Excavation Discoveries at the Diamond Ballycastle

November 2009. Daniel J McGill B Sc.

Excavations by the Water Service close to the old castle site and across the
Diamond in front of Holy Trinity Church revealed a number of interesting
discoveries. The plan shows their approximate locations.

The first (a) had the appearance of a brick floor laid on lime mortar.
(photo’ dated 18/11).The location was at the
entrance to the old Poor Row where no
buildings have ever been recorded. As with all
these discoveries, there was no time allowed for
further investigation and the sites were revealed
with a large toothed digger bucket. The whole
trench had been dug to a depth of four to five
metres along the whole length of Poor Row
where the glacial till overlaid the limestone
bedrock to a depth of four metres or more. (I
was unable to observe the dig along there).
 The next discovery was
a dry stone well (b), a few
yards to the north. (24/11).
This well was five metres
deep with a drystone wall
cut into the virgin glacial
till. The side of the well was
broken open allowing a
good view.

This photograph
shows a close-up view of the
well wall. Every stone was
fitted tight against its
neighbour. There may have
been traces of lime mortar,
but I couldn’t get close

enough to see. The well was

substantially damaged through
further pipe laying work. This well
may have contained valuable
dating material. Its location
suggests a relationship with the old
Tower House/Castle which
occupied the adjacent house site
until 1854.
 Unfortunately the well
was being filled with stone, but
the photographs show it to be
in a good stable condition.
Trevor Pricethe archaeologist
from Gahan & Long. retreived
a small polished flint point
from the well. (26/11).

The next discovery (c) was a

brick built culvert which ran
along the whole length of the trench in the Diamond a branch of this culvert
headed into the churchyard. This culvert was dated to mid C19th and cut
through other discoveries.(25/11)

The most significant discovery in the trench was a one metre wide stone
wall (d), which was four metres deep. The ground on the eastern side of the
wall was virgin glacial till. It looked as if the trench for the wall was able to
support itself as there was no evidence of backfill, in four metres! The wall
comprised of quarried black stone with the occasional well rounded ‘river’
stone using a good quality lime mortar. The foundation was almost on the
limestone bedrock. The alignment of this wall differed from any nearby existing
wall on the surface, however there is an old section of wall east of the
churchyard wall marked (l) on the plan which is similarly aligned. (26/11). I
have alignment photos of all the finds. This photo shows where the wall, on
the west side of the trench, has been cut into for a manhole casing (left of

photo).

This previous exposure was not

reported by the contractors to my
knowledge. The top of the wall is 0.3
metres below present surface. A
compacted surface appears on the
north side of the wall at about one
metre depth.

The next photo shows where the

Victorian culvert was cut through the
top of the wall on the east side of the
trench. (below the pipes). This one
metre wide wall appears to continue
into the churchyard. The wall here appears to extend to about three metres
below present surface.

The next feature is a patch of dark earth containing pieces of charcoal.

This has the appearance of a Cess pit (e). This was just to the north of the wall.
(30/11).
Eight metres north of
the one metre wide
wall another smaller
wall (f), appeared on
the same alignment
as the other. ( centre
of lower photo,
previous page). This
wall was half a metre
wide and only two
metres deep, built of
similar material. The
top of this wall, shown below, was about a half metre below the present
surface. There is an older very hard gravely surface level with the top of this
wall (g), giving the appearance of it possibly having been levelled and that
surface laid over the top. The ground either side of the lower part of the wall is
still natural. (30/11).

The above photo of the small wall looking east shows the wall being
removed at
centre, the level
ground at left is a
compacted gravel
surface. There
was another
surface layer
0.3m below this.
(30/11). At left
we see the stones
having fallen out
revealing the
Victorian brick
culvert behind.
The next photo shows the side of the trench further north where it is clear that
the ground has been made up above the bed of the old course of the river.

This is probably the material that was used at the end of the C18th to fill
the Diamond level when the blind River was enclosed in a stone culvert.
(1/12). The lowest layer appears to be the natural glacial till then over this is
the first layer of mixed soil and stone, then another layer of clayey material then
a layer of gravel probably to form the new surface of the Diamond area which
then was used for markets and fairs which transferred down from the ‘Margie
More’. It was around this time that
the new weighbridge was built just
west of the old castle.

This photo shows the thin layer

of light coloured gravel in the west
wall of the trench on the same level as
that over the top of the smaller wall.
(1/12.11.11).

A few metres north of this the

excavation revealed a dark grey wet soft and smelly matrix (photo below)
(2/12. 12.54), about one metre deep which overlaid a dense peaty layer (photo
on next page) which overlaid a fine light brown clay in many layers. This was
clearly the bed of the old course of the Blind River. This shows that the river
cut south across the Diamond from the bridge in front of the house west of the
Boyd Arms (later confirmed by a water company worker). The river then
turned east and
ran beside the
churchyard wall.
The river was
not contained
until the turn of
the C18th-
C19th.

Note the small

boulder.
(2/12.13.30).
This dark layer
was so dense it
stayed a large
lump when
lifted.

Ten metres north of the small wall there was a substantial amount of old
building stone. (2/12). At first I thought this may be a collapsed wall, but the
absence of mortar on the stones and the amount of small stone mixed with
earth makes me think
that this was material
used to level up the
Diamond after the
Blind River culvert
was built. This theory
was supported by the
discovery of the
culvert itself below
and north of this
material as can be
seen across the middle of the next photo.

This photograph of the trench was taken for me by Trevor Rice as I was
not allowed on site and I couldn’t see what was there. I’m delighted he obliged
me with a steady photo as when I examined the photo later I could see that the
material laid over the culvert is in fact Glasshouse waste. There is a lump of
glass at centre top and a lump of blue waste material from the bottom of a
glasshouse pot at bottom right. This material would have been brought from a
spoil heap at Hugh Boyd’s Bottle house site at the East Quay (now the Tennis
Courts). I’m so disappointed I didn’t see this on the day, I would probably

have jumped into the trench to retrieve it. But, some of it is still there!
 Fortunately this was the extent of the trench. So the river culvert
remained undisturbed. Underneath the loose fill there was a layer of soft sand.
It was difficult under the circumstances to see if this was fill or natural.

Conclusions
The discovery of two walls a well and a Cess pit to the west of the church,
suggests the existence of remnants of a building very likely a house within a
boundary wall, with one boundary being the old river bank. The historical
record does accommodate such a proposition.

The old turreted castle just east of the well may well be the oldest stone
structure on the site and very possibly Sorley Boy McDonnell’s C16th “Nyw
Castell”. A number of contemporary sketches kindly loaned by the Honourable
Hector McDonnell, show that this castle was both turreted and had a vaulted
undercroft. It was not centred on Castle Street, either the original or the C18th
rebuild. This suggests to me that there was no significant built street in
existence when the castle was first built.

If that was Sorley Boy’s castle, then where was that of Sir Randal dated
1609? The first reference to a building under Sir Randall was in a deed dated
1611, when he refers to keeping a “residence” in Ballycastle. Later in 1660 the
Hearth Money records note a “house” being built in Ballycastle. Around the
same time Dame Alice is asking for her “house in Ballycastle” to be returned to
her. It is correct that there was reference to a murder committed in 1641
behind the castle stable, but these could well be the old stable still in use.

So are the walls we found Randall’s “Residence”, it seems more likely that
he would have built a house rather than a castle considering the new era of
peace under his new Sovereign Lord King James.

At the same time as these discoveries were being made three other
notable constructions were identified as being of Archaeological significance.
To the east of the churchyard wall there is a steep embankment with a
revetment wall at it’s base. Could this be part of a Norman Motte and Bailey?
The location overlooking the valley and the shore is prominent, also the fact
that the land on which it sits projects out from the bottom of the hill on which
Castle Street stands.

Two hundred yard north-west of the church, along the old river bank at
the old Clare Street bridge, stands a wall which has been identified by Dr
Colin Breen as being part of a blockhouse dated circa 1620.

Two hundred yards due west along Castle Street there stands behind the
C18th Market House, two stories of a building of similar construction to a
Tower House, complete with vaulted undercroft and a medieval window which
has also has been provisionally dated to 1620. There are sections of wall
nearby which suggest a possible enclosure.

The fact that the turreted castle stood against the churchyard wall and the
existence of a plastered finish on the inside of some of the older parts of the
churchyard wall, suggests that the church is standing in the middle of the old
castle yard. There is no doubt that there is a substantial amount of C16th,
possibly even earlier, archaeology lying untouched in the churchyard, which
fortunately was never used for burials. Clearly there is also substantial
archaeology in the Diamond
and to the east and south of
the churchyard wall

All of these discoveries

show that Ballycastle has
considerable archaeological
potential and I await with
great interest further
investigation.

Daniel J McGill B.Sc.