|
The patterns of settlement in Early
Christian County Down
Table 24
Area (km2) of each
CORINE classification within each altitude
zone
|
|
Altitude
zones in metres
|
|
|
1 -
30
|
30 -
60
|
60 -
90
|
90 -
150
|
150 -
210
|
210 -
300
|
300
+
|
|
Artificial surface
|
74.2
|
43.8
|
17.8
|
14.1
|
0.7
|
0
|
0
|
|
Arable
|
52.2
|
37.1
|
24.1
|
17.7
|
1.8
|
0
|
0
|
|
Agricultural
|
289.6
|
201.9
|
169.1
|
236.6
|
48.3
|
6.5
|
0.4
|
|
Forest
|
5.5
|
7.5
|
4.9
|
10.8
|
9.1
|
5.8
|
2.9
|
|
Scrub
|
0.6
|
3.2
|
2.23
|
9.7
|
20.9
|
59
|
93.7
|
|
Beach
|
6.6
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Wetland
|
65.5
|
0.5
|
2.6
|
2.6
|
0.1
|
2.2
|
10.3
|
|
Bodies of water
|
114.3
|
0.9
|
0.7
|
3
|
0.7
|
0.7
|
0.6
|
|
Good pasture
|
80.2
|
100.4
|
117.1
|
158.6
|
42.3
|
7.2
|
0.1
|
|
Poor pasture
|
7.5
|
18.6
|
14.3
|
34.1
|
22.8
|
11.2
|
0.5
|
|
Mixed pasture
|
27.6
|
78.8
|
99.3
|
109.3
|
31.3
|
8.4
|
0.3
|
The results of the altitude / CORINE
map overlay are very similar to those of the Land
Classification map overlay. The best quality CORINE
categories are concentrated in the lowlands, with the medium
quality classifications dominating the middling altitudes
and the poorer quality categories becoming more common in
the highest altitude zones.
Table 25
Total number of sites within each
CORINE / altitude category
|
|
Altitude
zones in metres
|
|
|
1 -
30
|
30 -
60
|
60 -
90
|
90 -
150
|
150
- 210
|
210
- 300
|
300
+
|
|
Artificial surface
|
16
|
20
|
5
|
17
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Arable
|
18
|
20
|
17
|
30
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
|
Agricultural
|
128
|
119
|
163
|
240
|
31
|
0
|
0
|
|
Forest
|
3
|
3
|
1
|
6
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
|
Scrub
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
3
|
1
|
|
Beach
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Wetland
|
3
|
1
|
3
|
3
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Bodies of water
|
6
|
1
|
1
|
4
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Good pasture
|
22
|
74
|
87
|
185
|
32
|
0
|
0
|
|
Poor pasture
|
1
|
9
|
5
|
26
|
9
|
1
|
0
|
|
Mixed pasture
|
4
|
34
|
65
|
92
|
22
|
1
|
0
|
Table 26
Chi-squared values for sites within
each CORINE / altitude category
|
|
Altitude
zones in metres
|
|
|
1 -
30
|
30 -
60
|
60 -
90
|
90 -
150
|
150
- 210
|
210
- 300
|
300
+
|
|
Artificial surface
|
16.9
|
1.1
|
2.8
|
9.6
|
0.4
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
|
Arable
|
4.9
|
0.1
|
0.7
|
38.1
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
|
Agricultural
|
9.4
|
0.0
|
43.3
|
77.5
|
0.3
|
3.8
|
0.3
|
|
Forest
|
0.0
|
0.4
|
1.2
|
0.0
|
3.4
|
3.4
|
1.7
|
|
Scrub
|
0.4
|
1.9
|
1.3
|
3.8
|
10.2
|
28.4
|
52.2
|
|
Beach
|
3.8
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
|
Wetland
|
32.1
|
1.5
|
1.4
|
1.5
|
0.0
|
1.3
|
6.0
|
|
Bodies of water
|
54.7
|
0.4
|
0.8
|
3.0
|
0.4
|
0.4
|
0.4
|
|
Good pasture
|
12.9
|
4.3
|
5.5
|
94.5
|
2.3
|
4.1
|
0.0
|
|
Poor pasture
|
2.6
|
0.3
|
1.3
|
2.0
|
1.3
|
4.6
|
0.3
|
|
Mixed pasture
|
9.0
|
3.0
|
1.0
|
13.0
|
0.8
|
3.1
|
0.2
|
(Chi-squared values become significant
at 3.8)
Again the point layer, representing
each Early Christian site, was added to the CORINE map /
altitude overlay to calculate the number of sites within
each category (Table 25) and finally a chi-squared test was
applied to highlight any significant correlations (Table
26). A similar pattern of results can be seen as with both
the Soil and Land Classification analyses. Higher than
expected numbers of settlements are found within the 60m
– 90m and particularly the 90m – 150m zones,
demonstrating a clear preference for settling at this
altitude. The only significant result outside this altitude
range is in the good pasture category in the 30 – 60m
zone.
Summary and
conclusions
The analyses carried out above have
very much emphasised the agricultural basis of Early
Christian society. The majority of settlements are located
within the middle altitude range, most suited to both
cultivating crops and raising stock and it seems likely that
altitude was the dominant factor dictating where the Early
Christian farmer lived. Overall there are a number of very
clear trends. Perhaps the most apparent of these is that
raths are located on middling quality ground. Associated
with altitude, the over-riding influence on Early Christian
settlers appears to have been not the quality of the soil,
but the desire to locate on a drumlin. Although the analyses
above have given a clear insight into the influences which
dictated where the Early Christian farmers located their
settlements we must also have take into consideration not
only the land immediately surrounding their farmstead, but
also the wider area which they would have farmed, and this
is looked at in the following sections.
Site catchment
analysis
Theory and approach
The technique of site catchment
analysis allows an assessment of the economic potential of
the area surrounding a site which is habitually exploited
(Higgs and Vita-Finzi 1972, 30). The territory or catchment
area is generally taken to be circular, i.e. it is based on
the resources within a constant radius from the site. Using
GIS these catchment areas can be overlaid onto a resource
basemap, i.e. the soil map, land classification map or
CORINE map, and used to calculate the percentages of each
soil type or land class etc. within the site
catchment area. A 1 km radius was used around each site,
giving a catchment area of 314 ha (3.14 km2 or
776 acres). The argument for using a 1 km radius was
strengthened by a statement from Chrisholm (1968) that with
modern subsistence agriculture the decline in net return
from a territory becomes significant at a distance of one
kilometre from a site.
Site catchment analysis using the
basemaps
As in the previous analyses, the three
basemaps, Soil, Land Classification and CORINE, were used
for the analyses and a chi-squared test was applied to the
results to determine their statistical significance. The
results can be seen in tables 27 – 32 below. Throughout
this section, those results which are significantly higher
than expected are highlighted in red, while those which are
lower are highlighted in blue.
Perhaps the most obvious feature of
the results of the catchment area analysis is that raths are
clearly located to avoid the poorest quality type 1(PP/peat)
soils. There are no other significant results for raths,
demonstrating their wide distribution across the various
soils of County Down. Within the catchment areas there are
relatively high quantities of the poorer medium quality
categories of land, but which were probably still suitable
for grazing. The results for probable raths are fairly
similar to those of known raths, suggesting that these are
likely to be rath sites. Platform raths have a significantly
higher than expected quantity of type 19 (ABE/gley) soil
within their catchment areas, reflected by the B results on
the Land Classification map and the Good Pasture category on
the CORINE map. This soil tends to be found within the
drumlin belt, emphasising the tendency of platform raths to
be located in drumlin areas. As platform raths
are
Table 27
Site catchment analysis, up to 1km radius: Soil map
|
Map code
|
1
|
6
|
8
|
10
|
15
|
19
|
|
|
|
Principal
soil
|
PP
(75%)
|
ABE
(60%)
|
ABE
(60%)
|
ABE
(90%)
|
Gley
(60%)
|
ABE
(60%)
|
Other
|
Total area
|
|
Associated
soil
|
Peat
(25%)
|
SBP
(40%)
|
BP
(40%)
|
Gley
(10%)
|
ABE
(40%)
|
Gley
(40%)
|
|
(Km2)
|
|
% of total area
|
6.3
|
21
|
21
|
1.9
|
19.4
|
15.5
|
6.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rath
|
0.1
|
24.6
|
20.4
|
2.7
|
27.8
|
24
|
0.4
|
1403.9
|
|
Probable rath
|
0
|
29.1
|
15.8
|
0.7
|
23.9
|
30.5
|
0
|
139.7
|
|
Platform rath
|
0.15
|
23.9
|
14.9
|
3
|
19.5
|
38.5
|
0.2
|
98.9
|
|
Raised rath
|
0
|
21.1
|
47
|
0
|
16.3
|
15.5
|
0
|
36.4
|
|
Rath and
souterrain
|
0
|
38.7
|
38.4
|
0
|
22.9
|
0
|
0
|
38.4
|
|
Large rath
|
1.8
|
4.2
|
0
|
0
|
73.6
|
20.3
|
0
|
16.8
|
|
Conjoined raths
|
0
|
98.1
|
1.9
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
5.9
|
|
Rath pair
|
0
|
10.2
|
10.4
|
0
|
34
|
45.3
|
0
|
29.1
|
|
Bivallate rath
|
0
|
24.9
|
5.1
|
2.8
|
40.2
|
26.9
|
0
|
53.8
|
|
Multivallate rath
|
0
|
28.7
|
17
|
1.6
|
0
|
52.6
|
0
|
15.6
|
|
Large enclosure
|
0
|
25.6
|
14.2
|
0
|
29
|
31
|
0
|
92.6
|
|
Cashel
|
1
|
30.8
|
42.9
|
0
|
14.7
|
10.5
|
0
|
125.9
|
|
Crannog
|
1.2
|
19.5
|
20.5
|
1.8
|
27.5
|
29.3
|
0
|
127.8
|
|
Mound
|
0
|
9.1
|
36.8
|
0
|
17.7
|
36.3
|
0
|
32.4
|
|
Souterrain
|
2.1
|
27.4
|
54.1
|
0
|
4.2
|
12.1
|
0.1
|
143.7
|
|
Ecclesiastical
sites
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pre-Viking
|
0
|
15.5
|
18.9
|
5.1
|
20.2
|
38.5
|
1.6
|
40.4
|
|
Pre-Norman
|
0
|
15.5
|
56.5
|
0
|
6.7
|
21.1
|
0.1
|
45.1
|
|
Probably
Pre-Norman
|
4.2
|
15.5
|
46.1
|
0
|
3.4
|
30.6
|
0.2
|
30
|
Results are shown as a percentage
of the total area covered by each site type
Table 28
Chi-squared values, up to 1km
radius: Soil map
|
Map code
|
1
|
6
|
8
|
10
|
15
|
19
|
|
Chi-sq.
|
|
Principle
soil
|
PP
(75%)
|
ABE
(60%)
|
ABE
(60%)
|
ABE
(90%)
|
Gley
(60%)
|
ABE
(60%)
|
Other
|
|
|
Associated
soil
|
Peat
(25%)
|
SBP
(40%)
|
BP
(40%)
|
Gley
(10%)
|
ABE
(40%)
|
Gley
(40%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rath
|
6.6
|
0.1
|
0.3
|
0.1
|
2.1
|
3.1
|
6.5
|
18.9
|
|
Probable rath
|
6.9
|
1.7
|
2.2
|
1
|
0.4
|
11
|
7.1
|
30
|
|
Platform rath
|
6.6
|
0
|
2.8
|
0.3
|
0.1
|
27.8
|
6.9
|
44.6
|
|
Raised rath
|
6.9
|
0.2
|
25.5
|
2.1
|
1.1
|
0.1
|
7.2
|
43.1
|
|
Rath and
souterrain
|
6.9
|
10.9
|
10.5
|
2.1
|
0.1
|
16.8
|
7.2
|
54.6
|
|
Large rath
|
3.7
|
15.2
|
22.9
|
2.1
|
130.1
|
0.7
|
7.2
|
182
|
|
Conjoined rath
|
6.9
|
247.2
|
19.3
|
2.1
|
21.1
|
16.8
|
7.2
|
320.7
|
|
Rath pair
|
6.9
|
7.1
|
6.8
|
2.1
|
7.8
|
48.2
|
7.1
|
86
|
|
Bivallate rath
|
6.9
|
0.2
|
13.7
|
0.2
|
17.1
|
6.1
|
7.2
|
51.4
|
|
Multivallate rath
|
6.9
|
1.4
|
1.5
|
0.1
|
21.1
|
76.2
|
7.1
|
114.4
|
|
Large enclosure
|
6.9
|
0.3
|
3.3
|
2.1
|
2.9
|
12
|
7.2
|
34.8
|
|
Cashel
|
5
|
2.7
|
17.5
|
2.1
|
2
|
2.3
|
7.2
|
39
|
|
Crannog
|
4.6
|
0.5
|
0.2
|
0
|
2
|
9.3
|
7.2
|
23.7
|
|
Mound
|
6.9
|
8.3
|
8.5
|
2.1
|
0.6
|
22.7
|
7.2
|
56.2
|
|
Souterrain
|
3.4
|
0.9
|
42.6
|
2.1
|
13.6
|
1.3
|
7
|
71.1
|
|
Ecclesiastical
sites
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pre-Viking
|
6.9
|
2.4
|
0.7
|
4.2
|
0
|
28.1
|
4.3
|
46.6
|
|
Pre-Norman
|
6.9
|
2.4
|
49.5
|
2.1
|
9.9
|
1.1
|
6.9
|
78.8
|
|
Probably
pre-Norman
|
1.1
|
2.4
|
23.5
|
2.1
|
14.8
|
11.3
|
6.8
|
62.1
|
Individual values become
significant at 3.8
Overall chi-squared vales become
significant at 12.59
Table 29
Site catchment analysis, up to 1km
radius: Land Classification map
|
Land
quality
|
High
|
Medium
quality
|
Poor
|
Very
poor
|
High /
medium
|
Poor/
medium
|
Other
|
|
Total
area
|
|
|
A
|
B1
|
B2
|
B3
|
B4
|
C1
|
C2
|
D
|
A /
B1
|
A /
B2
|
C /
B
|
|
|
(km2)
|
|
% of the total
area
|
3.1
|
15.1
|
5.7
|
40.2
|
13.2
|
4.9
|
0.6
|
4.1
|
2.7
|
2.3
|
1.1
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rath
|
3.4
|
17.2
|
4.6
|
52.3
|
13.8
|
0.8
|
0.3
|
0
|
3.3
|
3.1
|
0.5
|
0.5
|
|
1403.9
|
|
Probable rath
|
5.5
|
22.8
|
5.7
|
47.1
|
8.7
|
1.2
|
0
|
0
|
1.9
|
5.2
|
0
|
1.7
|
|
139.7
|
|
Platform rath
|
0
|
15.4
|
15.4
|
42.7
|
16.2
|
1.9
|
1.7
|
0
|
2.6
|
3.7
|
0.1
|
0
|
|
98.9
|
|
Raised rath
|
8.9
|
15.3
|
0
|
41.7
|
18.7
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
13.1
|
0
|
2.1
|
0
|
|
36.4
|
|
Rath and
souterrain
|
0
|
10.7
|
0
|
51.6
|
32.5
|
0.3
|
0
|
0
|
4.8
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
38.4
|
|
Large rath
|
0
|
17.8
|
17.5
|
49
|
15.7
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
16.7
|
|
Conjoined raths
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
87.5
|
12.4
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
5.9
|
|
Rath pair
|
0
|
0.2
|
0
|
83.5
|
12.7
|
3.4
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
29.1
|
|
Bivallate rath
|
7.9
|
14.4
|
8.5
|
61.3
|
3.4
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
4.2
|
0
|
0
|
|
53.8
|
|
Multivallate rath
|
0
|
13.4
|
2.9
|
68.2
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
15.6
|
0
|
0
|
|
15.6
|
|
Large enclosure
|
5.5
|
10.8
|
7.9
|
61
|
9.6
|
1.7
|
0
|
0
|
0.9
|
2.3
|
0
|
0
|
|
92.7
|
|
Cashel
|
1.9
|
2.8
|
0
|
31.9
|
52.3
|
5.5
|
0
|
0.1
|
5.5
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
125.8
|
|
Crannog
|
2.5
|
9.6
|
4.1
|
63.2
|
9.2
|
0.1
|
1
|
2.2
|
4
|
2.2
|
1.5
|
0.1
|
|
127.9
|
|
Mound
|
1.9
|
9.5
|
9.1
|
59.4
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
18.5
|
1.5
|
0
|
0
|
|
32.4
|
|
Souterrain
|
1.3
|
17.2
|
0.8
|
44.9
|
21.7
|
0.7
|
2.1
|
0
|
8.7
|
0
|
2.2
|
0.1
|
|
143.7
|
|
Ecclesiastical
sites
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pre-Viking
|
0
|
26.3
|
5.5
|
52.5
|
0.1
|
0
|
4.4
|
0
|
0.1
|
6.9
|
0
|
4
|
|
40.4
|
|
Pre-Norman
|
10.9
|
35.9
|
7.9
|
27.0
|
6.6
|
1.1
|
0
|
0
|
5.6
|
0
|
0.5
|
4.1
|
|
45.1
|
|
Probably
pre-Norman
|
6.4
|
10.8
|
0
|
46.5
|
18.8
|
6.6
|
0
|
0
|
9.8
|
0
|
0.8
|
0.2
|
|
30.1
|
Results are shown as a percentage of
the total area covered by each site type
Table 30
Chi-squared values, up to 1km
radius: Land Classification map
|
Land
quality
|
High
|
Medium
|
Poor
|
Very poor
|
High / medium
|
Poor/
medium
|
Other
|
|
Chi-sq.
|
|
|
A
|
B1
|
B2
|
B3
|
B4
|
C1
|
C2
|
D
|
A/B1
|
A/B2
|
C/B
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rath
|
0
|
0.3
|
0.2
|
3.6
|
0
|
3.3
|
0.2
|
4.1
|
0.1
|
0.3
|
0.2
|
5.9
|
|
18.5
|
|
Probable rath
|
1.7
|
3.9
|
0
|
1.2
|
1.5
|
2.7
|
0.6
|
4.1
|
0.1
|
3.7
|
1.1
|
3.9
|
|
24.7
|
|
Platform rath
|
3.1
|
0
|
16.9
|
0.1
|
0.7
|
1.7
|
1.6
|
4.1
|
0
|
0.8
|
0.8
|
6.8
|
|
36.9
|
|
Raised rath
|
10.7
|
0
|
5.6
|
0.1
|
2.3
|
4.8
|
0.6
|
4.1
|
40.9
|
2.3
|
1.1
|
6.9
|
|
79.5
|
|
Rath and
souterrain
|
3.1
|
1.3
|
5.6
|
3.2
|
28.1
|
4.2
|
0.6
|
4.1
|
1.7
|
2.3
|
1.1
|
6.9
|
|
62.5
|
|
Large rath
|
3.1
|
0.5
|
24.7
|
1.9
|
0.5
|
4.8
|
0.6
|
4.1
|
2.6
|
2.3
|
1.1
|
6.9
|
|
53.4
|
|
Conjoined rath
|
3.1
|
15.1
|
5.6
|
55.7
|
0
|
4.8
|
0.6
|
4.1
|
2.6
|
2.3
|
1.1
|
6.9
|
|
102.3
|
|
Rath pair
|
3.1
|
14.8
|
5.6
|
46.6
|
0
|
0.4
|
0.6
|
4.1
|
2.6
|
2.3
|
1.1
|
6.8
|
|
88.3
|
|
Bivallate rath
|
7.3
|
0
|
1.5
|
11.1
|
7.2
|
4.8
|
0.6
|
4.1
|
2.6
|
1.6
|
1.1
|
6.8
|
|
48.9
|
|
Multivallate rath
|
3.1
|
0.2
|
1.3
|
19.4
|
13.2
|
4.8
|
0.6
|
4.1
|
2.6
|
76
|
1.1
|
6.9
|
|
133.6
|
|
Large enclosure
|
1.7
|
1.2
|
0.9
|
10.7
|
1
|
2
|
0.6
|
4.1
|
1.1
|
0
|
1.1
|
6.9
|
|
31.5
|
|
Cashel
|
0.5
|
10
|
5.6
|
1.7
|
115.4
|
0.1
|
0.6
|
3.9
|
2.9
|
2.3
|
1.1
|
6.9
|
|
151.3
|
|
Crannog
|
0.1
|
2
|
0.4
|
13.1
|
1.2
|
4.6
|
0.2
|
0.9
|
0.7
|
0
|
0.2
|
6.7
|
|
30.2
|
|
Mound
|
0.5
|
2.1
|
2.1
|
9.1
|
13.2
|
4.8
|
0.6
|
4.1
|
95.2
|
0.2
|
1.1
|
6.9
|
|
140.2
|
|
Souterrain
|
1.07
|
0.3
|
4.2
|
0.6
|
5.5
|
3.5
|
3.4
|
4.1
|
14.1
|
2.3
|
1.1
|
6.7
|
|
46.9
|
|
Ecclesiastical
sites
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pre-Viking
|
3.1
|
8.3
|
0
|
3.8
|
13
|
4.85
|
21.2
|
4.1
|
2.5
|
9.2
|
1.1
|
1.2
|
|
72.6
|
|
Pre-Norman
|
19.5
|
28.8
|
0.9
|
4.3
|
3.3
|
2.87
|
0.6
|
4.1
|
3.4
|
2.3
|
0.2
|
1.2
|
|
71.6
|
|
Probably
pre-Norman
|
3.3
|
1.2
|
5.6
|
1
|
2.3
|
0.65
|
0.6
|
4.1
|
19.3
|
2.3
|
0.1
|
6.5
|
|
47.2
|
Individual values become significant
at 3.8
Overall chi-squared vales become
significant at 19.68
Table 31
Site catchment analysis, up to 1km
radius: CORINE map
|
|
Artificial
surfaces
|
Arable
|
Agricultural
|
Forest
|
Scrub
|
Wetlands
|
Bodies
of
water
|
Good
pasture
|
Poor
pasture
|
Mixed
pasture
|
|
Total area
(Km2)
|
|
% of total area
|
3.83
|
4.96
|
33.27
|
1.75
|
7.39
|
3.13
|
4.55
|
18.98
|
4.1
|
13.25
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rath
|
4.9
|
5.4
|
41.4
|
0.8
|
0.9
|
0.5
|
0.3
|
24.7
|
4.3
|
16.4
|
|
1403.9
|
|
Probable rath
|
4.5
|
9.5
|
44.8
|
0.2
|
0.3
|
0.1
|
0.5
|
25.4
|
2.7
|
11.7
|
|
139.7
|
|
Platform rath
|
1.5
|
4.2
|
34.3
|
0.8
|
1.9
|
0.5
|
0.2
|
34.1
|
4.8
|
18
|
|
98.9
|
|
Raised rath
|
5.9
|
3
|
36.9
|
0.8
|
0
|
3.1
|
0.6
|
28.2
|
4.6
|
16.6
|
|
36.4
|
|
Rath and
souterrain
|
5.8
|
3.9
|
52.6
|
0.0
|
0.4
|
0
|
1.4
|
11.4
|
3.1
|
21.1
|
|
38.4
|
|
Large rath
|
2.1
|
0.7
|
29.7
|
0.1
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
49.2
|
7.5
|
10.5
|
|
16.7
|
|
Conjoined raths
|
0
|
0
|
93.9
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
6.03
|
0
|
0
|
|
5.9
|
|
Rath pair
|
2.3
|
2
|
43.3
|
0
|
0.9
|
0
|
0.1
|
29.9
|
5.6
|
15.6
|
|
29.06
|
|
Bivallate rath
|
7.5
|
3.3
|
55.8
|
0
|
0
|
0.5
|
0
|
24.4
|
0.1
|
8.2
|
|
53.8
|
|
Multivallate rath
|
9.1
|
5.7
|
26.9
|
2
|
0
|
0.3
|
0
|
24.3
|
5.6
|
25.9
|
|
15.6
|
|
Large enclosure
|
8.1
|
4.2
|
43.5
|
0.2
|
1.3
|
0
|
0.2
|
24.7
|
2.2
|
15.3
|
|
92.6
|
|
Cashel
|
1.9
|
1.2
|
42.8
|
5.1
|
3.3
|
0.2
|
1.9
|
11.4
|
12.6
|
19.5
|
|
125.8
|
|
Crannog
|
0.7
|
5.5
|
38.8
|
1.6
|
2.8
|
2.3
|
3.3
|
23.7
|
4.4
|
16.5
|
|
127.8
|
|
Mound
|
6.1
|
7.3
|
34.4
|
1.5
|
0
|
1.1
|
0
|
30.9
|
0.4
|
18.1
|
|
32.4
|
|
Souterrain
|
5.4
|
7.5
|
52.8
|
1.4
|
1.1
|
0.9
|
0.1
|
14.8
|
3.4
|
12.2
|
|
143.7
|
|
Ecclesiastical
sites
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pre-Viking
|
26.7
|
2.4
|
37.3
|
0
|
0
|
0.7
|
0.7
|
18.3
|
4.5
|
10.3
|
|
40.4
|
|
Pre-Norman
|
15.3
|
7.2
|
47.1
|
1.4
|
1
|
1.1
|
0.1
|
12.6
|
2.5
|
11.3
|
|
45.1
|
|
Probably
pre-Norman
|
6.9
|
4.5
|
56.6
|
0.2
|
1.4
|
0.3
|
0.1
|
21.3
|
5.1
|
3.2
|
|
30
|
Results are shown as a percentage of
the total area covered by each site type
Continue to
the remainder of the article
|
.