Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland . These slopes donot correspond with the ditch slopes, which are as abrupt as thenature of the soil will allow. The mound in the east fort is anothersepulchral point, but then we have the bailey. I would say thatthese were originally sepulchral rings of a pre-Celtic people, andthat they were used by the Celts practically unchanged. Theirproximity is another point in favour of sepulchral origin. I attributethe deep ditches and the bailey to subsequent Norman occupation. But there are points against this view. First, the westernfort is aberr
Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland . These slopes donot correspond with the ditch slopes, which are as abrupt as thenature of the soil will allow. The mound in the east fort is anothersepulchral point, but then we have the bailey. I would say thatthese were originally sepulchral rings of a pre-Celtic people, andthat they were used by the Celts practically unchanged. Theirproximity is another point in favour of sepulchral origin. I attributethe deep ditches and the bailey to subsequent Norman occupation. But there are points against this view. First, the westernfort is aberrant as to shape for a sepulchral work. The eastern forttoo, though more regular, is hardly a stereotyped ring. However,as regards these points, the central garth at Rathra is as aberrantas the eastern fort, and the west termination of Corker leads me toinfer that, as in all other earthworks, there are occasional widedepartures from regulation. This has no reference to the later workto the west of Corker {Journal , 1914, p. 353). RATH. # ^ \ ?A v^O 1 „ f C =16 !I«56YDS _. J _ _66 YDS ^ /A
Size: 1653px × 1511px
Photo credit: © The Reading Room / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., bookcentury1900, bookdecade1910, bookidjournalofroy, bookyear1915
