R Warner

An Iron Age lead pin from Co. Donegal

Ryan, M., (ed) Irish Antiquities (Dublin: 1998), 111-122.

AN IRON AGE LEAD PIN FROM COUNTY DONEGALR. warner

ThepinThe object under discussion is a small lead pin (Figs 1 and 2). It came, as we shall discover

below, from sandhills at Magheramore, near Ardara, Co. Donegal.1 The pin was originally7.2cm long but is now bent almost double; it weighs lOAg. The shank is 5.7cm long with a

simple point and has a subrectangular, faceted section. The shoulder is at right angles to the

shank, and in the angle is a lobe. The shoulder protrudes about 1cm, then turns almost

parallel to the shank and widens. On the front of this neck are three knobs. The ring-head is

unbroken, ofOAcm internal and l.Ocm external diameter, and is separated from the neck bya groove. The ring is of lozenge section and is thicker at the front than at the back. It bears

a fine ridge on each side. On its front is a raised decorative 'comma', consisting of a.singleknob with a pointed-oval lobe running from it. The black, oxide-patinated surface is

minutely pitted and has been removed by weathering on one complete side to reveal the lead.

Fine tool marks are visible, especially on_the shank, which was probably bent in antiquity.

The pin belongs to the ring-headed class of Irish Iron Age pins which have been

categorised and discussed by B. Raftery (1983; 1984, 157-75). However, it does not readily

fall into anyone of his four types. The originally simple, straight shank and the use of 'plastic'boss-and-lobe ornament have their closest affinities with Raftery's type 2, though this would

be an unusually small and simple example. Too few of this type are known for us to draw

distributional conclusions (Fig. 3), but one was found in coastal sandhills at Grange, Co.

Sligo (the only other ring-headed pin to come from sandhills, as far as we know). The

annularity of the ring is more typical of the rather non-specific type 1, although this is, I

believe, of little significance. More tellingly our pin has, in its shoulder angle, a little lobe or

moulding absent on all type 2 pins but found on several of the enamel-stud-decorated type

3 pins (a basically north-eastern type) and on a great deal of other Irish Iron Age metalwork.

The use of the front of the shoulder for incorporated, rather than riveted, decoration is not

known on type 2 pins but can be found on the type 3 and, with similar knob clusters, on the

westerly distributed but otherwise quite different type 4 ring-headed pins. I conclude that

the maker of this pin was most familiar with, and was working within the artistic milieu of,

the type 2 ring-headed pins but that he was incorporating ideas from other contemporary

Irish Iron Age metalwork. If I must, in Procrustean fashion, place this pin into a designated

typology I must call it (a variant of) type 2. As for the date of the piece, the artistic and

associative evidence would indicate (for type 2 ring-headed pins) the second century BC, or

not far off. The 'plastic' style of decoration, with knobs (sometimes multiple) and connected

lobes, is quite typical of the three-dimensional variant of the Con,tinental 'Waldalgesheim'

style of La Tene art. This found its way to Ireland in the third century BC on such items as

111

Irish Antiquities

Ocm 5

:"'~'I

"1\: f1/~

';{i~:1:\

"

Fig. l-Magheramore ring-headedpin (drawing: D. Crone;scale on drawing).

the Ardnaglug, Co. Roscommon (formerly 'Clonmacnoise'), torc and was then used on a few

early Irish Iron Age objects, in particular the style 2 ring-headed pins, of which this is, as Ihave argued, an example. I will show elsewhere that the original inspiration of the class 2 and

3 ring-headed pins was a group of Continental brooches of just this date. The onlyarchaeologically recovered style 2 ring-headed pin came from the Iron Age buildings within

the great ritual enclosure at Navan, Co. Armagh. The context gives a date of the third or

second century BC for this object (Raftery 1997 for the object; Warner 1997 for the date).The pin is made of lead, and is therefore quite unusable as an ornament. All the other

ring-headed pins, in common with most Iron Age ornaments, are of cast bronze.

Furthermore, this pin gives every appearance of having been tooled rather than cast, and ofbeing unfinished (the shank is faceted, not round-sectioned). The complexity of many Iron

Age objects, especially those with highly three-dimensional decoration such as the style 2

ring-headed pins, meant that they had to be cast by the 'investment' or 'lost wax' method.

112

')

--

An Iron Age Lead Pin

,J

Fig.2-Magheramore

ring-headed

pin (photo:

copyrightUlster

Museum).

This requires that a model be carved or shaped in a pliable and low-melting-point material,

with much or all of its final detail in place. The model is surrounded (except for a pouring

funnel and air-holes) by a ball of clay,which is then fired both to harden the clay and to cause

the model to melt and fUn out. Bronze is then poured into the mould, which must be

completely broken to remove the cast object. Clearly this method requires a new model anda new mould for each new object. This is, I believe, just such a model: (bees?)wax and lead

are materials which lend themselves to modelling for investment casting. Being organic,waste wax or unused wax models are unlikely to survive long burial. Lead, on the other hand,

both waste and models, would be expected to appear in the archaeological record were it soused.

On the evidence of what should be interpreted as lead models it is now clear that 'lost-

lead' was used (though not necessarily exclusively) in the early medieval period, especially in

Ireland (Craddock 1989, 171). We may cite the model for a brooch pin from a sixthccentury

AD brooch factory at Clogher, Co. Tyrone (Warner 1989), on the shank of which is faceting

113

Irish Antiquities

0 1

.821 2+

.0

Fig. 3-Distribution of Iron Age ring-headedpins.

Key: ]: Tjpe 2 pins. 2: All other types.

very similar to that on the Magheramore pin (we may suppose either that the models were

yet to be smoothed 'Or that this finishing was done on the final casting). It is a strange

coincidence that another lead model, this time for the loose ring of an eighth-century pin-

brooch, was found in the Dooey sandhills, a fairly short distance north of the findspot of our

pin (0 Floinn 1989). Significantly, both Clogher and Dooey produced other evidence of

contemporary metalworking in situ (Warner 1989; O'Meadhra 1987, 36-7). On the other

hand, no evidence of the use of 'lost-lead' casting in the Iron Age has hitherto been described,

either in Britain or Ireland. The thoroughly explored British Iron Age workshop of Gussage

All Saints produced enormous quantities of casting debris from investment moulds but no

lead, and the use of wax alone must be inferred (Foster 1980). One is tempted to explain the

use oflead rather than beeswax in Ireland (although the former does not, of course, preclude

the latter) by making reference to the claim of the Roman writer Solinus in the third centuryAD that 'no bees have ever been there [in Ireland]' (Kenney 1929, 134). Unfortunately, in

the early medieval period, when lead models were, as we have seen, commoner, so were bees

(Charles-Edwards and Kelly 1983).

c

114

An Iron Age Lead Pin

The finder

From the 1940s to the 1960s the late T. B. Graham of Bangor and his family regularly

spent their holidays in County Donegal. In 1945 Graham wa~ accompanying some friends

through the Dunfanaghy sandhills when one of them found what proved to be an importantRoman brooch (Graham and Jope 1950).2 The finder gave the brooch to Graham, who,

stimulated by this discovery, became an assiduous and dedicated searcher of the middens that

litter the Donegal coastal sand-dunes.3 He was almost always accompanied actively on these

searches by his wife, and occasionally by his children and friends. His extensive collection,

which includes some fine archaeological material left to him by Mrs Montgomery ofDunfanaghy in 1956,4 now belongs to his son and daughter.5 Graham was not an

archaeologist and was quite unaware of the cultural status or archaeological worth of most of

the objects. Many of those which we would now regard as of major importance he was lessthan excited about, and he often reserved his enthusiasm for 'artefacts' that we would

probably dismiss. He was, as a result of this unchecked enthusiasm, extraordinarilyunselective, and while, from a present perspective, we may be struck by the unimportance of

the bulk of material he picked up and kept, we must also reflect that if he had been more

selective he would undoubtedly have rejected some quite important artefacts, including the

one that forms the subject of this discussion, which he thought was nrodern. Perhaps as aresult of his profession, town clerk of Bangor, Graham was a carefUl recorder. His 'better'

discoveries were catalogued in a series of notebooks, with a number, location, date of finding,

a fine drawing, and often -other informative or anecdotal matters. The boxes containing

uncatalogued material were labelled with location and date of discovery. His location entries

usually give us the general area of dunes (for instance 'Maghera') and the name of a midden.

Unfortunately the midden names were coined by himself and, as it does not appear that

he marked anything on maps or drew any maps of his own, there are few clues as to exactly

where they were. In 1994 his son, Sean Graham, donated a large amount of unsorted and

un catalogued material to the Ulster Museum on condition that we would sort it. This

material consisted mostly of natural stone, recent or undiagnostic animal bones and shells,which were discarded. A small remainder, which has been retained by the Museum, consisted

mostly of metal fragments. Among these fragments was a lead pin in a matchbox bearing the

label 'Pigeon Midden, Tramore, 18.8.57. Probably modern': this is the pin we are discussing.

The findspotIn his notebooks Graham refers to 'Tramore' on a number of occasions. Some objects are

described as from 'Tramore', others from 'Tramore, near Rosbeg', and several from one of

five middens, four of which are qualified by 'near Rosbeg'. 'Pigeon Midden' does not appear

in the notebooks. Trawmore Strand, south of Rosbeg on Loughros More Bay, is certainly

Graham's 'Tram ore near Rosbeg' and I shall describe it later. Bur the label for our pin does

not have the 'near Rosbeg' qualification. Tramore, 'large beach', is, unsurprisingly, a fairly

common name for large beaches in County Donegal, and most are backed by dunes. We find

the name first at Carrickart on the north coast, where it is backed by extensive sandhills

(Glenree) with known middens (Lacey 1983, 57, no. 220). Graham heard of and searched

Glenree only in 1964. Moving westwards, the very extensive sandhills behind Tramore

115

Irish Antiquities

~b

Dak-rosL,'7CJaQ' cl

~

2kmTrawmore

Strand

f

1 mile

l.ou9l;ros A,

'V/OreSay

\3

Fig. 4--Location of Magheramore. Sand beaches close-stippled, mud and gravel open stipple,

sandhills vertical shading. Open symbol = Magheramore p[n. Closedsymbols = Romano-British

imports. Contours at lOOm, 200m and 300m.

9

Strand at Dunfanaghy have long been known to be midden-rich (Lacey 1983, 56, no. 216).

Graham searched this area only until 1953 - it was the source of his important Iron Age

artefacts - but he seems always to have referred to the place as 'Horn Head' (the northernend) and 'Murro' (the southern end). On the west coast, Tramore Strand near Naran is

backed by sandhills which have produced extensive middens (Lacey 1983, 56, no. 210-

Clooney). Graham searched a midden here which he described as 'Cashelgolan, Nr. Narin'.

It is unlikely that he would have described other middens in these dunes simply as 'Tramore'.

Lastly, and further south, there is the Trawmore Strand near Rosbeg which, as we have seen,

Graham referred to as 'Tramore near Rosbeg'. Magheramore is the correct name for these

extensive sandhills, and it is the name Graham used for their south-eastern part. He began

holidaying here from 1954 (staying at Kiltooris, just north of the beach), and it is notable

that, according to his catalogue, all of his searching from 1954 until 1959 was in the sandhills

between Bunbeg and Ardara, especially Dooey, 'Tramore' (and 'Tramore near Rosbeg') and

Magheramore. During the holiday of 1957 in which our pin was found we know he searched

116v

An Iron Age Lead Pin"

at 'Tramore', Magheramore, Maghera (across the bay to the south) and Dooey. There is every

reason, therefore, to believe that Graham's 'Tramore' was the Rosbeg Trawmore.

Trawmore Strand (Fig. 4) is a llan-Iong stretch of beach facing west into Loughros More

Bay. At its southern end the promontory of Carrickalahagh separates it from south-facing

Ballinreavy Strand. These two beaches are the western and southern margins of the very

extensive sandhills of Magheramore. Inland the dunes are bounded by rough pasture, lakesand wetland, much of which is a wildlife reserve. The area of the dunes is approximately

2km2, with sand-covered lowlands extending further. The sandhills are uneven, and many

rise to 30m OD. It is also very clear, when the contours on the 1909 six-inch map are

compared with those on the present (1993) 1: 50,000 map, that they are fairly mobile despite

the present covering of marram grass. The area of the sandhills is divided into two roughly

equal blocks by a slight valley running between Sheskinmore Lough and Carrickalahaghpromontory. It seems likely, from the rather vague information in Graham's notebooks, thathis 'Tramore', with its five middens, was the north-western block behind Trawmore Strand,

and that his 'Magheramore', with some twelve middens, was the south-eastern block behind

Ballinreavy Strand. Most of the 'Tramore' block is in Magheramore townland but it extends

into Mullyvea townland. I believe that Graham's use of the beach name for this group of

middens implies that they were relatively dose to the beach. It is unfortunate that the part

of the dunes nearest the beach has since been destroyed for a caravan park. The pin underdiscussion probably came, therefore, from these dunes behind Trawmore Strand and should

be referred to as the 'Magheramore pin'. I shall refer below to this whole dune area as

Magheramore.

Middens have been described in print from these sandhills (Knowles 1901, 345,

'Loughros More'). I visited Magheramore several times in 1993 (before I was aware of the

pin) and spent some time in the dunes, but saw no 'middens'. They may well have appearedfleetingly, soon to be re-covered (for recent transient middens at Magheramore see Lacey

1983,58, no. 229). I shall briefly clarify the use, or rather misuse, of the term 'midden'. True

coastal middens are, typically, small areas or mounds of archaeological refuse left by people

exploiting the shoreline for food. They are strictly in situ, might be of a single archaeological

period, are usually rich in sea-shells and need not be in sand-dunes (Wilson 1995). Dark

layersin sand-dunes are bands of buried soil and vegetation which have built up on the sand

whilst this was stable. Black layerscontaining artefacts might be buried middens, bur might

also be dark layers containing the normal remains of intensive and extensive habitation

(Knowles 1891,622). In this sense a black layer is not different from an occupation site in

normal land-soil and does not imply seashore scavenging. When dunes erode and shift, the

middens and black layers and their contents spill down into the erosion hollow, where

artefacts and other debris become concentrated on the surface (a very good photograph is in

J. Raftery 1951, fig. 29). Artefacts from different periods are often mixed together at this

stage and can then become re-covered (and re-eroded ad infinitum). 'Midden' hunters of thepast were often exploring black layers or erosion mixes rather than true middens, and the

term has been widely misused.

117

Irish Antiquities

Conclusions

Graham picked up at Magheramore numerous small fragments of bronze which might

be metalworking debris, in common with almost all the sandhill sites searched by himself and

by others. He also found there several other fragments of lead. Bur there is not the slightest

reason to associate any of these objects with our pin or to believe that they are of Iron Agedate. On the contrary, and again in common with other Donegal sandhills (6 Floinn 1995),

by far the greatest proportion of metal artefacts from the sandhills are medieval and early

modern in date.6 We cannot therefore propose any sort of archaeological contextual

explanation for the presence of the pin in these dunes. County Donegal has produced a fair

amount of Iron Age material, though very little of the classic 'La Tene' derivative group.

Indeed, Rahery (1983) lists only three artefacts from the county that belong, in his view, to

the Irish 'La Tene' Iron Age.? To these we may now add our pin. Caulfield (1977) lists eight'beehive'querns of arguably Iron Age date from the county.8 Finally, there are a number of

gold ribbon tores, whose date is controversial bur which I believe are all Iron Age (Eogan1983).9 There is one Continental 'La Tene' import, and eight Roman or Romano-British

imports.1O We would expect, for a county with the topography of Donegal, that a fairnumber of the native objects should be coastal (within a few kilometres of the coast), and

indeed we find (Fig. 5) that more than half of them are so located. Likewise we might expect,

and I have eXplained this elsewhere (Warner 1976), that the imported objects would tendtowards a littoral (close to the shore) distribution, particularly behind accessible beaches.

Such we find to be the case - all the Donegal imports being thus located. On a mappublished (Warner 1976) from the evidence of a nineteenth-century Coastal Pilot I marked

five natural refuges on the County Donegal coast. Sheep Haven and Loughros More Bay (I

would now add Ballyness Bay) have convenient beaches and have produced ancient imports

in the adjacent dunes. We may therefore accept that the explanation for littorally depositedexotic material (imports) is that it arrived by sea and was dropped by (intentionally orunintentionally) beached owners. What rather surprises me is that two of the four native

objects of 'La Tene' derivative type (including our pin), the only personal ornaments, also

have a littoral provenance, which is not common elsewhere in Ireland for native Iron Age

artefacts. There is no solid evidence that the dune areas of Horn Head and Magheramorewere places of normal Iron Age settlement, and no querns have been found in littorallocations. One might be tempted to conclude that natives were in these littoral locations on

brief occasions in order to trade with, or at least exploit in some way, the foreigners who were

sailing that coast and beaching there. Certainly Irish ring-headed pins did find their way

abroad (a type 2 example comes from the Scottish island of Coli, for instance; Raftery 1983,no. 413). It will be seen that the Donegal ribbon torcs are also littoral and coastal, so were

they perhaps trading in gold?!! This is a tempting explanation for the tOte distribution and

some of the other artefacts, but not, I think, for our pin model. In addition to the

littoral/inland division of finds I draw attention to their distributional groupings. On thenorth coast we have what might be called the Horn Head cluster (H on Fig. 5) - all littoral,

one native 'La Tene' artefact, a hoard of ribbon torcs and five Romano-British imports. Onthe west coast is the Loughros cluster (L on Fig. 5), almost identical to H - one native 'La

Tene', three (much later) Romano-British imports. In the north-east, inland, a group of

.J

118

H

'::':S'Sc.,:'.::-

..:./~:~\""':.:

20 MIles

An Iron Age Lead Pin

Fig. 5-Iron Age

arteftcts from

County Donegal

and adjacent areas(land above 150m

stippled).

Key:1. Native 'La Tene'

..'

type.2. Gold ribbon tores.

3. Imported arteftets(1 and 2+).

4. 'Beehive'quans.

5. Possiblehillforts.H = Horn Head

cluster;L =

Loughros cluster;

B = Ballyshannon

cluster;5 = Swillycluster.

'beehive querns' cluster at the head of Lough Swilly (S on Fig. 5). The hillfort ofCroaghan

(Lacey 1983, 115, no. 703), with its internal mound, is adjacent to two of these querns.

Finally there is, in the south-west, a coastal cluster around the mouth of the River Erne at

Ballyshannon (B on Fig. 5). This cluster is a mixture, containing two native 'La Tene'

artefacts, two ribbon torcs, two 'beehive' querns and a Continental 'La Tene' import.

Adjacent to one of the native artefacts is the hillfort of Glasbolie (Lacey 1983, 115, no. 704),

again with an internal mound. I am not claiming that these hillforts are Iron Age but I amstruck by the locational 'associations'. Respecting this cluster we may note the distribution of

the probably Iron Age ring-barrows in County Donegal (Lacey 1983, 100, fig. 52). They arevirtually absent from the county except for a cluster of nine around the Erne mouth,

coinciding with our B artefact cluster. I have argued elsewhere (Warner 1991) that Donegal

was, in the Iron Age, occupied by the 'quem' users rather ~han the 'La Tene' users. The

mainly inland distribution of the querns (Fig. 5) should be contrasted with the completelylittoral or coastal location of the few 'La Tene' -type objects (and with the totally littoral

imports). Only one of our four clusters mixes the types. I would also draw attention to the

locational 'association' of the La Tene-type Irish objects and the imports, while at the same

time remembering that the objects within each location can differ in date by up to 600 years.

I am implyingthat there is a common 'mechanism'- that our littoral 'La Tene' -type objects

119

0** 2

.. 3@ 40 5

r

Irish Antiquities

should be regarded as 'imports', but from other parts of Ireland. The owner of the

Magheramore pin model, who we need not doubt was a craftsman, might well have been of

the peripatetic class of craftsmen often postulated but seldom proved, selling his ornaments

to the seaborne travellers.12 I am indeed ready to accept that he was a peripatetic craftsman,

but not that he was trading from these sands. I suggest rather that he, and the owner of the

Horn Head brooch, were themselves seaborne travellers from eastern parts of Ireland

(possibly trading with local natives) who beached as if they were foreigners. The sand-spit

known as O'Connor's Island (Streedagh Point; Grange), Co. Sligo, from which a type 2 ring-

headed pin came, is, as the occupants of three Armada ships were to discover nearly 2000

years later, a likely and convenient place to get wrecked. 13 It is of interest that the types of

native 'La Tene' ornament represented in these Donegal (and Sligo) littoral sandhilllocations

have also been found at the ritual site ofNavan, Co. Armagh.

References

Bateson, D. 1973 Roman material from Ireland: a reconsideration. Proceedingsof the Royal

Irish Academy 73C, 21-98.

Caulfield, S. 1977 The beehive quern in Ireland. Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquariesof Ireland 107, 104--38.

Charles-Edwards, T. and Kelly, F. 1983 Bechbretha. Dublin.

Collins, A. 1970 Bronze Age moulds in Ulster. UlsterJournal of Archaeology33, 23-36.Craddock, P. 1989 Metalworking techniques. In Youngs 1989, 170-4.

D'Evelyn, A. 1933 A sandhill settlement, Maghera, Co. Donegal. Journal of the Royal Society

of Antiquaries of Ireland 63, 88-100.Eogan, G. 1983 Ribbon torcs in Britain and Ireland. In A. O'Connor and D. Clarke (eds),

From the Stone Age to the 'Forty-five,87-126. Edinburgh.

Foster, J. 19430 The Iron Age mouldsfrom GussageAll Saints. London.Graham, T. and Jope, E. 1950 A bronze brooch and ibex-headed pin from the sandhills at

Dunfanaghy, Co. Donegal. UlsterJournal of Archaeology 13, 54-6.

Kenney, J. 1929 The sourcesfor the early history of Ireland New York. (Reprinted Dublin1979.)

Kilbride-Jones, H. 1980 Zoomorphic penannular brooches.London.Knowles, W 1889 Report on the prehistoric remains from the sand-hills of the coast of

Ireland. Proceedingsof the Royal Irish Academy 1, 173-87.

Knowles, W 1891 Second report on the prehistoric remains from the sandhills of the coast

of Ireland. Proceedingsof the Royal Irish Academy 1, 612-25.Knowles, W 1901 The fourth report on the prehistoric remains from the sandhills of the

coast of Ireland. Proceedingsof the Royal Irish Academy 6, 331-89.

Lacey, B. (ed.) 1983 ArchaeologicalSurvey of County Donegal Lifford.6 Floinn, R. 1989 Entry in Youngs 1989, 193.

6 Floinn, R. 1995 Sandhills, silver and shrines: fine metalwork of the medieval period from

Donegal. In L. Ronayne and M. Dunlevy (eds), Donegal: history and society, 85-148.Lifford.

')

120

An Iron Age Lead Pin

O'Meadhra, U. 1987 Motifpieces from Ireland. vo!. 2. Stockholm.

Raftery, B. 1983 A catalogue0/ Irish Iron Age antiquities. Marburg.Raftery, B. 1984 La Tene in Ireland. Marburg.cRaftery, B. 1997 Discussion of diagnostic finds. In Waterman 1997, 90-5.Raftery, J. 1951 PrehistoricIreland. London.

Warner, R. 1976 Some observations on the context and importation of exotic material in

Ireland, from the first century BC to the second century AD. Proceedingso/the Royal Irish

Academy 76C, 267-92.

Warner, R. 1989 Entry in Youngs 1989, 195.Warner, R. 1991 Cultural intrusion in the Early Iron Age. Emania 9,44-52.

Warner, R. 1997 The non-ceramic artifacts and the chronology of Site B. In Waterman1997,100-5.

Waterman, D.M. 1997 Excavations at Navan Fort 1961-71. Belfast.

Wilson, P. 1995 Sand dunes and archaeology. ArchaeologyIreland 9 (2),24-6.

Youngs, S. (ed.) 1989 'The work o/angel/' masterpieceso/Celtic metalwork, 6th-9th centuriesAD. London.

Endnotes

1 Magheramore townland, Co. Donegal (grid reE G 6895). The pin is Ulster MuseumA.7958.

2 Graham and Jope failed to describe the precise findspot of these objects in their published

article, giving only the general provenance 'sandhills at Dunfanaghy', a provenance

repeated by all later writers. Though not incorrect, the provenance is imprecise. I therefore

offer the following extra information gleaned from Graham's manuscript (copy in Ulster

Museum, original with S. Graham):

'Poor-mans' brooch:found 7.6.1945 by Mrs Barbour in the company ofT Graham and

given to Graham by her. From the 'sandhills in the valley leading to Tramore beach from

the river from New Lake, and just below the One-Man's-Path'. Probably the townland of

Corganive Glebe at about grid reE B 9936. Found in sand rather than in an identifiable'midden' .7bex-headed'pin: found 5.9.1948 byT. Graham. From a 'kitchen midden' apparently inthe same sandhills.

3 Graham searched middens at Tranarossan, Glenree near Carrickart, Dunfanaghy/Horn

Head, Ballyness, Inishinny near Bunbeg, Dooey in Gweebarra Bay, Naran, Magheramore

near Rosbeg and Maghera. The whole collection will be described on another occasion.For other references to Donegal middens see Lacey 1983, 55-8 and the references therein,and 6 Floinn 1995.

4 Much of the Montgomery material, which was catalogued by Graham, is described as

coming from 'Horn Head'. This includes the 'Navan'-style brooch, no. 391 of Raftery's

corpus (1983). I believe 'Horn Head' should be interpreted as the extensive tract of

sandhills at the neck of Horn Head, west of Dunfanaghy, from which the objects in note2 came.

121

Irish Antiquities

5 It is regrettable that the objects were all removed from County Donegal in contravention

of the National Monuments legislation of the Republic ofIreland, although J. Rafrery had

catalogued part of the Montgomery collection. A full copy of the Graham catalogue has

been deposited with the National Museum of Ireland.

6 For instance, Graham found three fine sixteenth-century spurs in the 'Tramore' dunes.

7 A horsebit (Rafrery no. 2) from Ballymagrorty. Raftery rather misplaces it on his map-thefindspot is quite close to the coast and also very close to Donegal's only demonstrable

hillfon at Glasbolie; the 'Navan'-style pin from Horn Head (see note 3); a 'pendant'

(Raftery no. 199) from 'Inishowen'.

8 Letterfad, 'Inishowen' (2), Ballindrait (2), Teevickmoy, Mullans and Churchland Quarters.

9 Hoard from 'Inishowen' (Eogan nos 9-22); torc from Ballyshannon (Eogan no. 7); torc

from 'Bundrews' (Eogan no. 8; probably Bundrowes near Ballyshannon); hoard fromLargatreany on Horn Head (Eogan nos 23-9); unlocated 'Co. Donegal' torc (no. 30).

10This is a higher number of imports than for any similar length of Irish coast. They are:

'anthropoid' dagger (Rafrery no. 244), from the sea-bed off Ballyshannon; Romano-British

brooch from Ballyness sandhills (Bateson 1973, 64, no. 3); Romano-British brooch from

Horn Head sandhills (see note 2); Romano-British 'ibex-headed' pin from Horn Head

sandhills (see note 2); Romano-British 'ibex-headed'pin from Magheramore sandhills (6Floinn 1995); two Roman coins from the Horn Head sandhills (Bateson 1973,43, no. 3;

Graham catalogue); zoomorphic pin from Magheramore sandhills (Graham catalogue);

early zoomorphic penannular brooch from Maghera sandhills (Kilbride-Jones 1980, 88, no.12).

11There is a tantalising reference to 'a small strap of gold, broken off some ornament' from

Maghera sandhills (D'Evelyn 1933,98), where a Romano-British import was found. One

would like to believe that this was a fragment of a ribbon torc, but the piece is not with

the rest of D'Evelyn's Maghera material in the Ulster Museum.12Or G. Ramsey has pointed out to me that Bronze Age moulds are also found, in County

Donegal, exclusIvely in the coastal sandhills (Collins 1970). I can only suggest that this

was for trading purposes, but this particular phenomenon requires far more study.

13Middens have been reponed at Streedagh by Knowles (1889, 183).

122 :;