a comparable manner: William de

Burc, who held land in Ardoyne, south of Tullow and Roger of Leicester, who had

lands at Kilmacart, near Hacketstown, were both patrons of St Thomas in Dublin.66

Hennessy has shown that in Tipperary, where a similar situation prevailed, that the

parish system was used, by religious houses as a basis for revenue collection to the

neglect of pastoral care.67

In the initial grant of land to the church of St Mary and St David it is noted that the

boundary of the castle, the fovea, was perambulated by Raymond — publicly marking

63 A charter of Basilia’s after Raymond’s death is confirmed by William Marshal the younger. Register of the Abbey of St Thomas, no. cxxxvii, p. 118. 64 See for example Register of the Abbey of St Thomas, no. cxxvii, p. 110, no. cxviii, p. 111 and no. cxxxvi, p. 117. 65 Ibid., nos cxxxii, cxxxiii, pp 115-6; nos cxxi, cxxii, p. 106. 66 Ibid., nos cxix; cxxv; cxxvi, p. 117. 67 Mark Hennessy, ‘Manorial organisation in early thirteenth-century Tipperary’, in Irish Geography, xxix (1996), pp 116-125.

13

the defensive ditch of his castle from church land. In the early thirteenth century

Simon, Abbot of St Thomas, granted seven burgages with twelve acres of land in

abbey’s land ‘in the vill of Fothered, between the River Slaney and the said vill’.68

This would suggest that the borough was located close to the castle and church. An

account of a fracas in the town in 1305 mentions William Cachepol, ‘serjeant of the

town’ and the house of William Glannoc.69 The jury for the 1307 inquisition record

that there were 79 burgesses and 29 cottegers as well as a number of smiths and a

decayed mill.70

The first land grant of Basilia and Raymond’s to St Mary and St David includes a

clause ‘Reversing, nevertheless the site of a mill and of a fishery ….in that part where

it [the land] slopes down to the Slaney’.71 A corn mill site is marked on the Ordnance

Survey sheet and a weir was located close to Poolcaam, a place noted in description of

the boundaries of the parish of ‘Villa Castri at Foorthynolan’.72 In the 1307

inquisition the mill is described as decayed; in Fynnagh a similar situation existed

where the jury found that the mill was ‘waste and prostrate’. The value to an estate of

the the mill can be seen from the returns for the mill at Forth which had been very

profitable returning £9.8s.6d. in 1283 when the mill and oven at Carlow returned just

over £13 for the same period.73 Mills were a vital element in the economic

organization of any estate. The grinding of corn at the lord’s mill was a normal part of

tenancy arrangements. The fact that mills in two of the principal boroughs are in

decay by the early fourteenth century is a clear indication that the colony in Carlow

was under pressure before the major upheavals caused by the Bruce war and the Black

Death.

There are ten surviving or recorded mottes for Co. Carlow, however, if we look at the

motte distribution within the Carlow Corridor (figure 2) it can be seen that some sites

are on or very close to the modern county boundary. This is, of course, why county-

based distribution pattern are so unsatisfactory. There are no recorded ringworks for

Carlow other than that which underlay Carlow castle. This lack of sites may, however,

be related to the difficulty of identifying these monuments in the field. Their

morphology — an embanked circular enclosure with deep peripheral banks and 68 Register of the Abbey of St Thomas, no. cxxxiii, pp 115-6. 69 Cal. justic. rolls Ire. 1305-1307, p. 36. 70 Ibid., p. 36. 71 Register of the Abbey of St Thomas, no. cxxxvi, p. 117 72 Ibid., no. cxxxiii, pp 115-6. 73 Mills, ‘Accounts of the earl of Norfolk’s estates in Ireland 1279-1294’, pp 52-3.

14

ditches as well as a fortified gate tower — resembles that of raths.74 While the

problems of identification in the field are not as acute as those connected to

ringworks, nevertheless, mottes, particularly the smaller and flatter examples, can

present difficulties. This is exacerbated by a lack of documentary records clearly

linked to individual mottes, although Carlow is better served than other areas of the

Corridor in this regard. Where sites are mentioned in the sources, however, it is

sometimes uncertain if the structure referred to is a motte.75 The available

archaeological evidence for motte construction is severely limited; very few have

been excavated, and most of the work has taken place in Ulster.76 Excavation

evidence dates construction in Ireland to the period 1170-1220, but these excavations

have usually concentrated on the summits, with the result that the current state of our

knowledge of the chronology and status of baileys and ancillary features is

rudimentary, and we know little of the construction techniques. Sweetman has noted

that some of the most important Marshal castles in Leinster in 1231 were

earthworks.77 This is a reminder to us that timber and earthen castles came in various

degrees of complexity and were not simply an expediency for the initial conquest.78

The reality was that timber fortification was an enduring element in castle

construction, being quicker to build and less costly than stone. This, however, is

obscured by the fact that the evidence for such monuments is only discernible by

excavation.

Mottes were not an exclusively Norman earthwork type: they are a feature of the

landscape of Europe as far east as Austria, and seem to be absent only in Iberia,

Norway and Sweden.79 Almost all examples were built between the end of the tenth

74 T.B.Barry, The archaeology of medieval Ireland (London, 1987), p. 45. 75 This can lead to problems in the identification of the precise location of a site mentioned in the sources, for example, there are a variety of opinion as to the exact situation of the motte at Leighlinbridge mentioned by Giraldus, Expugnatio, p.191; Kenny ‘New Leighlin’, in this volume. For a discussion of the problems attached to the identification of particular site types in documentary sources in France see Mouillebouche, Maisons fortes en Bourgogne , p. 95. 76 The list of excavated mottes in Cóilín Ó Drisceoil, ‘Recycled ringforts: the evidence from archaeological excavation for the conversion of pre-existing monuments to motte castles in medieval Ireland’, County Louth Archaeological and Historical Journal, 25: 2 (2002), pp199−201 illustrates how little solid information is available. 77 Sweetman, Medieval castles in Ireland, p. 26. 78 For the complexity possible in earth and timber fortifications see Robert Higham and Philip Barker, Hen Domen, Montgomery: a timber castle on the English-Welsh border a final report (Exeter, 2000); Jacques Le Maho, ‘Un grand château de terre et de bois aux environs de l’An mil: l’Enciente fortée de Notre-Dame de Gravenchon (Haute-Normandy)’, Château Gaillard 21: édudes de castellologie médiévale (2004), 191-201. 79 Tadhg O’Keeffe, ‘The archaeology of Norman castles in Ireland, part 1, mottes and ringworks’, in Archaeology Ireland, iii (1990), p. 16.

15

century and the start of the thirteenth century by societies that could broadly be

termed feudal. In Ireland there was the development of indigenous settlement forms in

the second half of the twelfth century, perhaps inspired by the imported Anglo-

Norman mottes. The majority of raised raths excavated, for example, provide some

evidence of use in the medieval period. There are a number of possible examples in

Carlow including, Ardristan, Ballymoon, Ballyryan and Bough.80 These sites are

usually more than 3m above the surrounding ground level and lack the fosse and bank

of the typical rath. They often incorporate a natural feature which raises the site; in

other instances the elevation is caused by successive layers of occupation. The

platform rath, another type yielding late occupation material, was usually deliberately

heightened by human labour. In Ulster many of these raths were raised in the

thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, and are located in areas traditionally viewed as

being within the sphere of Anglo-Norman influence. In Carlow raised raths noted

above are all in the northern part of the county — the area of greatest Anglo-Norman

settlement (figure 2). Carlow was used by McNeill as a test case to establish if an

alternative form of earthen castle might ‘fill in’ the gaps left in the motte

distribution.81 During this exercise he considered all monuments of whatever date

listed as castles, documented manorial centres, and the sites of all parish churches. No

other type emerged and there was no evidence of ringworks that could be

distinguished from standard raths.

The recognition that the types of military earthwork introduced by the Anglo-

Normans were more complex than mottes has changed the view that their presence is

key indication of Anglo-Norman settlement. In fact the existence of the ringwork and

the possibility of the ‘Gaelic motte’ have rendered all deductions based on the

distribution of mottes of little value.82 In the southern and western foothills of the

Slieve Bloom Mountains, bordering the western Carlow Corridor, here are a number

of square mottes which O’Conor has suggested are late — possibly mid−thirteenth

century.83 These could represent either an Anglo-Norman attempt to fortify the passes

leading into the Corridor or they may be of Gaelic construction. In a survey of

evidence for re-use of rath in the construction of mottes, Ó Drisceoil’s found that 54

80 Brindley and Kilfeather, Archaeological inventory of County Carlow, pp 40 -3. 81 T.E. McNeill, ‘Early castles in Leinster’ in Journal of Irish Archaeology, v (1990), p. 58. 82 K.W. Nicholls, ‘Anglo-French Ireland and after’, in Peritia, i (1982), p. 391. 83 Kieran O’Conor, ‘The later construction and use of motte and bailey castles in Ireland: new evidence from Leinster’, JKAS, 17 (1991), pp 14-24.

16

per cent of fifteen excavated mottes had re-used existing raths as a foundation.84 Even

allowing for the north-eastern bias in motte excavations, the fact that over 50% of

mottes excavated have evidence for re-use and that there was a significant time-lag

between the sequential monuments in 25 per cent of the cases, suggested that this may

be more than the exploitation of an available sub-structure. The symbolic takeover of

sites may be a possible motivation, although, most motte locations in Carlow have

little previously recorded community significance.

A number of mottes in Carlow marked the caputs of the more successful rural market

settlements. Others, such as Castlegrace, Inchisland and Straboe were the centres of

manors. McNeill argued that these castle are ‘the fruits of conquest not the means to

it’.85 Mottes in Carlow, as elsewhere in the Corridor, tend to be large, astutely but not

especially strategically sited. They were off the bog and below the 150m contour and

are found on land that today supports arable farming or good grazing land. They are

sited at the end of ridges or the sides of small valley.86 The height of many of the

surviving mottes in the region is remarkable; in addition mottes were not associated

with holdings of more than a fee.87 There is, therefore, a clear correlation between the

status of the grantee and the size of the motte. The distribution of these castle sites in

Co. Carlow seems to be related to family and feudal connections rather than to

strategic considerations.

This is exemplified by the group of mottes clustered around Tullow. Castlegrace, 6

km east of Forth, was held by Robert de Cantitune of his uncle Raymond le Gros. As

noted above he granted the church of Barragh to St Thomas, Dublin; Barragh has

been identified with Castlegrace by Brooks.88 Today there are the remains of a large,

flat-topped mound (c 12m) sited in a commanding position in rolling countryside

(plate iv). The remains of the nearby parish church consist of a long, narrow structure

which is unenclosed. The base of a granite font as well as part of a rotary quern were

84 Ó Drisceoil, ‘Recycled ringfort’, pp 193−7, in particular fig. 1, p. 190; for a discussion of motte substructures in Britain see M.W. Thompson, ‘Motte substructures’, Medieval Archaeology, 5 (1961), 305−6. 85 McNeill, ‘Early castles in Leinster’, p. 60. 86 Ibid., p. 60. 87 A study of mottes in Wales revealed a similar preference among early examples impressive structures. C.J. Spurgeon, ‘Mottes and castle-ringworks in Wales’ in J.R. Kenyon and Richard Avent (eds), Castles in Wales and the marches: essays in honour of D.J. Cathcart King (Cardiff, 1987), p. 32. 88 Brooks, Knight’s fees, p.71.

17

found outside the church.89 Robert de Cantitune died without heirs and the lands

reverted to the Marshal overlords. It was later granted to the le Gras family — three of

whom had followed their uncle William Marshal the elder to Ireland and are frequent

witnesses to the charters of both William and his sons.90 In 1300-5 William le Gras

granted to Edmund Butler of Ireland and his heirs ‘Castrum Gras which is called

Tollathynerth in Offothirith [Forth] by the service of a knight’s fee, as he hold said

lands of the gift of Edmund his father’.91 In 1545 the lands are mentioned in the will

of James Butler, earl of Ormond.92

To Mabilla, the mother of Raymond and Robert, le Gros granted lands in the parish of

Straboe where the motte which marks the caput is known as Motabower. The site has

been largely quarried away but the motte appears to have been low c. 4-5m high. On

the wall of the nearby church, which is known as Templeboy church, is a medieval

graveslab with a double-edged cross in relief.93 At Inchisland or Motalusha, just 2 km

south-west of Forth, Raymond le Gros granted lands to William Danmartin. The

family may have been part of Raymond’s retinue since a Stephen de Danmartin

witnessed a charter of Raymond and Basilia giving land to the church at Castlemore.94

Basilia and her second husband, Geoffrey fitz Robert purchased Motalusha from

William Danmartin c.1200.95 This castle distribution, as far as a pattern can be

discerned, was related firstly to the waterway of the Barrow, with Carlow,

Leighlinbridge and St Mullins and secondly with the exploitation of good agricultural

land in the south of the county. The early grants in this area in the main being to

family or followers of the chief grantees.

In the second half of the thirteenth century a second wave of settlers, perhaps drawn

by the profits to be made in supplying the royal army in Scotland, was marked on the

landscape by the moated site. That these sites mark an outreach of the colony into new

regions in response to the need for more land is borne out by the distribution of these

sites in Co. Carlow (figure 2).96 The pattern is focused along the eastern Barrow

valley and around the boroughs of Forth and Tullow in the north-east. Functionally

89 Edward O’Toole, ‘The parish of Ballon, County Carlow’, in JKAS, xi, (1933), p. 245. 90 Brooks, Knight’s fees, p.72. 91 Edmund Curtis (ed.), Calendar of Ormond Deeds, 6 vols (Dublin 1932-70), i, p. 340. 92 Ibid., iv, p. 289. 93 Brindley and Kilfeather, Archaeological inventory of County Carlow, p. 73. 94 Register of the Abbey of St Thomas no. cxxxi, p. 114. 95 Ibid., no cxxvii, p. 110; no cxxviii, pp 111-12. 96 T. B. Barry Medieval moated sites of south east Ireland, British Archaeological Reports, 35 (1977), pp 126-175.

18

moated sites were the defended farmsteads of important tenants — strong farmers

who did not command a castle but who were large landholders. Empey, examining the

manor of Knocktopher, found no relationship between moated sites and the centres of

military fiefs in the area.97 He therefore consigned moated sites to the secondary

settlement of the manor — evidence from elsewhere in the county appears to support

this thesis.98 Excavated moated sites show evidence of occupation at the end of the

thirteenth century, lasting until the first half of the fourteenth century. At

Ballyloughan moated site the eastern moat is located within a few metres of the

western fosse of the late thirteenth-early fourteenth-century castle. It is possible that

the moated site may have been connected with the construction of the castle and

would date to the second half of the thirteenth century.99

In the landscape these sites can be recognised as rectangular earthworks,

approximately 500-4000m2 in area, generally around 2,000m2 with raised corners

where the internal banks have been formed from upcast from the digging of the

surrounding moat. The latter were usually between 2m and 10m in width with a U-

shaped profile. The principal source of water for the moat was not usually rainwater;

in most cases water was diverted to and from the moat by channels or leats from

nearby streams or springs. In the field these leats, where they are visible, provide a

persuasive factor in the identification of moated sites. A site with both internal and

external banks as well as a moat of remarkable dimensions is that at Killeeshal

Located in the south-west of the county just 30m west of the Barrow the site was

prone to flooding.100 The raised platform has an areas of 1,558m2 and is enclosed by a

moat 5m wide and 1m in depth. There are internal banks of 5.5m wide and 50cm

high. An aerial photo of Killeeshal shows that the moated site was constructed on part

of an existing rath or large enclosure.101 This also appears to have been the case at the

97 C.A. Empey, ‘Medieval Knocktopher’, in Old Kilkenny Review (1984), i, pp 329-42; (1985), ii, pp 441-52. 98 Linda Doran, ‘Role of the ‘Carlow Corridor’ (Unpublished report, HCI, 2003), pp 39-47; ‘Medieval settlement in the Suir Valley’(Unpublished report, HCI, 2004), pp 38-37. In regions with a continuous and dominant Gaelic Irish presence and where Anglo-Norman settlement is later, moated sites occur as part of the general sub-enfeudation and were built by both cultural groups. Linda Forde Doran, ‘Medieval settlement in Longford and Roscommon’ (PhD thesis, UCD, 2001), pp 182-191. 99 Barry Medieval moated sites of south east Ireland, p. 89. 100 Ibid., p. 58. 101 Barry Medieval moated sites of south east Ireland, plate 8, p. 65; J.K. St Joseph, Cambridge University Collection (ALV 30).

19

moated site close to the thirteenth-century castle at Ballymoon and at Spahill.102 The

evidence noted above both for the re-use of raths in the construction of mottes and the

possibility that in Gaelic controlled areas where moated sites were built by native

lords, suggests that not all moated sites in Carlow are a result of the arrival of new

settlers.103 Barry has noted that rath such as Coolmanagh, which is almost rectangular

in shape and has an area of 4,761m2, may represent an Irish adaptation of elements of

the moated site.104 Whatever the cultural context of these moated site, however, within

a settlement hierarchy they represent agricultural activity on the landscape.

These ‘square raths’ were initially recognised in the early nineteenth century, but it

was Orpen who first suggested that they were probably medieval in date and belonged

to a period immediately after mottes ceased to be constructed — a remarkable

conclusion which has subsequently been borne out by archaeological research.

Carlow has fewer moated sites than other areas of the Carlow Corridor. This may be

related to the increasingly unsettled conditions in the region at the end of the

thirteenth century. A signal that the colony in Carlow was under pressure came in

1297 when the Ó Mórdha moved into the Barrow valley and attacked Leighlinbridge.

Two years earlier in 1295 the seneschal of the liberty of Carlow was given permission

to treat with the Ó Nualláin and William Talun.105 This permission probably

formalised what was already taking place. The naming of both Gaelic Irish and

Anglo-Irish families in this licence provides an insight of the complexity of

relationships in frontier regions such as Carlow in the second half of the twelfth

century. In 1305 An Calbhach Ó Mórdha, and twenty-nine of the nobles of his people

were murdered by Sir Pier Bermingham in Caisleán Feórais (Carbury Castle,

Kildare).106 This annihilation of the Ó Mórdha facilitated the rise of Laoiseach Ó

Conchobair. Under his leadership there was increased raiding on settlements in the

Liberties of Kilkenny and Carlow. The situation was not help by a feud between

Arnold le Poer and John de Boneville during January 1310 for control of the office of

seneschal of Kildare and Carlow, during which Carlow was laid waste. Leighlinbridge

102 Other examples of the re-use of raths occur elsewhere in the region and in other parts of the country. These include: Garryrichard and Garnakill in Co. Wexford, Bral Boru, Co Clare and Lismahon, Co. Down. 103 K.D. O’Conor, The archaeology of medieval rural settlement (Dublin, 1998), pp 87-9; Forde Doran, ‘Medieval settlement in Longford and Roscommon’, pp 182−191. 104 Barry Medieval moated sites of south east Ireland, p. 73. 105 Cal. justic.rolls Ire. 1295-1303, p. 73. 106 Séamus Ó hInnse (ed.) Miscellaneous Irish annals, 1114-1437 (Dublin, 1947), p.131.

20

received a murage grant in 1310 as did Tullow in 1343. At the same period the Mac

Murchadh occupied the barony of Idrone, thereby controlling the communication

routes between Carlow and Dublin.107

It is clear that in the conditions of lawlessness, which pervaded these border regions,

isolated farmers needed water-filled trenches and earthen banks with wooden

palisades to protect themselves, their cattle and their goods from cattle raiders and the

neighbours, both Gaelic Irish and Anglo-Norman. No moated sites in Co Carlow have

been excavated. As well as secular occupation some moated sites were the granges of

religious houses. At the appropriately named Friarstown, also known as Killerrig,

there were a moated site with an attached rectangular enclosure and tower house; with

extensive cropmarks in the area around the tower house. There was an ‘abbey’ site to

the south of the complex. The remains here consist of a portion of a door jamb, quoin

and some dressed stone. A holy water stoop was found on the site but has now been

relocated.108 Between the ‘abbey’ and the complex is a large irregular enclosure

which may have been part of the field system. This complex was associated with the

Knights Hospitallers’ preceptory of St John the Baptist.109 The house was founded by

Gilbert de Borard and was confirmed to the Hospitallers by Innocent III in 1212.

Ware believed that the preceptory was originally held by the Templars, however,

while Templars acquired land in this area in 1284, Killerrig is not mentioned in the

certificate of 1326-7.110 At the Dissolution the jury, who were all from the Friarstown

area, found that the complex contained a castle in ruins ‘situated on the “borders” of

the Irish called the McMurroughes, the Mores, the Byrnes; and three messuages. At

the court of ‘Kyllargan’ there were two messuages with (in great measure where each

acre equalled two acres) nine acres of arable, five acres of pasture and underwood.

This was held by Donald Moyne and others at a rent of 76s. with the traditional

ploughdays, cartdays, turfdays, weedingdays and hookdays.111

The ruling in 1255 that mass could be celebrated in outlying granges of religious

houses allowed these outfarms to be sited at some distance from the original abbeys.

In the fourteenth century, the Bruce wars in which wide-spread devastation was

caused by both side in Co Carlow, the famines which followed and the Black Death 107 For a general discussion of conditions and measures taken to address them see Connolly, ‘“Head and comfort of Leinster”’, in this volume. 108 Now located at St Patrick’s College, Carlow. 109 Gwynn and Hadcock, Med. Relig. houses, pp 336-7. 110 ibid., p 336; Charles MacNeill (ed), Registrum de Kilmanham (Dublin, 1943), p. 152. 111 N. B. White (ed.), Extents of the Irish monastic possessions 1540-1541 (Dublin, 1943), p. 97-8.

21

increased the dependence of the religious orders hired labour to work their granges.

Progressively more unstable conditions saw the fortification of many of these granges

that were a valuable element in the colonial economy. At Knockroe which was a

grange for the Cistercian abbey of Baltinglass, Co. Wicklow, for example, there is a

motte located in a commanding position. Even before the tribulations of the

fourteenth century Stephen of Lexington proscribed the fortification of granges.

Addressing Jerpoint and Duiske, in Co. Kilkenny, in particular, he says ‘No structure

shall be built in the granges, apart from a barn and shelter for animals’.112 He also

prohibited the placing of buildings, either in the main monastery or at a grange in the

middle of the courtyard. They were to be built ‘on the side within the confines on

account of thieves and other chance dangers’, in addition only solid roofs were to be

constructed in the future.113 He also recommended the auditing of accounts for the

granges once a year ‘to known whether their cost is greater than the produce’.114 If

this precautions were necessary in the heady days of the early thirteenth century, it

must have become ever more pertinent as areas in which these granges were situated

passed into the march and granges were increasingly more isolated and vulnerable.

For beleaguered rural population these fortified granges were a protection. In its

account at the Dissolution of the former Templar house at Kilclogan the jury records

that there was ‘a castle or fortilage, in good repair, very necessary for the defence of

the country and the protection of the goods of the king’s tenants’.115 It is possible that

just such a role was fulfilled by the Hospitallers at Killerrig.116

The most indefinite and the most intriguing classification of monument in Carlow is

that of ‘early stone castle’. Within the Corridor they are few in number, whether this

is an accident of survival or whether there was ever sufficient wealth to support a

castle-building programme in stone, it is difficult to establish. The majority of extant

examples in the Corridor, however, are located within the modern county of

Carlow.117 The most enigmatic of castles are those at Ballymoon and Ballyloughan;

both are substantial ruins with little documented history. They are part of a group of

four castle, also including Ballinree and Rathnageeragh, just south of Leighlinbridge.

112 B.W. O’Dwyer, Letters from Ireland 1228-1229 (Kalamazoo, 1982), p. 160. 113 Ibid. 114 Ibid, p. 159. 115 White (ed.), Extents of the Irish monastic possessions, p.100. 116 Connoly has noted that the master of the preceptory acted as keeper of the peace on a number of occasions, ‘“ Head and comfort of Leinster”’, p.20. 117 McNeill, ‘Early castles in Leinster’, p. 61.

22

They are on high ground commanding a pass leading south into the Corridor. A

limited archaeological investigation was carried out by Liam de Poer at Ballyloughan

in the early 1960s.118 The excavator concluded that the ‘excavations were too limited

in area to provide much information on Ballyloughan as a whole’.119 Evidence was

uncovered that the fosse had been filled in the fourteenth century and that the north-

east tower, probably built as an addition to the walls, was abandoned at the end of the

medieval period. Most information for the medieval period came from this tower. The

finds in general were all from the period after c. 1300, with the exception of a shred of

white-paste ware imported from western France. This is usually dated to the late

thirteenth century, in Ireland it has been found at the Ó Briain stronghold of Clonroad

and the Mellifont abbey.120 The alteration to the fortifications may have followed the

take over of the castle by the Mac Murchadh. A Bryan Mac Donagh Kavanagh was

still at Ballyloughan in 1603 when he was granted a pension for warders of castles.121

In 1997 archaeological testing took place in a field c. 100m west of Ballymoon castle,

in a field where shallow banks and ditches were visible. No evidence of medieval or

other activity was found.122

O’Keefe has argued that a number of castles designated as tower houses in north and

central Carlow were in fact built before 1350 and are part of a push into central

Carlow possibly linked to the moated sites in the same area — part of consolidation

following a retreat into the heartland area of the settlement. The situation is

complicated by the wealth of documentary sources in contrast to the paucity of the

remains on the ground. On the other hand substantial remains, such as Ballymoon,

lack records. The distribution of sites plotted on figure 2 is, therefore, a synthesis of

probable classifications augmented with discrete fieldwork. The available

documentary sources supports the distribution evidence that some of these stone

castles were part of a warding system. In 1365-6, for instance, both Clonmore and

Ballyloughlan are mentioned in exchequer payments. Michael White, the constable of

Clonmore, maintained a ‘good company of hobelars and footsoldiers’ there, while

hobelars — sturdy ponies for mounted troops which were essential for low level

warfare over rough terrain — were brought to Ballyloughlan ‘to resist Gerald

118 Liam de Paor, ‘Excavation at Ballyloughlan castle, Co. Carlow’, in JRSAI, xcii 1962), pp1-14. 119 Ibid., p. 9. 120 John Hunt, ‘Clonroad More, Ennis’, in JRSAI, lxxvi, (1946), pp 200-201. 121 J. P. Prendergast, ‘The plantation of the barony of Idrone’, in JRSAI, v (1859), p 420. 122 M.F. Hurley, ‘Ballymoon’, in Isabel Bennett (ed.), Excavations 1997 (Dublin, 1998), pp 3-4.

23

Kavanagh and his accomplices who were at war against the king’123 Clonmore

appears be situated in a position to guard the roads leading north-east, along the

southern slopes of Lugnaquilla mountain, or, in particular, the road over the pass to

Tinahely.

Ballymoon was built sometime at the end of the thirteenth century or the beginning of

the fourteenth century (plate v).124 Although a date as early as 1300 has been

suggested for it, and the adjacent Ballyloughlan and Clonmore in the north-east of the

county. It was presumably part of the lands of Dunleckny, held in the mid-thirteenth

century with St Mullins by the Carew family.125 It remained in their hands, with their

lands in south Wales until the sixteenth century.126 Local tradition suggests that the

castle was abandoned and never finished and this would tally with the material

remains.127 No attempt was made to give the castle a high-level defence system this is

surprising given the remote, exposed and frontier location. Although castles in general

were not often required to withstand a substantial or well-mounted siege. It may have

been deserted through lack of resources or the sheer pressure of holding the land.

O’Keeffe has suggested that the castle was built by Roger Bigod and included a

designed landscape.128 There are several difficulties with this proposition not least the

straitened circumstance of Bigod at this period.129 It is also hard to reconcile the

frontier nature of the site with an expensive project designed for pleasure. The extant

buildings are four ranges built around a courtyard with towers projecting from three

walls and one at the east angle.130 The layout recalls a monastic arrangement, for

example, that of the Carthusian priory of Mount Grace in north Yorkshire. The design

at Ballymoon does not evoke a grand seigniorial residence or an administrative centre

but a garrison.

Clonmore castle, 26km from Ballymoon has a similar layout (plate vi). This consists

of a rectangular enclosure with towers at the western angles and the domestic building 123 Philomena Connolly (ed), Irish exchequer payments 1270-1446 (Dublin, 1998), p.523. 124 Tadhg O’Keeffe, ‘Ballyloughlan, Ballymoon and Clonmore: three castles of c. 1300 in County Carlow’, in Anglo-Norman studies, 23 (2000), 168-170. 125 Brooks, Knight’s fees, pp 60-2. At the partition of the Marshal estate in 1247 the lands of St Mullins, to which these may have been associated, were inherited by Maud Marshal and passed on her death to the Bigod family. 126 Brooks, Knight’s fees, p. 62. 127 H. G. Leask. Irish castles and castellated houses (Dundalk, 1973), p. 74 128 Tadhg O’Keeffe, ‘Were there designed landscapes in medieval Ireland ?’, Landscapes 5:2 (2004), pp 52-68. 129 Morris, The Bigod earls of Norfolk in the thirteenth century, pp 157-161. 130 For a plan of Ballymoon see T.E. McNeill, Castles in Ireland: feudal power in a Gaelic world (London, 1997), p. 112, fig. 66; Leask, Irish castles, p. 73, fig. 44.

24

in a block along the eastern wall. It probably replaced the motte and bailey to the east

and was part of the manor of Tullowphelim. Ballyloughan castle, like Ballymoon, was

almost certainly in the Carew manor of Dunleckny. The structure of the building is

less well preserved than at Ballymoon.131 The surviving remains at Ballyloughlan

consist of a courtyard 45m square with now square towers at the north-west and

south-east corners (plate vii). Midway along the south wall was a two-towered gate

house. The south-west tower has a fair-sized chamber on the first floor and had

window seats, a fireplace and latrines.

The remains of Rathnageeragh castle are comprised of a square gatehouse two

storeys high with an entrance through a central vaulted area and domed chamber on

each side of the passageway and parallel to it (plate viii ). There is a first floor hall

and a chamber block at the east side. A courtyard, in the form of a raised platform, is

traceable at the south east. Sweetman has argued a late thirteenth century date for this

gatehouse.132 In 1308 there is a reference to a fortalice in the manor of Rathnegeragh

which was attacked by Maurice de Rupeforte, deputy justiciar, who was campaigning

against the Ó Nualláin and member of the Talon family.133 The entry is particularly

noteworthy as it indicates the diverse roles played by strongholds in frontier regions.

Following the encounter, in which Adam Talon was captured, goods and chattels

worth one hundred marks were stolen from Richard Talon, who held the manor, and

his ‘hibernici’ — presumably the Ó Nualláin. Included in this haul were cattle that

had been sent to the fortalice for refuge. The word ‘fortalice’, which occurs

throughout the documentary record, appears to imply a fortified site without the

administrative attributions of a castle.

In the Carlow Corridor there is no evidence that earthworks were later re- fortified

with stone. Either repair was made in wood or the sites were abandoned quickly after

construction. The general lack of stone castles is in keeping with this pattern. The

great tower at Carlow illustrates that there was no shortage of skills or ability

therefore the missing component was resources. The earlier earthen and timber castles

were supported by the profits of estates outside Ireland being invested in the

enterprise of settlement. With the contraction of the colony and the growth in

absenteeism this died away. Ireland was not a place where, even if organised in a

131 For a plan see McNeill, Castles in Ireland, p. 115, fig. 68. 132 David Sweetman, Medieval castles of Ireland (Dublin, 1999), p 133. 133 Cal. justic. rolls. Ire., 1308-14, p. 20.

25

disciplined fashion, great fortunes could be made.134 The consequences of the internal

conflicts within the Anglo-Norman colony, allied to a deficiency in the political will

and resources to grapple with the question of the Gaelic Irish role in the new order,

are written in the landscape. The confidence seen in the broadly classical motte

distribution and the assurance needed to confine castle building above a particular

social strata, had gone by the time consolidation in stone was appropriate.

South and central Carlow at the start of the fourteenth century was part of what Smith

has called ‘debatable land’.135 In such lands power is almost as much a claim as a fact.

Marches were initially a feature of expansion not contraction and this is probably

what the castles of Ballymoon, Ballyloughan, Ballinree and Rathnageeragh, represent.

It is misleading to speak of castles blocking passes before long-range artillery yet

territoriality was always a prevailing imperative — Norman fortresses, in contrast to

Gaelic Irish strongholds, were set prominently on the landscape.136 As Mc Neill has

noted ‘The choice of site is strategically shrewd’.137 At territorial borders, such as

here between the Mac Murchadh and the Ua Tuathail in the south and to the west and

the contracting colony to the north, castles were placed as markers or as element of

economic exploitation — concentrated at passes, river-crossings and commanding

communication lines. The castle was vital as a base of operations; a castle was a static

feature but its garrison was mobile. If a castle was secure from large scale incursions

then a small force could control the surrounding countryside.138

In 1453 Thomas Stanley, writing to Henry VI, reported that

the countie of Catherlagh….is inhabyted with enemyes and rebelx,

save the castels of Catherlagh and Tillagh; and within this Lx yr were

in the said Countae of Catherlagh cxlviii castelx and pyles defensible

well voutyd, bataylled and inhabyted, that now ben destrued, and under

the subjection of the said enemies.139

134 Ibid., p. 231. 135 Brendan Smith, ‘The concept of the march in medieval Ireland: the case of Uriel’, in Proc R.I.A. xviiiviii c (1988), p. 258.0 136 Coulson, Castle in medieval society, p. 215. An example of a fortress designed to hold the land by stealth is that of Castel-y-Bere, north-east of Tywyn in Wales. For a discussion of Gaelic Irish castles see O’Conor, The archaeology of rural settlement in Ireland, pp 87-89. 137 McNeill, Castles in Ireland, p. 59; ‘Castles of ward and the changing pattern of border conflict on Ireland’, in Château Gaillard, xvii (1996), pp 127-33. 138 Seamus Taaffe, ‘The role of the castle in Kildare 1169-1550’, in JKAS, Vol. Xviii (Pt iv), 1998-99, p. 518-9 139 Quoted in J.T. Gilbert History of the viceroys of Ireland (Dublin, 1865), pp 330 -1

26

This is often interpreted as there being 168 castles in the liberty of Carlow at the end

of the fourteenth century. The comparison between the number of castles on figure 3,

where all know castle sites are plotted and figure 2, with only extant or firmly

identified castle is striking, perhaps the key phrase in the quotation above is ‘pyles

defensible’. ‘Castle’ as an attribution can apply to a wide variety of structures, not all

of them conforming to the traditional image. Even after a castle or fortified place has

fallen out of use the provenance of a ‘castle’ will often still be attached to it. One only

has to look at the numerous ‘castle site of’ marked on the first edition of the Ordnance

Survey — many of which leave no traces in the landscape or documentary record.

The situation is further complicated by the longevity of use of earthen castles.140

There is sufficient historical and morphological evidence to suggest that mottes

continued to function as caputs throughout the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. A

castle at St Mullins is referred to in 1306141 and there is a reference to the dilapidated

castle of ‘Fothrted’ in the same year. While the citation suggests that it was no longer

regarded as a castle it retained its manorial and symbolic lordship functions, in

particular as the location of a court.142 This was also true elsewhere in the country; a

survey of the possessions of St Thomas Abbey, Dublin in 1540, mentions that in the

manor of Kill, Co. Kildare, there was a ‘small mountain surrounded by a dry ditch, on

which the capital messuage was situated and where the court baron is still held’.143 It

is likely that other motte and bailey castles of under tenants, for which we have little

evidence, also continued in use. In addition many of the sites plotted on figure 3 may

have been tower houses. All of these factors — the lack of clear chronology of use, a

firm classification and the structural evolution of sites over time — make any maps of

‘castle sites’ problematic. With these provisos in place, however, figure 3 provides an

impression of general distribution but in the case of Carlow alters the picture very

little.

By the start of the fourteenth-century the colony in Carlow was increasingly under

strain. When reading official records, the major source of historical evidence for

Carlow in the medieval period, one has to keep in mind the origins and context of

such information, nevertheless, a similar situation is depicted in the more impartial

accounts of the Bigod estate. The Gaelic Irish, when they appear in the records that 140 Kieran, ‘Later construction and use of motte and bailey castles in Ireland, pp 13-29. 141 Cal. justic. rolls Ire., 1305-07, p. 346. 142 Cal. doc. Ire., 1302-07, no. 617, p. 174. 143 Extents of Irish monastic possessions, p. 39.

27

survive for the Carlow Corridor, do so surreptitiously. Yet, as O’Byrne has shown, the

Mac Murchadh especially were part of the political landscape and very conscious of

their familial relationship with the both the Marshals and the Bigods.144 Among items

of expenditure recorded in the Bigod accounts are cloth and furs for the ceremonial

gowns of officers of the liberty. Art Mac Murchadh is recorded as receiving a robe

with a fur-lined hood suggesting an official role within the liberty of Carlow. In early

1280s Roger Bigod met the Mac Murchadh on a visit to Carlow, giving Art a robe, a

cap, furs, money and a cask of wine, while Muirchertach received money.145 On

manors, such as Fennagh, most of the agricultural labour would have been carried out

by the original tillers of the soil, much of it on a part time basis.146 So essential are the

Hybernici that land value was given with their services.147 Further, the identity of the

tenants who paid the fixed rents is not specified in many extents; they could have

been either colonists or Gaelic farmers.148

Any population movement, such as that instigated by the Bruce wars or the Black

death, would have had a devastating effect on agricultural production particularly in a

labour intensive tillage economy. The effect of the endemic low-grade warfare that

marked this period could be seen on tenants and casual labourers who worked the

land. An account of 1311 detailing of the consequences of an attack on the manor of

John de Boneville during which he was killed. The Hibernici, who were tenants of de

Boneville, ‘not daring to remain longer in his [de Boneville] mansions for fear of

these who slew the said John’, taking ‘all their goods and other chattels, with their

wives and their households’ went to Meiller le Kendale, who had been knighted by

John, at his manor of Mothyl in Co Carlow.149 On a pretext of moving them to shelter

on waste land in Co. Kildare, with a promise of safe conduct back to his manor at

Mothyl once conditions had settled, le Kendale killed and robbed them. The casual

level of violence, and the atmosphere of insecurity it engendered for a section of the

population who were essential to keep the economy prosperous, is neatly illustrated

144 Emmett O’Byrne, ‘The MacMurroughs and the marches of Leinster 1170-1340’, in Linda Doran and James Lyttleton, Lordship in medieval Ireland: image and reality (Dublin, 2007), pp168-9. Hore, A History of the town and county of Wexford, i, pp 14–15, 18, 143, 146, 148. 146 For a discussion of the importance of Gaelic Irish tenants and labourers to manorial organisation see Mark Hennessy, ‘Manorial organisation in early thirteenth-century Tipperary’, p. 121. 147 Ibid., p. 124. A extent of the manor of Kilsheelan in the Suir Valley accounts for the Hybernici ‘with their services’, quoted in Mark Hennessy, ‘Manorial organisation in early thirteenth-century Tipperary’, pp 122-3. 148 Murphy, ‘Tullow’, in this volume, pp 17-18. 149 Cal. justic. rolls Ire. 1308-1314, p. 230-1.

28

by the unhappy fate of this group. During the Bruce wars the Scots, as well as the

crown forces pursuing them, left a trail of destruction and desolation; the earl of

Norfolk complained of the loss suffered in his Liberty of Carlow, where stewards,

treasurers and many free tenants had been killed in successive raids.150

The incompleteness of the Norman settlement resulted in the creation of large Gaelic

enclaves, where the earlier landholders had been forced on to the land above the 600ft

contour and into the vast stretches of bog and densely forested areas, that hemmed the

Carlow Corridor.151 From the mountains in the east and the bog in the west the Gaelic

lords began to raid and devastate the rich manors, creating a situation which

successive governments were unable to solve permanently and which drained away

scant resources in fruitless military expeditions. In September 1288, for example, the

government lead by John de Sandford made the seneschal of Carlow, along with those

for Kildare, Kilkenny and Wexford, responsible for guarding the marchlands fringing

the Barrow valley.152 Those summoned were to remain ‘as long as the service should

last’ as the area was ‘very hostile’. After 40 days service — a considerable burden on

the local communities — when no success had been achieved a new system of

warding the marches was organised, again a costly exercise.153 Finally a general

offensive was undertaken lasting twelve days and to which the Gaelic Irish of the

mountains as well as liege men were summoned. The account of this expedition,

perhaps because it was a claim for expenses, declares that ‘the Irish as well of Offaly

as Leix came to the king’s peace and were never hostile again.’ As we have seen

above the situation was more complex.

In addition to their ineffectiveness the greater part of the cost of these measures was

borne by a community already under stress. In 1306, for instance, it was agreed before

the justiciar at Carlow that if a man at arms lost his horse while ‘fighting the Irish

felons of the mountains of Leinster’ the men of the liberties of Carlow, Kilkenny and

Wexford would give him the value of that horse up to £10.154

150 H.G. Richardson and G.O. Sayles (ed.), Parliaments and councils of medieval Ireland. i. (Dublin, 1947), p 202. 151 Robin Frame, ‘War and peace in the medieval lordship of Ireland’, in James Lydon (ed.), The English in medieval Ireland (Dublin, 1984), pp 118-41. 152 This account is drawn from ‘expenses of divers journies to divers parts of Ireland’, Cal. doc. Ire., 1285-92, no. 4. 153 James Lydon, ‘A land of war’, in, NHI, p. 266. 154 Cal. justic. rolls Ire., 1305-1307, p. 325.

29

A vital and constant concern was the control of the roads and the navigable Barrow

river which connected Dublin with the colony in the south. The liberty of Carlow, in

the hands of absentee lords from the mid-thirteenth century, was critical to that

domination. During the comparative peace of the thirteenth century the government

tried to improve communications by clearing rivers and making new roads.155 By the

start of the fourteenth century, however, the situation had deteriorated so badly that

the sheriff of Carlow in answer to the justiciar regarding payments said that ‘he dare

not send money…because of the danger of the roads’.156 In this situation the

importance of the river network to the medieval economy of Carlow cannot be

overestimated. Most of the heavy carrying for the estates of the earl of Norfolk was by

riverboat — sand was transported from the coast up the Barrow to New Ross for

manure, wool from Ballysax was carried by boat to Ross, and millstones from the

Island to Carlow.157 By the mid-fourteenth century control of substantial stretches of

this waterway became tenuous. There are signs, however, that all was not totally

adrift. In the years 1284-90 well over 50% of the financing of the north Wales castles

came from Ireland, much of this provisioned in Carlow.158 The construction noted

earlier of a bridge over the Barrow at Leighlin in 1320 implies was significant traffic

on the main road from Dublin to Carlow and Kilkenny.159

1350-1500

Empey has called the period from 1350 to 1550 a tunnel period; it was the era in

much of the Corridor of the ‘Gaelic revival’, however, this resurgence was evident in

Co. Carlow well before the close of the thirteenth-century.160 By 1300 the Mac

Murchadh control of much of south and eastern Carlow was assured.161 The various

payments made to members of the MacMurrough throughout the fourteenth century

for keeping the roads between Carlow and Kilkenny safe, was merely the formal

recognition of the political reality.162 These payments are traditionally viewed as a

‘black rent’, however, they were simply a tax extracted by those in control. Gaelic

recovery was most successful in areas where the colony was never particularly

155 J.F. Lydon, The lordship of Ireland (Dublin, 1973), p. 96. 156 Ibid., p. 393. 157 From the Bigod ministers accounts quoted in Kevin Down, ‘Colonial society and economy in the high middle ages’, in, NHI, p. 483; see also Kevin Down, ‘Agriculture and manorial economy’, in this volume. 158 J.G. Edwards, ‘Edward I’s castle building in Wales’, in Proc. of the British Academy (1953), 32, p. 47. 159 Chartul. St Mary’s, Dubin, ii, 361.

30

strong —regions, such as Carlow, that were conquered but not solidly colonised. In

these territories the Anglo-Irish lords remained what they had always been ‘lords of a

cultural twilight zone’163 In the absence of any significant colonial population from

which to draw military support, and who would share the burden of financing

military campaigns, Anglo-Irish lords were dependent on the support of surrounding

Gaelic Irish lineages and on their Irish tenant families.

From the mid-fourteenth to the mid-sixteenth century, much of Western Europe was

affected by war, dominated by the struggles between England and France that carried

other disputes, from Scotland to Spain, into their maelstrom.164 Although Ireland lay

on the outer fringes of these contests and felt their effects mainly in the haemorrhage

of colonial revenue, the Anglo-Scottish conflict intruded directly in the form of the

Bruce invasion of 1315-18, one of whose objectives was to ravage the Irish

countryside and disrupt supplies to the king’s army in Scotland. In Ireland the main

consequences of these external conflicts was to delay and hinder English military

response to the erosion of royal authority.165 This draining of resources, combined

with the devastation caused by the Bruce wars and augmented by subsequent famines

and plagues starkly revealed the vulnerability of the settlers, illustrating how easily

their exposed situation could be exploited.166 This was especially true in an area, such

as the Carlow Corridor, where settlements were strung out along the river valleys

overlooked by the Gaelic Irish-controlled highlands and restricted in their access to

Dublin by the extensive areas of midland bogs. For must of this period the country

was a land of low-grade warfare.

The years 1350-1500 remain elusive in terms of our understanding of the

transformation of Irish society and economy.167 It is important to seek explanations of

political, economic and settlement development within the wider context of general

European decline and revival in the fourteenth century. One of the anomalies is that, 160 A.C. Empey, ‘The Anglo-Norman community in Tipperary and Kilkenny in the middle ages:continuity and change’, in Gearóid Mac Niocaill and P.F. Wallace (eds), Keimelia:studies in medeival archaeology and history in memory of Tom Delaney (Galway, 1988), p. 459. 161 Seán Duffy (ed), Atlas of Irish history (Dublin, 1997), p. 39. 162 Connolly, ‘“the head and comfort of Leinster”’, in this volume; Edmund Curtis, Medieval Ireland (London, 1938), p 242, fn.1. 163 Empey, ‘The Anglo-Norman community in Tipperary and Kilkenny’, p. 459. 164 Robin Frame, ‘The defence of the English lordship, 1250-1450’, in Thomas Bartlett and Keith Jeffery (ed.), A Military history of Ireland (Cambridge, 1997), 76. 165 Frame, ‘The defence of the English lordship’, p. 76. 166 Clarke, ‘Decolonisation’, p. 171. 167 B.J. Graham and L.J. Proudfoot (ed.) An historical geography of Ireland (London, 1993), pp 99-100.

31

given the tenacity and vibrancy of Gaelic culture during these years, its society is

largely invisible in the archaeological record. We knew from Jean Creton, the French

chronicler, who travelled with the army of Richard II on his campaigns in 1399, that

Art Mac Murchadh had an abode in the woods near Leighlin, a vital crossing point on

the Barrow. We do not know the form of this fortress but it was probably not

insubstantial since Creton says that it was ‘where he is accustomed to dwell at all

seasons’.168 Earlier, in 1394, this had been referred to as ‘principal fortress’, so even

while he dominated Carlow Corridor, Mac Murchadh chose to live within the security

of the forest.169

Letters written during Richard II’s campaign against Mac Murchadh in 1394 and 1399

give a fascinating picture of these Mac Murchadh compounds in the woods of

Garrowkill (Garryhill) or Garbh Choill lying on the Myshall to Bagenalstown road, a

mile and half from Rathnageeragh castle, and Leverough, close to Leighlin.170 The

significance of these locations is indicated by the fact that they are depicted on a map

of 1570 of the barony of Idrone (plate ix). This map also shows how much of Carlow

was still wooded 170 years later — much of it fringing the main highway. These

accounts, of Richard’s attempts to capture and subdue Art Mac Murchadh, illustrate

the viciousness of the fighting and the extensive destruction of the countryside. At

Garrowkill

wherein our chief adversary M [acMurchadha] had his house and stood on his

defence… not withstanding all the fortress and defences of the forest, we were

at last lodged in the said strong wood, our said enemy dislodges, and his

principal house burned in our presence.....171

Resistance seems to have rumbled on since the accounts says that there were ‘several

skirmishes’ in the day and night that followed the taking of the stronghold.

The Earl Marshal, using men-at-arms and archers had ‘several fine encounters’ during

which nine villages were burned and 8,000 head of cattle taken. Mac Murchadh and

his wife evaded capture, nevertheless, items taken from their house included a chest

belonging to Mac Murchadh’s wife containing ‘certain articles of feminine use, but of

168 J. Webb ,‘Translation of a French Metrical history of the deposition of King Richard the second’, in Archaeologia, xx (1812), p 27-8, 298; A.P. Smyth, Celtic Leinster: towards an historical geography of early Irish civilization A.D. 500-1600 (Blackrock, 1982), p. 108. 169 Edmund Curtis, ‘Unpublished letters from Richard II in Ireland’, RIA Proc., xxxvii, C (1978), p 270-71. 170 Ibid., p. 279. 171 Ibid., p. 291.

32

no great value.’ Of more importance was the capture of Mac Murchadh’s seal, which

had the inscription Sillum Arthurii MacMurgh Dei Gracia Regis Lagenie. This blend

of domestic and administrative elements underlines the role of fortresses as both

dwelling of the lord and his seat of his government —‘private property but public

utility’.172 The earl, ‘sorely vexed’ by his failure to take Mac Murchadh ‘had his

house burned, which was in the said wood of L[everough], as also some fourteen

villages round the said wood, and had four hundred cattle driven away from him’.173

Later in the account the earl of Cork and Rutland attacked the ‘strong country, in

which S [unidentified] had his dwelling’. His army had great difficulty passing

through the area and had to make a ‘great bridge of certain tress, cord and boughs

across the river of P [olmounty, south of St Mullins]…And there he slew a great

number …drove away with him more than 6,000 cattle and he sent 360 of them to the

King’.

These accounts, as well as those of Creton, provide pictures of a buoyant economy;

Mac Murchadh’s horse, Creton tells us, cost him 200 cows — the calculation

reflecting the importance of pastoralism. These vast numbers of cattle — over 14,000

if the figures are true — suggest substantial wealth. These were probably the small

cattle described by Fynes Morrison, which would have provided meat for food and

hides for trade.174 These could be grazed on clearings within the forest and bogs. Pigs,

which thrived in similar conditions were also important; pork was a great delicacy in

fact it features in the Tale of Mac Dáitho’s swine, a story reputed to be set in central

Carlow.175 The strongpoints and dwellings mentioned in these letters are clearly not

insubstantial structures and the fact that one was burned ‘in our presence’ implies the

ritual destruction of a fortress held against the king.176

The 1570 map mentioned above has a section within the wood marked as ‘Kyllarte’,

suggesting ‘Art’s Wood’. The archaeological inventory records a possible castle in the

area. According to tradition this stood close to Garryhill House; parts of the garden

wall and stable yard may contain sections of a castle while the garden suggests a

172 Coulson, Castle in medieval society, chapter title, p. 157. 173 Ibid., p. 293. 174 Quoted in Henry Morley (ed.), Ireland under Elizabeth and James the first (London, 1890), p. 421. 175 Smyth, Celtic Leinster, 108; John Dymmok, ‘A treatise of Ireland’, in Richard Butler (ed.), ‘Tracts relating to Ireland’, Irish Archaeological Society, ii (Dublin, 1843), pp 5, 54. 176 For discussion of the concept of castles as points of resistance see Coulson, Castle in medieval society pp 117-127.

33

possible bawn.177 Curtis noted the remains of an ‘ancient wall’ and circular enclosure

in the area. The significance of the strongholds at Myshall and Garyhill can be seen

from entry the annals for 1399.178 When the Lord Lieutenant Roger Mortimer, earl of

March, was killed in 1398, near Kellistown, his mother sent two chalices, one to

Myshall and another to Garryhill, presumably to two churches there, in order to

facilitate the return of her son’s body. It is likely that the body had been sent to one of

the Mac Murchadh fortresses in the area. There are the remains of an early

ecclesiastical site at Myshall, however, there is no recorded site at Garryhill, which

may have been a private chapel.

The official records depict medieval Irish society as divided between ‘English rebels’,

‘Irish of the mountains’ and loyal subjects, On the ground, however, community were

more inter-dependent and connected than these records imply.179 While inter-cultural

marriage was confined to the upper reaches of society, trade involved a broader

communal mix. In areas, such as that covered by the modern county of Carlow, the

medieval colony, marked on the landscape by mottes, manors and towns, was always

less than the medieval lordship. Similarly it is vital to distinguish between the

settlement and economic aspects of the frontier.180 From 1290, as we have seen, the

sign of a serious colonial reversal was present in the Carlow Corridor. Families, such

as the Talons, to the horror of Dublin officials, were forming themselves into lineages

and taking part in raids and reprisals with their Gaelic neighbours.181 One provision of

the Statutes of Kilkenny (1366) was the prohibition of trade with the Gaelic Irish.

Since more than half of the medieval liberty of Carlow was controlled by the Mac

Murchadh at this period, that a toll was paid to them for free passage on the highway

and that major towns, such as New Ross, paid for their protection, such provisions

were entirely irrelevant.182 In fact the Gaelic Irish hinterland had just the produce —

hides, skins, wool and fish − that were imported by places such as Bristol.183

177 Brindley and Kilfeather Archaeological inventory of County Carlow, p. 90. 178 From Dowling’s annals quoted in Curtis, ‘Unpublished letters from Richard II in Ireland’, p. 300, fn. 63. 179 Murphy, ‘Tullow’, in this volume. 180 H.B.Clarke, ‘Decolonization and the dynamics of urban decline in Ireland, 1300-1550’, in T.R. Slater (ed.), Towns in decline, A.D. 100-1600 (Aldershot, 2000), p. 168; P.J. Duffy, ‘The nature of the medieval frontier in Ireland’ in Studia Hibernica, 22/23 (1982-3), pp 21-38. 181 Margaret Griffith (ed.), Cal. just rolls Irel., 1308-14, p. 20. 182 This is also true the rest of the country apart from the Pale and a small pockets of the surrounding area. 183 A.K. Longfield, ‘Anglo-Irish trade in the sixteenth-century (Dublin, 1929), pp 213-5: Wendy Childs and Timothy O’Neill ‘Overseas trade’, in, NHI, p. 501.

34

Essentials, such as firewood, was imported into these towns; coming by riverboat

from the Gaelic Irish countryside.184 Bliss has suggested that ‘inhabitants of the towns

used Irish as their preferred language, and knew English primarily as a school

language’.185

Just as Gaelic society is often portrayed as inert, there is a tendency to see these

emerging Anglo-Irish lordships of the fifteenth century as possessing a static feudal

quality setting them apart from their Gaelic neighbours. This, however, is largely an

illusion.186 The emergent leading families of the fifteenth century were not heirs to the

feudal barons of the thirteenth century.187 During this period the face of Anglo-Irish

Ireland as it was to remain for the rest of the middle ages began to emerge. Power and

influence were in the hands of a small number of Anglo-Irish nobles who generally

had no land in England and whose families had been in Ireland since the

establishment of the settlement. The history of the Anglo-Irish lordship for the next

two centuries was fundamentally the history of the earldoms created during this

period: the Geraldine earls of Kildare and Desmond and the Butler earls of Ormond.

Kildare concentrated much of his military power on retaking lands in Carlow and

Kildare that had fallen into the hands of hostile, Gaelic Irish families. He invited the

absentee lords to return, and when they failed to do so he then had the lands

transferred to him. In the south-east the Butlers were wary of Kildare’s need, now that

he had consolidated his position in Carlow, to maintain some control over the

Corridor in order to access Waterford. The over-whelming importance of these was

rooted in the administration’s dependence upon them to keep law and order in the

local areas. These men were to dominate the colony and the foundations of their

immense power were laid in this period. The principal loser in this process was the

royal government; the rise of the new lordships ushered in an era of decline in its

power. This loss of power meant the loss of revenue, which in turn meant a further

loss of power.188

The construction of tower houses has been interpreted as representing a degree of

economic recovery, through the moblilisation and concentration of resources by an

184 Timothy O’Neill, Merchants and Mariners in medieval Ireland (Dublin, 1987), pp 99-100. 185 Alan Bliss ‘Language and literature’, in James Lydon (ed.), The English in medieval Ireland (Dublin, 1984), p. 45. 186 K.W. Nicholls, ‘Anglo-French Ireland and after’ in Peritia, i (1982), p. 393. 187 Ibid. 188 McNeill Castle in Ireland, p. 172.

35

élite, within the Anglo-Irish and the Gaelic lordships.189 These multi-storied defended

residences emerged during the fourteenth century; their distribution ignoring cultural

boundaries. By the middle of the fifteenth century these private castles were being

built by Irish families, by English families who remained loyal to the crown and those

who did not. As Ó Danachair noted, there are occasional references to tower houses in

descriptions of local wars, but they are regularly mentioned in wills, mortgages, leases

and family disputes.190 They are most plentiful in areas where settled conditions

prevailed rather than in the more difficult border regions. This is perhaps the

explanation for their scarcity in Carlow, however, it is possible that at least some of

the castle plotted on figure 2 may have been tower houses.

Evidence from elsewhere in the country suggests a radial distribution for tower houses

from certain centres, perhaps ports or other trading towns.191 The outlines of such a

pattern can be seen on figure 3 with a concentration in the northern half of the county

where towns such as Tullow and Leighlin. Both of which continued to function

despite the vicissitudes of the previous centuries.192 Leighlin retained its earlier

importance and for much of the late fourteenth and early fifteenth centuries was

controlled by the Mac Murchadh, who as we saw above had an important fortress in

the area. Yet there appears to have been ongoing efforts to retain control of this

crucial crossing point, in 1358-9, for example, John Galbarry was granted assistance

for ‘keeping two fortalices in Galbarristown and Rathalyn near Leighlin in defence of

the king’s people’.193 These may have been two of the three built to guard Leighlin.194

There is reference to the castle at Leighlin in 1348-9 — the extant remains are of a

tower house — Brother William Hulot, prior of the Carmelites of Leighlin was

granted aid for the repair of the ‘tower built beside the bridge at Leighlin for the

defence of the faithful people’.195 The town remained contested until a garrison was

189 Donnelly, C.J. ‘Tower houses and late medieval secular settlement in County Limerick’, in P.J. Duffy, David Edwards, and Elizabeth FitzPatrick. Gaelic Ireland: land, lordship and settlement 1250-1650 (Dublin, 2001), pp. 315-2. 190 Caoimhín Ó Danachair, ‘Irish tower houses’, in Bealoidas, xlv-xlvii (1977-8), pp 158-63. 191 K.W. Nicholls, ‘Gaelic society and economy in the high middles ages’, in New history of Ireland, p. 406. The distribution pattern of moated sites in the lower Carlow Corridor shows a similar radiation from the ports of New Ross and Wexford, Doran ‘Role of the Carlow Corridor’, Map 3.1. 192 Murphy ‘Tullow’, in this volume. 193 Irish exchequer payments 1270-1446, p. 493. 194 E. Tresham, Rotulorum Patentium et Clausorum Cancellaria Hibernia Calendarium (Dublin, 1828), p. 66. 195 Ibid., p . 427. For an examination of the role of the Carmelites in the defence of this strategic location see Kenny ‘New Leighlin’, in this volume.

36

established there in 1549. This is the best-preserved tower house in Carlow, due no

doubt to the value of its location.

The main focus of tower house distribution in Carlow is focused on the Barrow. This

pattern is mirrored in the rest of the Corridor and is linked to the importance of the

movement of people and goods by water, in a era with poor and dangerous roads, as

well as to value of fishing, both as a food and for export. A number of these Carlow

tower houses are located at bends in the river and may have been placed to control

particular stretches of water. Tower houses could not have sustained an artillery

attack, or indeed any protracted assault, nor were they designed to do so. The extreme

difficulty and expense of moving heavy ordnance across country restricted its use to

major strong points and goes far to explaining the survival of the tower house. The

violence they were intended to withstand was a quick raid by a small group of men.

The moated manor house, suitably barricaded, was probably every bit as defensive.

While individual castles may have had little impact except on local defence, groups of

tower houses may have formed part of an integrated defence strategy. Garrisons based

at tower houses, whether permanent or formed in response to particular needs, could

act as a small mobile force.196 Two castles, for example, Graiguenaspiddoge and

Ballytarsna are to the north and south, close to the Tullow to Leighlinbridge road as it

enters an area of high ground. Graiguenaspiddoge has been levelled and the remains

at Ballytarsna are poor.

Donnelly in an analysis of Limerick tower houses discovered that, out of 359 sites

drawn from a variety of documentary and cartographic sources, 244 or 68% had

vanished. Between 1650 and 1840, 216 castles disappeared leaving no trace of their

exact location. Statistics such as these call into question the validity of distributional

patterns based on surviving remains alone, and certainly require caution in the

postulation of rigid developmental frameworks. In addition timber castle are referred

to in the Barrow Valley, it is likely that many of the outbuildings such as the hall

were of timber.197 Since this form of construction would leave little above ground

evidence tower houses appear today in the landscape as isolated remains. Only at

Friarstown, associated with the preceptory of Killerrig, are there remains associated

with the tower house, these include a moated site as well as field systems. 196 Frame, ‘War and peace in the medieval lordship of Ireland’, p. 519. 197 Ormond Deeds 1547-84, v, p. 27; for a discussion of tower houses distribution with the Carlow Corridor see Doran ‘Role of the Carlow Corridor’, pp 85-99.

37

The resurgence of construction and refurbishment seen in Ireland the fifteenth- and

sixteenth-century appears to be related to the existence of a multiplicity of

autonomous and semi-autonomous lordships.198 Local lords with restricted resources

sought more secure and permanent fortifications to replace their more vulnerable and

largely earthen dwellings, whether raths or moated sites. The first tower houses may

have been built in districts, such as the Carlow Corridor, that had been held by the

Anglo-Normans in the thirteenth century with earlier keeps providing inspiration. The

spread of the moated site across the southern part of the country is matched by the

spread of tower houses, except that the heaviest concentration of the latter extends

further into land resettled by the Gaelic Irish.199 This connection between the

distribution of moated sites and tower house is seen in Co. Carlow when figures 2 and

3 are compared. With the exception of the strongly held Gaelic lands of the west and

north of the country, the tower house transcends social, cultural and economic

boundaries. Nationally, tower houses are found in areas covered by what Jones

Hughes called the ‘hybrid zone’200 These areas include central and southern Ireland

regions, characterised by a complicated and strained blending of Anglo-Irish and

Gaelic Irish cultural influences created by the ebb and flow of the late middle ages’.201

The regions of greatest density of tower houses were those, such as the Carlow

Corridor, where the fourteenth century brought the greatest instability and change in

land ownership, where the three great fourteenth century earls carved out their

lordships of Desmond, Kildare and Ormond. Conversely tower houses are rare in

lands that remained under Gaelic control. In Carlow tower houses are missing from

the areas under the control for most of the middle ages of Gaelic Irish families. Given

the wealth and power of the Mac Murchadh and their client lineages particularly in

Idrone, in addition to the semi-official role of the Mac Murchadh in the government

of the Liberty of Carlow, it is surprising that there are no tower houses associated

directly with these families. If one compares, however, the spread of tower houses in

Carlow with that of Roscommon, where there was mixed settlement in the south

198 Barry, ‘Late medieval Ireland: the debate on social and economic transformation’, p.107. 199 See distribution map see Barry, The archaeology of medieval Ireland, fig. 38, p. 187. 200 Tom Jones Hughes, ‘Town and baile in Irish placenames’, in Nicholas Stephens and R.E. Glascock (ed.), Irish geographical studies in favour of E. Estyn Evans (Belfast, 1970), pp 244-58. 201 Barry, ‘Late medieval Ireland: the debate on social and economic transformation’, p. 108.

38

while the northern section was dominated by the Uí Chonchobair, the pattern is

replicated.202

Gaelic society in this region, as in the country as a whole, was not static. It was

intricate, complex and evolving. It is not easily understood. While there is more

information available on social matters following the arrival of the Anglo-Normans, it

is a particular arrangement of information. The picture presented was that constructed

by official sources. Gaelic society was not formed of the recognisable layers of

bureaucracy from which history is constructed, hence despite this new wealth of

information, Gaelic Ireland recedes further from view. In other areas, such as

Connacht and Munster, the annals provide a path to the evolution of the Gaelic Irish

community; here that is largely absent. There is conservatism in the built environment

in this region, seen in the description of Mac Murchadh’s fortress. While the accounts

of the form these structures took is unclear they do not appear to have been stone.

This is in marked contrast to the evidence in the sources for innovations in social

organisation and material culture, which appeared in the decades before the arrival of

the Anglo-Normans. It is also in contrast to the Mac Murchadh’s evolving attitude to

their legal and political role in the new order.203

The judgement of cattle as a value of worth ⎯ as a currency ⎯ was also extremely

potent. Cattle were effective political and military weapons. Cattle-raids, for example,

had a myriad of different functions, each with a code understood by all sides in a

conflict. The records for Carlow contain a number of raids conducted jointly by

Gaelic Irish and English lords. Richard II’s campaign against Mac Murchadh has

elements of the cattle-raid about it. This perception of warfare and the closeness to the

landscape that the predominance of cattle instilled may explain the lack of desire on

the part of Gaelic lords for stone castles. The stability linked to wealth that the

building of these tower houses indicates may simply not have existed in Gaelic-held

areas of the region.

Conclusions

The cornerstone to control of the lordship of Leinster was the domination of the area

now covered by the modern county of Carlow. Through this area ran not only the

202 Forde Doran, ‘Medieval settlement in Longford and Roscommon’, Map 5. 203 O’Byrne, ‘The MacMurroughs and the marches of Leinster, , in Doran and Lyttleton, Lordship in medieval Ireland (Dublin, 2007), 173-176.

39

navigable River Barrow but the Slighe Chulann, the major highway linking Ossory

and Munster with Dublin. The decision to relocate the exchequer to Carlow in 1361 is

a consequence of the importance of the region to a Dublin government, attempting to

remain related to the colony in one of the richest parts of the lordship.204 The wealth

and beauty of the area is a recurring theme in the accounts. Richard II observed the

‘of all others the most famous, fair and fertile…in woods, pastures, meadows, arable

lands and rivers the beautiful, pleasant, and delightful that one could find in all the

land of our rebels of Ireland’

The Lordship of Leinster was the first Anglo-Norman lordship established, created

following Richard fitz Gilbert acquiring the kingdom of Leinster in 1171, on the death

of Diarmait Mac Murchadh. The quality of the land on the river valleys on which this

lordship was based was ideally suited to the tillage-based agriculture favoured by the

Anglo-Norman farmers. The creation of this lordship illustrates the point made by

Davies that military conquest, however, impressive and distracting for later historians,

was not the only route to domination in medieval Ireland. ‘Conquest in the sense of a

military act is only one of the routes to the domination of one society over another and

not necessarily the most attractive, rewarding or important of such routes’.205 These

aristocratic warriors, such Raymond le Gros and his nephews or their Marshal

overlords, took the world as they found it; they adapted to it and exploited it for their

own purpose. The marriage alliance was one of the most important channels of

integration and ultimately succession. Strongbow’s marriage to the Gaelic Irish

princess, Aoife, secured his, and untimely the Marshall succession, to the lordship.

They worked with the grain of native society where it fitted their ends. Political and

martial alliance created significant routes to domination, as did the commercial

dependence on and the economic entrepreneurship of the conqueror.206

Places in Carlow that were to become important Anglo-Norman towns are

encountered in the writings which record the initial Norman adventure in Ireland.

Among the most prominent of these locations is Leighlin, close to the major early

historic site of Dinn Rig. Domination of this key crossing point was to be a symbol of

control of the Corridor. An indication of the fragility of the settlement in south-west

204 Connolly, ‘“the head and comfort of Leinster”’, in this volume. 205 R.R. Davies, Domination and Conquest: the experience of Ireland, Scotland and Wales 1100-1300 (Cambridge, 1990), p. 3. 206 Marie Therese Flanagan, ‘Warfare in Twelfth-century Ireland’ in Bartlett and Jeffrey (ed.) Military History of Ireland, p. 73.

40

Carlow was the burning of Leighlin and the settlements around in 1297 by the

‘Hibernicos de Slemergi’207 — the Irish of Laois — moving into the Corridor from

the hills behind Old Leighlin. The building of a stone bridge and associated castle in

1320 was a clear signal of the importance of this location to the communications

between the settlements in the south and Dublin. Once the vulnerability of the colony

begins to be exposed by the tribulations of the early fourteenth century, the records

are filled with the dangers posed to these routeways by the advancing Gaelic Irish. As

soon as the settlement dynamic faltered and there was no resident magnet or

adequately funded government initiative to stand in the way, such attempts on the part

of former overlords to regain valuable lost territory were inevitable. As Smyth has

argued, for the Gaelic Irish ‘the political centre of gravity of Leinster lay not at Dublin

but in the central Barrow valley’.208 By the mid-fourteenth century years of absentee

lordship and over-production of the manors, to make quick profits feeding the royal

armies had taken their toll.209

Of course the impoverishment of the government does not mean that a general

economic failure.210 As we move into the fifteenth century the most buoyant urban

centres were the ports, which would suggest that the dynamic of the economy had

changed from grain-based marketing towards international trade. This was founded on

exports such as hides, skins, wools and fish — produce of pastoral agriculture— and

the importation of wine, salt iron and luxuries to cater to the tastes of the new elite,

both Gaelic Irish and Anglo-Irish.211 The small market settlements that dotted

northern Carlow in the thirteenth century had contracted or been deserted. The

importance of the Gaelic Irish aristocracy in the new economy is illustrated by the

number of cattle captured at the Mac Murchadh strongholds in the 1390s.

For Carlow this new wave of prosperity, based as ever on the navigable Barrow and

the ancient road network, has left little traces in the archaeological record. Maybe

because the greater part of the new wealth was held by those who saw no great need

to build in stone. The tower houses, which elsewhere in the country symbolise this

new commerce, are here simple and the surviving fabric appears poorly built. They

suggest a need for domestic security rather than a display of wealth. The documentary

207 Chartul. St Mary’s, Dubin, ii, 327. 208 Alfred Smyth, Celtic Leinster (Dublin, 1982), p. 106. 209 Down ‘Agriculture and the manorial economy’, in this volume. 210 Clarke, ‘Decolonization’, p. 180. 211Ibid., p. 179.

41

record is mainly that of an administration in retreat with the attendant narrative of

shock and doom. We lack Gaelic Irish annals which would give a voice to the potent

transformations of that society which we glimpse accidentally in the official accounts.

Undoubtedly Carlow, on the main passage between Dublin and the richest manors in

the country, was always a contested landscape. This is noted rather ruefully by one of

those fighting with Richard II who had been optimistically granted land

The King had granted me a parcel of land in the country of the rebels, which if

it were in the parts of London would be worth by the year fifty thousand

marks, but, by my faith, I have so much trouble holding on to it that I would

not like to lead such a life for a long time even for a quarter of the land.212

This quotation contains elements of naivety, ambition and resignation that was

probably echoed by many would-be conquers of this region.

212 Letter from Janico Artoye to the bishop of Salisbury quoted in Curtis, ‘Unpublished letters from Richard II in Ireland’, p. 296. Artoye severed in Ireland under Henry IV, V, VI, holding various office such as Guardian of the Peace, Commissioner for Assessments and Constable of royal castles.