related article>

The first level of construction consisted of four wattle houses, side by side, which were orientated roughly east-west, thus respecting the line of the Poddle rather than the Liffey. These early houses (Structures R, O, P) were what Dr Wallace defines as ‘Type 1’ house (i.e., a Dublin-type house), containing a central hearth, flanked by benches on either side and a roof supported by four internal posts. There was also evidence of irregular property boundaries and at least one wattle path. What was also important was the construction of what appear to represent animal pens (Structure CK and CG) on the western side on the site, where the land was actively reclaimed or built up artificially and then divided into plots (Properties 1-3), giving a rural aspect to the settlement. These embryonic ‘plots’ are very important, as they form consistent property boundaries, some of which survive and endure until the early twelfth century at least.

The second phase of this early layout, also pre-dating AD 917, was similar in type and at least two of the Type I structures underwent several refurbishments (Structures O and P) rather than replacement. Also of note were the distinctive large circular wattle pens, which were possibly pig pens (Structure Q and Structure CC). Of most importance at this level, however, was the substantial mettled road, in the middle of the site, which was clearly not simply the result of successive pathways but was deliberately laid down as a road over a demolished circular pen (Structure R), suggestive of some sort of collective rather than individual action (Simpson 1999, 20).

These Viking levels, then, appear to relate to a resident population concentrated at the confluence of the Liffey and the Poddle but with an emphasis on the Poddle watercourse. What was crucial, however, was that for the first time, a date in the ninth century could be postulated for these deposits and thus they related directly to the tenth-century evidence, which sealed them. The immediate tenth-century levels (post AD 917) were also very revealing as they demonstrated that a dramatic ‘urban renewal’ had taken place at the western side of the site, closest to Fishamble Street, which saw the sweeping away of the mixed collection of domestic and farm buildings that had been there previously and the establishment of stout houses within defined and organized properties. A total of six plots were uncovered and nine distinct building levels identified, spanning the period from the early tenth to the twelfth century. By way of contrast, the earliest part of the site on the east, towards the Poddle, declined rapidly in importance at this time and became a large industrial area composed of shed-like structures, open-air hearths and mettled surfaces.

This fresh building impetus can presumably be tied into the documented return of the Dublin Vikings in AD 917, who came back in greater number, establishing a larger settlement, which was eventually enclosed by the defensive banks in the mid-to-late tenth century. Thus there was a clear shift in the emphasis of settlement from the Poddle in the east, westwards to the Fishamble Street/Wood Quay area and Liffey frontage. What was also clearly evident was that the settlement, contrary to popular belief, had not been entirely abandoned in AD 902 but that some occupation had continued in Dublin in the documented break, i.e. between AD 902 and AD 917.

The excavations at Temple Bar West, then, did tell us much about the development of the early town and established that there was possibly domestic habitation in the crook of the Poddle/Liffey confluence in the ninth century, focusing attention on this area as the possible location for the longphort. It is an attractive theory as the topographical location is one much favoured by longphort sites, in the angle of a main river and its tributary thus protected on three sides by water, i.e. the longphort sites of Athlunkard, co. Limerick, Dunrally, co Laois and the recently discovered site at Woodstown co. Waterford (Fig. 5).ⁱⁱ However, the excavations produced no indication of any artificial defences on either the eastern side or northern side despite the fact that both the Poddle and Liffey are tidal, a factor that would have presumably reduced the defensive capabilities of the site. The documentary sources tell us that the longphort was comprehensively destroyed by the Irish in AD 849 and, if not defended then, was surely defended afterwards (Simpson 2000, 32-33).ⁱⁱⁱ It may, however, be a mistake to emphasis the lack of defences at Temple Bar West since this area became part of the main settlement in the tenth century and was rapidly subsumed, with possible damage to earlier deposits.

<back       next>