Ringfort (Rath), Kilballyherberry, Co. Tipperary
Co. Tipperary |
Ringforts
A ringfort, or rath, a roughly circular enclosure built from earthen banks and used as a defended farmstead during the early medieval period, is not unusual in the Irish landscape.
What makes this one in Kilballyherberry, County Tipperary, quietly odd is that an administrative line drawn on a map has, over time, effectively erased half of it. A modern townland boundary runs through the site on a north-west to south-east axis, and on the south-west side of that boundary there is now nothing visible above ground. The northern portion alone survives as a legible earthwork, giving the monument the appearance of a semicircle rather than the complete enclosure it once was.
The surviving bank of earth and stone is modest in profile, rising only about 0.4 metres on its exterior face and 0.3 metres on the interior, with a base width of roughly 2.2 metres. It traces an arc from the north-west around through the north to the south-east, enclosing a semi-circular area approximately 27 metres north to south and around 50 metres east to west. Dense vegetation has made it impossible to measure the full internal diameter. The site sits on a hilltop, which would have been a deliberate choice by whoever built it, commanding clear views in every direction. What is particularly interesting is the cartographic record: the first edition Ordnance Survey six-inch map already shows the monument as a semi-circular earthwork, with nothing depicted on the southern side of the townland boundary, suggesting that this half of the enclosure had vanished from the landscape even by the time of that early survey. The second edition, produced from fieldwork carried out in 1953 and 1954, tells a different story. That edition depicts a fully sub-circular enclosure, a version corroborated by a sketch plan and sections drawn by Ordnance Survey fieldworkers in 1954, which recorded overall dimensions of approximately 77 metres north to south and 61.5 metres east to west. Whether the first edition simply missed what was there, or whether the monument was more legible a century later due to changed land use, the two maps offer contradictory pictures of the same earthwork across roughly a hundred years of surveying.