Structural carpentry in medieval Ireland: continuity and change

The study of medieval carpentry is probably one of the most neglected aspects of archaeological research in Ireland. The principal difficulty is the nature of the evidence, in that timber, unless the conditions are right, rarely leaves a trace above ground. The problem is further exacerbated by the fact that not a single medieval timber-framed building has survived in Ireland. Nevertheless, in recent years, in addition to the medieval roof of Dunsoghley, which up to quite recently was thought to be the only surviving roof structure in Ireland, a further eight medieval roof structures have been identified. Furthermore, an extensive corpus of early medieval mills, with evidence for advanced Roman carpentry techniques, has been excavated, while evidence for Viking houses, on what is probably the largest extant Viking settlement in Europe, have also been recovered. Although post and wattle structures dominate the archaeological record of the Viking period, nevertheless, it will be shown that the Roman tradition of carpentry, evidenced in the early medieval mills from the early seventh century, continued in use in the wider Gaelic community. And it is one of the pivotal points of this study, that with the takeover of Dublin by the Gaelic Irish in the late tenth century, this Roman carpentry tradition was gradually assimilated into the carpentry tradition of the Viking towns, which were now largely inhabited by a mixed population of Hiberno-Norse. Evidence for this Gaelic influence can be seen not only in the gradual replacement of the Viking post and wattle house by timber houses with load-bearing walls, but more importantly by the evidence for waterfront structures founded on baseplates with mortise and tenoned uprights on the pre-Norman waterfront in Cork. Furthermore, it will be shown, that the carpentry techniques used to build the Wood Quay revetments, shortly after the Anglo-Norman conquest in AD 1170, supports this contention.

The contribution of warlordism to the disintegration of the western Roman army (c. AD 395-480)

My thesis investigates the dynamics behind the changing nature of the leadership of the western Roman army in the fifth century through the concept of ‘warlordism’. I carried this out by analyzing those cases of insubordination and military unrest in the officer class of the western Roman army, which can be shown to be linked to the slow decline of central authority and the imperial office in the period 395-480. My thesis demonstrates that theories of ‘Warlordism’, as developed in social sciences, can be useful for both the late Imperial west as for other eras of ancient history, such as the late Roman republic. Warlordism was a way of continuing politics, if necessary by military means, when commanders found themselves outside the legitimate framework. Unlike the case of usurpation of the imperial office, when there was little hope of achieving permanent recognition and acceptance, it offered insubordinate officers a chance of returning to the ruling imperial regime depending on circumstances and the success of their resistance. I propose that warlordism functioned as an alternative to usurpation, a tool for military dissidence, fuelled by an economy of violence. Contrary to modern warlordism, the warlordism of the fifth century AD represented a transient phase which no imperial commander was willing to prolong indefinitely. At some stage, given the means, warlords in the western Roman army wanted to become part of the imperial echelon again. Yet these alternative methods of violent opposition, and the acquisition of force through private means, ensured the breakdown of the state’s monopoly on violence and the disintegration of centralized armies. What started as an accidental revolution became a new form of military rule.