Native Enclosed Settlement and the Problem of the Irish 'Ring-fort'

Abstract

One of the most sustained monolithic traditions of Irish archaeology is the classification of a wide variety of earthen and stone enclosures (ráth and caisel) as 'ring-forts'. This is an impediment to understanding the significant changes that native enclosed settlement underwent through time since it encourages archaeologists to fit their evidence to the category rather than to assess each enclosed settlement on its own merits. It also conceals differences between various forms of enclosed settlements inhabited from the 7th to the 17th century AD, occasionally later. The proposal is therefore that the 'ring-fort' is a chimera and that the use of that term should be discontinued so that study of native enclosed settlement can be liberated from its insular base and used to explore social change in Ireland. A field study from the Burren, Co Clare is used in support of this argument.

One of the most sustained monolithic traditions of Irish archaeology is the classification of a wide variety of earthen and stone enclosures (ráth and caisel) as 'ring-forts'. This is an impediment to understanding the significant changes that native enclosed settlement underwent through time since it encourages archaeologists to fit their evidence to the category rather than to assess each enclosed settlement on its own merits. It also conceals differences between various forms of enclosed settlements inhabited from the 7th to the 17th century AD, occasionally later. The proposal is therefore that the 'ring-fort' is a chimera and that the use of that term should be discontinued so that study of native enclosed settlement can be liberated from its insular base and used to explore social change in Ireland. A field study from the Burren, Co Clare is used in support of this argument.

L'habitat enclos indigène et le problème du « fort circulaire » irlandais

L'une des traditions monolithiques les plus tenaces de l'archéologie irlandaise est la classification de toutes sortes d'enceintes de terre et de pierre (ráth et caisel) en « forts circulaires » (ring-fort). Celle-ci empêche de comprendre les changements significatifs subis par l'habitat enclos indigène au fil du temps, car elle encourage les archéologues à adapter les preuves à la catégorie plutôt qu'à évaluer chaque site selon ses propres mérites. Elle dissimule également les différences entre diverses formes d'habitats enclos occupés du VII^e au XVII^e siècle, voire plus tard. Il est par conséquent suggéré que le « fort circulaire » est une chimère et que le terme devrait être abandonné afin que l'étude de l'habitat enclos indigène puisse se libérer de ce carcan et servir à explorer le changement social en Irlande.

Einheimische umwallte Ansiedlungen und das Problem des irischen "Ringforts"

Eine der dauerhaftesten monolithischen Traditionen der irischen Archäologie ist die Klassifizierung einer großen Vielfalt von Erd- und Steinumwallungen (ráth und caisel) als "Ringforts". Dies behindert allerdings das Verständnis für die bedeutenden Veränderungen, die einheimische umwallte Ansiedlungen mit der Zeit durchliefen, denn es ermutigt Archäologen dazu, ihre Beweisstücke an die Kategorie anzupassen, anstatt jede umwallte Ansiedlung einzeln für sich zu bewerten. Diese Vorgehensweise überdeckt auch die Unterschiede zwischen verschiedenen Formen umwallter Siedlungen, die zwischen dem 7. und 17. Jahrhundert n.Chr., gelegentlich auch noch später bewohnt waren. Es wird daher argumentiert, dass das "Ringfort" eine Schimäre ist und man diesen Ausdruck nicht mehr benutzen sollte, damit sich die Untersuchung einheimischer umwallter Siedlungen von diesem insularen Ansatz befreien und statt dessen der Erkundung des gesellschaftlichen Wandels in Irland widmen kann.

L'insediamento recintato indigeno e il problema della cosiddetta fortezza ad anello

Una delle tradizioni più durature e monolitiche dell'archeologia irlandese è quella di classificare un'ampia varietà di recinzioni in terra e in pietra (ráth e caisel) come 'fortezze ad anello' (ring-fort). Questo impedisce di capire le importanti trasformazioni subite nel tempo dall'insediamento recintato indigeno, poiché porta gli archeologi a far rientrare i vari ritrovamenti in questa categoria, anziché a valutare ciascun insediamento recintato secondo i suoi meriti, e inoltre non lascia trasparire le differenze esistenti tra varie forme di insediamenti recintati abitati dal secolo VII fino al XVII d.C., e in qualche caso più tardi. Si sostiene quindi che la 'fortezza ad anello' non è che una chimera e che questa definizione deve essere abolita per far sì che lo studio dell'insediamento recintato indigeno sia liberato dalle pastoie di una visione limitata e serva a investigare le trasformazioni sociali in Irlanda.