Round Towers of Ireland by michael doherty

The Round Towers of Ireland A synopsis of their origins

“The first stone edifices erected subsequently to the introduction of Christianity into Ireland, are, with every appearance of probability, the very peculiar, and not less interesting, structures known as the round towers, whose origin and the object of their erection have been a fruitful theme for speculation; and so widely different and many of the theories that have been advanced, that no satisfactory elucidation of their history has yet been arrived at.” 1

The Round Towers of Ireland, through the synthesis of political, social and religious factors of the epoch, are the symbolic culmination of three millennia worth of Irish obsession with the infinite geometric shape, the circle. Every construct is inherently, imbedded with reason. This reasoning may be implicit, as determined by function or, as is oft the case in history, maybe shrouded in obscurity, buried beneath layers of meaning that we may only today, attempt to comprehend. This obscurity of reason is what makes so many of histories creations awe inspiring. The Pyramids of Giza, the megaliths of Stone Henge, the towers of Babylon, the temples of Greece. Who are these buildings for? Why was so much monitory funding lavished on their construction? What is there raison d’être? This obscurity of reason is, most undeniably and most abundantly, present at the round towers of Ireland. From the genesis, the relationship with the subject matter has been at the level of the personal. I have resided in their nonchalant shadows since my inception with three such constructs are located within a ten mile radius of my home place. This rapport with the towers has formulated the approach to this thesis. I will endeavour to bring the reader to the site from where I will raise the questions that I have personally grappled with in my relations with the towers. In the answering of these questions, I will provide a new slant to the enduring questioning of the towers reasoning.

Wilkonson, George. 1845. Practical Geology and Ancient Architecture of Ireland. : (p66).

For those new to the towers, I will firstly provide a brief summary. The Irish Round Towers (fig 1) are, in essence, cylindrical towers of varying height. When perfect, they range from about seventy to one hundred and twenty feet tall2. The vast majority have doorways that are raised above ground level, from eight feet to over twenty six feet 3. All have internal floors, usually of wood that rest on stone corbels which project from the internal surface of the wall. These floors are connected via ladders, which rise through a hole in the floor surface. Some floors, in rare instances are constructed of stone, in a corbelled construct4. They are capped with a corbelled, conical roof and have varying amounts of windows rising the length of the shaft. The top floor contains the most windows, ranging from four to eight5; the intermediary floors usually have one window. The foundations, rarely exceeding four feet in depth6, are remarkably shallow considering the height of the towers and are set on all manner of strata, from solid rock to soft clays. The stone used for the towers varies in size and type, depending on the locale. Over one hundred of these towers are comprehensively known to have existed, with the strong possibility that more have been forever lost to the passage of time. Seventy three of these are still standing in some form, with vast majority being in very good repair7(fig 2). They are evenly dispersed across the width and breathe of the land, occupying twenty eight of the thirty two counties of Ireland. So you arrive at the site of a round tower. The tower has been visible to you for some miles as the tall, phallic structure dominates the surprisingly flat Irish landscape. The immediate question that always pervades with ancient constructs is that of age. Of what epoch is the structure? Until the recent advent of carbon dating, the placing of the towers in time has miffed the scholarly writers. Even up until more recent times, scholars had wrongly

Wilkonson, George. 1845. Practical Geology and Ancient Architecture of Ireland. (p69)

Ibid (p69) Ibid (p86)

4 5 6 7

Barrow, George Lennox. 1979. The round towers of Ireland - A Study & Gazetteer Dublin, Academy Press: (p29).

Idid (p23) Lalor, Brian. 1999. The Irish Round Tower. The Collins Press. Ireland 1999.(p14)

placed them too far back, principally from around the fifth to the seventh century, equating their apparition with the foundation of the monasteries in Ireland.8 In reality, carbon dating has proved that there actual timeline is from the mid tenth century to beyond the start of the thirteenth.9 This gives us an active age of construction spanning three hundred years, with the last recorded tower being that of Annadown, Co Galway, placed in the annals at year 1238 AD.10 When we are view these constructs, the general question of what and why pervades? Why are the towers here and what was there function. You look around the site for some possible clues. One such clue is immediately forth coming. The tower is situated on a Christian site. The towers are invariably part of a religious site, whether it manifests itself as a church, a grave yard or a historic ruin( fig 3). Hence forth, the what and why of these structures are imbedded is this religious link, which I will now proceed to uncover. 432AD is a pivotal moment in the course of Irish history. This is the year that Patrick brought Christianity to Ireland11. Little is known of the nurturing of the faith or of the early architecture, as it was constructed of impermanent materials, and are long since lost. â&#x20AC;&#x153;What is certain is that an important phase of architecture, lasting at least 300 years, from say 450 to 750 or later, has disappeared completely and can only be known by inferenceâ&#x20AC;?12

By whatever means, Christianity took root in Ireland. By the sixth century AD, Irish Christianity was under the rule of Bishops, who had control of diocese. The order of the

Barrow, George Lennox. 1979. The round towers of Ireland - A Study & Gazetteer Dublin, Academy Press: (p42).

Manning, Conleth. 1997. The Date of the Round Tower at Clonmacnoise. Archaeology Ireland 11, (2) (Summer): (p13). 10

Mc Donnell, Hector. 1994. Margaret Stokes and the Irish Round tower: A Reprisal. Ulster Journal of Archaeology, 1994, Vol 57 (3) (p.70) 11

Thomas, Charles,. 1971. Britain and ireland in early christian times, AD 400-800. New York: McGraw-Hill.(p83) Craig, Maurice. 1982. The Architecture of Ireland; From the earliest times to 1880London, Batsford.(p25)

Church was similar to the makeup of the Roman Empire; hence forth the introduction of the church into Ireland was the first time a coherent system of governess appears in the state, though not as the ruling order. â&#x20AC;&#x153;by the 6th century, Irish Christianity was under the rule of Bishops. Each Bishop held his own authority within his own paruicha( diocese); the peruchia was, in general, co-terminous with one or other form of Irish territorial division, probably the tuath- a petty kingdomâ&#x20AC;?13

The most rudimentary impact on Irish society that Christianity made was the introduction of the monastery. This strict occult had formed in the Egyptian desert, when Christians were banished from the Roman Empire and yearned refuge in the desert 14. The format of the monastery reflects this seclusion, whereby the focal point within the plan was an outdoor courtyard space, the cloister, in which the monks would follow a ritual of silent prayer, circumnavigating the rectangular space. This form of monasticism was firmly entrenched in the rural fabric of Ireland by the seventh century. They became par excellence centres of learning, recording the countries first manuscripts. From the Irish bases, missionaries were sent across Europe, founding world renowned monasteries. As already stated, the original monastic buildings were impermanent timber constructs, most likely due to the lack of resources. By the 10th

century, stone begins to

appear as the material of choice for chapels. The forms of these chapels were quite small in scale, rectangular in plan. As with all other Christian churches, the rectangular nave plan fulfils the ritual needs, a space for prayer and the distribution of the Eucharist. One of the needs of the monastery was a way of tracking time, to call the monks to prayer and the congregation to mass. This was done by the ringing of a bell. The bell used for this task was a hand bell, which had quite limited capacity. This was greatly increased in the 9th century with the invention of the bronze cast bell. Ringing this bell from a height

Thomas, Charles,. 1971. Britain and Ireland in early Christian times, AD 400-800. New York: McGraw-Hill.(p84)

ibid.(p85)

Lalor, Brian. 1999. The Irish Round Tower. The Collins Press. Ireland 1999.(p34)

maximised its effect. Hence forth, a belfry became an essential element within the monastery compound. In Ireland, these belfries took the form of the ubiquitous round tower. “One consequence was that monks spent a much greater proportion of their time in liturgical activities and prayer, the” hours” of which were regulated by the ringing of bells. For this reason, the belfry acquired particular significance. This development is also linked to the widespread casting of larger bronze bells . ”16

A spin off from the monasteries was there missions to Europe and the subsequent foundation of Monasteries abroad. A direct impact of this was the garnering of knowledge from the continent, as monks either visited or permanently returned from these establishments. The connection with the continent exposed the monks to the new churches and towers in construction, from Ravenna in Italy to the West works of the Charlemagne Empire in the Rhineland17. The most probable reference was the towers of Ravenna, more so that those of northern Europe, such as st Gall, whose twin round towers were never built, were joined to the church in plan, contained chapels instead of a belfry and were drawn with a spiral staircase18. It’s the concept rather than a literal translation of the belfry tower that is brought from Europe by these early monks. Another milestone of technological advancement that was brought from the continent was that of concrete. This was the colossal discovery of the Roman Empire, the technology that permitted the construction of the great domes and arches the symbolised the civilisations prowess. Its form, in the round towers, was as a rubble and mortar mix 19, binding the interior and exterior stone surfaces together. It was the quintessential component in the tower. It’s the leap that permitted their realisation.

Mc Donnell, Hector. 1994. Margaret Stokes and the Irish Round tower: A Reprisal. Ulster Journal of Archaeology, 1994, Vol 57 (3) (p.73)

ibid(p.73) ibid(p.70)

18 19

Lalor, Brian. 1999. The Irish Round Tower. The Collins Press. Ireland 1999.(p76)

So now back on our site, we have the what and the why. The monastery had provided the physical need for a belfry to which end the tower provided the form. The monastery and its monks, by way of its spread and contact with continental Europe, had acquired the idea of form as well as the methodologies required to enact it. As you walk about the tower, you can’t help being moved by the clinical masonry and poetic simplicity. The mason’s prodigious ability is exemplified by the remarkable adherence to the circle in plan. This is a trait that you will remark upon with all the towers. After all they are the round towers. The question you ponder over is why there is this affinity with the round. Why does each tower, without fail, comply with the infinite geometric shape?( fig 4) The answer to this question is a hypothesis that I have arrived at, that stretches far back into ancient Irish history. Neolithic Ireland was an unfolding landscape. By the time of 7000BC20, the ice sheets had melted. By the early fourth millennium, agriculture was already established .The country, for the most part was covered in thick oak foliage. The primitive settlers cleared tracts of these forests to implement their farming techniques, creating settlements as they progressed. Today, the remnants of these middle to later Neolithic settlements that dot the landscape, are their burial chambers. Four distinct typologies of tomb were in vogue, portal tombs, passage tombs, court tombs and wedge tombs 21, the most lavish of which was the passage tomb. This is what I propose to be the earliest blueprint of the round tower, both in shape and in focal poignancy within the landscape. “In an area 3 miles by 1 mile are the three great mounds of New grange, Dowth and Knowth, together with numerous small mounds, most of which are likely to be passage tombs. The three great mounds, all of much the same dimensions (that is to say, covering about an acre of ground and approximately 280 feet in diameter) are strikingly situated on hilltops and can

Ó Cróinín, Dáibhí, Moody, T. W. and Dawson Books. A New History of Ireland vol. 1, Prehistoric and Early Ireland. In Oxford University Press [database online]. Oxford, 2005(p55).

Ibid.(78)

be seen in silhouette against the sky from many vantage points in the neighbourhood.”22

The origin of the circle is the key point here for without exception, Irish Passage tombs are found in circular cairns which vary in diameter from about 280 feet to as little as 25.23 The passage graves were a dominant symbol in the landscape; they were by far and away the largest constructs on the Island in that age. The circular plan form, a pure, infinite geometry, had now been set as the default, the precedent for constructs of nobility, wealth, power or reverence within the Island of Ireland. This circular reverence grew in Bronze Age Ireland (2000BC-600BC), with a new ritual or cult site, circular stones. These standing stones were not an enclosed space, merely a mid space array of vertical stones, hinting at the bounding of the infinite. Little is known of the rituals performed, though the bizarreness in some instances points to some liturgical process “Includes tangential alignments and many small cairns and cists, the stones used in all these being quite small. One circle is completely filled with hundreds of small boulders, carefully set upright”24

The ritual affiliation with stone and circle appears to have gathered cult status in this epoch. The permanence of the stone was, without doubt, its reason for use, a symbolic reference to the permanence garnered in the afterlife. This ritual phenomena appears to have become commonplace throughout the country. Moving into the Iron Age (600BC-400AD), the combination of circle and stone becomes a paradigm for those of opulent circumstances. Burial, ritual space and the home are now seduced by the geometric shape. This is the era of the massive stone megaliths, some of Irelands most revered monuments, Dun Aenghus (Aran Islands), Staige Fort (Co Kerry), The Doon Fort (Co Donegal), Dun Conor (Inishmann), Grianan (co Donegal) (fig 5).

Ó Cróinín, Dáibhí, Moody, T. W. and Dawson Books. A New History of Ireland vol. 1, Prehistoric and Early

Ireland. In Oxford University Press [database online]. Oxford, 2005. (p82) 23 24

Ibid (p84) Ibid (p112)

The Primary function of these gigantean circular stone constructs, known as Hill Forts, is as defensive residence. The defence was necessitated as wealth at this time was measured in cattle, and these monuments were constructed so as to ring the beasts25 (fig 6) One point that has been suggested is of real significance, that these forts are almost entirely symbols of wealth and status, and hardly intended for serious defence.26 This marks a landmark shift as its one of the first instances of blatant social higher archie within the Irish landscape. The idea of using monumental structure as defining social class, removed from the realm of cults or gods, as is the case in the passage graves. People now can elevate their status through the built strata. During the Iron Age of Ireland the round enclosure was the choice typology of all level of the social pyramid, from peasant, to gentry, to king. Raths, circular enclosures, usually with a single, (earthen) bank, but in some instances with multiple (fig 7), were the enclosures for the lower social classes. Averaging 30m in diameter, these circular rings number somewhere in the region of 40,000, spread throughout the Island.27 Of the upper echelons, Hill Forts, as discussed, and Crannogs were the choice. Both again are circular. Crannogs, which are relatively few in number, are another captivating typology. Essentially, they are artificial, circular islands built on lakes, on which the dwelling was founded.

â&#x20AC;&#x153;artificial islands made of brush-wood and stones and consolidated by wattle fences and substantial timbers driven into the bottom of the lakeâ&#x20AC;?28

Craig, Maurice. 1982. The Architecture of Ireland; From the earliest times to 1880London, Batsford.(p23)

ibidp23)

Laing, Lloyd Robert, and Jennifer Laing . 1990. Celtic Britain and Ireland, AD 200-800 : The myth of the dark ages. New York: St. Martin's Press. (p 148)

Laing, Lloyd Robert, and Jennifer Laing . 1990. Celtic Britain and Ireland, AD 200-800 : The myth of the dark ages. New York: St. Martin's Press. (p 152)

In essence, it’s a more flamboyant version of the Hill Fort typology. Due to their scarcity in the landscape, they were most likely the feudal king’s residences at that time, endorsing the rulers devotion to the form. In short, for king or for layman, the veneration of the circle is ubiquitous. The final tie between the towers and the circle is the fact that “the majority of insular monasteries were sited within abandoned hill forts, or in coastal or promontory inland forts, protected by bank and ditch across the neck…Later monasteries were obliged to provide their own enclosures, generally round or oval in layout”29

Hence forth, the connection with the circular form and the stone monuments of the past is at a one to one level (fig 8). The round form governs the site that in turn governs the new, untested construct to be built within it. So back at the tower, the rational of the circle has become apparent. The infinite geometrical form had been the dominant form in the Irish landscape for millennia prior to the construction of the round towers. The monastery settled on a form that would immediately resonate with the populace, a form that already carried much deeply embodied symbolism and a form that would adequately respond to the task at hand. On the site, and from miles around, the absorbing height of the tower grabs the onlooker’s attention. Even one thousand years later, the salient height of slender cylindrical stone mass dominates the skyline, testament to the grandeur they must have imposed on a society that was completely alien to the advances of the classical period (fig 9). The round form and the imposing height are the quintessential elements of the tower. This raises the next mystery. Why were they built this high? For sure, to fulfil their duty a as a belfry,a certain degree of verticality was necessary , but did they need to be 100 feet. Most arguably and probably not. In a bid answer this question, I propose secondary hypothesis, that the towers are the built expression of the rivalling feudal kingships of the age.

Thomas, Charles,. 1971. Britain and Ireland in early Christian times, AD 400-800. New York: McGraw-Hill.(p94)

“complex law tracts, some of which were set down in the early seventh century AD, reveal a great deal about early Celtic society. From sources such as these, a clear picture emerges of a society in Ireland in the first millennium AD, a society which was tribal, rural, hierarchical and familiar”30

Iron age Ireland, as is suggested, was an amalgamation of local dynasties and kingships. Ireland was never invaded by Rome, so their advanced systems of governance, architecture and commerce never reached her shores. Political unity was nonexistent. Instead, a series of over 100 dynasties controlled local plots known as tuath 31. Law was governed by specialist legal scholars, known as Brehons 32. The settlements were rural, towns did not exist. The monetary system was measured in cattle, land and produce. Dynasties earned their wealth by letting of the lands to serfs. The system as whole is rather archaic compared to central Europe at that time. The introduction of Christianity did little to change these social power systems, the (often feuding) kings maintained the tuatha, territories, their source of wealth secure. “Early Christian Ireland was a country ruled over by a multitude of kings: he has suggested there were no less than 150 kings in the country at any one given date between the fifth and the twelfth centuries”33

However, though the kings maintained their power over the land and social structure, the monasteries became centres of trade. People flocked to them, seeking the protection and promises of the new faith34. The trade off from this is that the local kings became patrons, seeking to keep their flock.

Thomas, Charles,. 1971. Britain and Ireland in early Christian times, AD 400-800. New York: McGraw-Hill (p 143) 31

O Grady, Standish. 1889. The last kings of Ireland. The English Historical Review 4, (14) (April): (p287).

Ibid (p 291)

Laing, Lloyd Robert, and Jennifer Laing . 1990. Celtic Britain and Ireland, AD 200-800 : The myth of the dark ages. New York: St. Martin's Press. (p 153) 34

Barrow, George Lennox. 1979. The round towers of Ireland - A Study & Gazetteer Dublin, Academy Press (p35)

“They (monasteries) quickly became the new centres of Irish civilisation, their principle offices often hereditary in the families of local rulers who had given the land on which they were established. ”35

This is the base link. The monasteries were now funded by their local kings. The political, liturgical and social spectrums became intertwined. This arrival of monetary funding from the local kings coincides with the introduction of stone as the choice material for the religious constructs36. Also, this coincides with the appearance of the round tower in the Irish landscape, the 10th century. The Kings, who were oft times at war, now had a symbol through which there wealth could by easily made visible, while at the same time appeasing God. Height is the quintessential symbolic reference of power, for one needs funding to attain it, one needs skills to build it, one needs control of labour to organise it. Some writers have claimed that the round towers were all aiming at a height of 100 feet, due to biblical reference, and that the perfect tower had a “base diameter to height” ratio of 1:237 I find this argument unfounded. For some towers stand at 70 feet and others stand at 115. For builders to have the skill to craft such towers and be so inaccurate with their height is unreasonable. Seeing as there were reputedly 150 kings in the country 38, and around 100 towers, I believe it is plausible to reason that each king aspired to have one, maybe more if possible and of course, be as tall as his funding would allow him. Its my proposal that these towers were a half way house, a common ground. For these are symbols of the monasteries mesmeric rise in opulence as well. Yet to have them attached to a physically recognised ecclesiastical building, such as the chapel, would debase

Barrow, George Lennox. 1979. The round towers of Ireland - A Study & Gazetteer Dublin, Academy Press (p35) Lalor, Brian. 1999. The Irish Round Tower. The Collins Press. Ireland 1999.(p34) Hourihane, Colum,. 2001. From ireland coming : Irish art from the early christian to the late gothic period and its european context. Princeton, N.J.: Index of Christian Art, Dept. of Art and Archaeology, Princeton University in association with Princeton University Press.

(39)

Laing, Lloyd Robert, and Jennifer Laing . 1990. Celtic Britain and Ireland, AD 200-800 : The myth of the dark ages. New York: St. Martin's Press. (p 153)

the kings input. The towers are almost monochromatic in their appearance, like we see in the construct of the Doric temple in classical Greece. Their success is judged against other proponents. Some have minor differences in their detail, besides the height, such as the three external string courses and exceptional batter of Ardmore, that elevate the confidence and resolve of its monastery and (more tellingly) associated patron. So the tower stands free, within the confines of the monastic site, but deftly segregated, a symbolic segregation, just as the symbolic as the construct itself (fig 10). Its clear that the round towers are the embodiment of the era of the construct. They express the social, political and liturgical parameters in vogue in that age. They were the result of the physical need for a belfry as well as the symbolic need for the powers to display their means. When arriving at a form most suitable for this dual requirement, a circular form, a form that had been used by the higher echelons as well as the common man, that had transcended millennia in the Irish landscape, that was used for burial, housing and ritual was the obvious, perhaps, only choice. It can even be seen that these towers were the vertical extrusion of these ancient Irish stone forms, made possible by the introduction of mortar from the continent. So as we walk amongst the towers, we walk amongst pillars of our history, each plotting a story through stone that has pervaded our culture. Each tells a tale of a different epoch, a time when kings ruled the land, monasticism offered salvation and the combination of which was symbolical imbued upon the peoples through extruded megaliths of circular stone. As we leave the site, we realise that the salient, static, silhouette has stirred the soul.

In summary, I believe it is fair to say that The Round Towers of Ireland, through the synthesis of political, social and religious factors of the epoch, are the symbolic culmination of three millennia worth of Irish obsession with the infinite geometric shape, the circle.

Fig 139 39

Lalor, Brian. 1999. The Irish Round Tower. The Collins Press. Ireland 1999.(p69)

Fig 240

Barrow, George Lennox. 1979. The round towers of Ireland - A Study & Gazetteer Dublin, Academy Press (p2)

Fig 341

Lalor, Brian. 1999. The Irish Round Tower. The Collins Press. Ireland 1999.(p1)

Fig 442

42 42

Barrow, George Lennox. 1979. The round towers of Ireland - A Study & Gazetteer Dublin, Academy Press (p1)

Fig 543 Top Left: Staigue Fort, Co Kerry Top Right: The Doon Fort, Co Donegal Bottom: Dun Conor, Aran Islands

Craig, Maurice. 1982. The Architecture of Ireland; From the earliest times to 1880London, Batsford.(p21)

Fig 644

Lalor, Brian. 1999. The Irish Round Tower. The Collins Press. Ireland 1999.(p22)

Fig 745

Thomas, Charles,. 1971. Britain and Ireland in early Christian times, AD 400-800. New York: McGraw-Hill (p 43)

Fig 846

Craig, Maurice. 1982. The Architecture of Ireland; From the earliest times to 1880London, Batsford.(p26)

Fig 947

Barrow, George Lennox. 1979. The round towers of Ireland - A Study & Gazetteer Dublin, Academy Press (p198)

Fig 1048

Lalor, Brian. 1999. The Irish Round Tower. The Collins Press. Ireland 1999.(p230)

Bibliography

Wilkonson, George. 1845. Practical Geology and Ancient Architecture of Ireland. Lalor, Brian. 1999. The Irish Round Tower. The Collins Press. Ireland 1999.

Barrow, George Lennox. 1979. The round towers of Ireland - A Study & Gazetteer Dublin, Academy Press: Manning, Conleth. 1997. The Date of the Round Tower at Clonmacnoise. Archaeology Ireland 11, (2) (Summer) Mc Donnell, Hector. 1994. Margaret Stokes and the Irish Round tower: A Reprisal. Ulster Journal of Archaeology, 1994, Vol 57 (3) (p.70) Ó Cróinín, Dáibhí, Moody, T. W. and Dawson Books. A New History of Ireland vol. 1, Prehistoric and Early Ireland. In Oxford University Press [database online]. Oxford, 2005 Craig, Maurice. 1982. The Architecture of Ireland; From the earliest times to 1880London, Batsford. Laing, Lloyd Robert, and Jennifer Laing . 1990. Celtic Britain and Ireland, AD 200-800 : The myth of the dark ages. New York: St. Martin's Press. Thomas, Charles,. 1971. Britain and Ireland in early Christian times, AD 400-800. New York: McGraw-Hill Mc Donnell, Hector. 1994. Margaret Stokes and the Irish Round tower: A Reprisal. Ulster Journal of Archaeology, 1994, Vol 57 (3) Hourihane, Colum,. 2001. From Ireland Coming: Irish art from the early Christian to the late Gothic period and its European context. Princeton, N.J.: Index of Christian Art, Dept. of Art and Archaeology, Princeton University in association with Princeton University Press. O Grady, Standish. 1889. The last kings of Ireland. The English Historical Review 4, (14) (April): 286-303.