INTRODUCTIONArchaeological excavation of three trenches wasundertaken within the interior of the Woolworth’sand Burton Building during September and October2003. This four-storey, eleven-bay, art decobuilding was erected in 1929-30 by F W Woolworth& Co Ltd Construction Department (Patton 1993,185). It is located in the centre of Belfast at thewestern end of High Street. It occupies Nos 1-15High Street, and also fronts on to Nos 2-14Cornmarket and Nos 2-6 Ann Street. On its easternside the building is bounded by the narrow alley,known as Crown Entry, which connects High Streetand Ann Street. The building is located within anarea considered to be of high archaeologicalpotential, between the likely positions of themedieval castle and Chapel of the Ford on a narrowstrip of land between the River Farset (which nowflows under High Street) and the former course ofthe River Blackstaff. This is an area which isconventionally considered the most probablelocation for any medieval settlement in Belfast.

In 2003 the building was acquired by DunnesStores. As part of the ensuing refit of the shop, twoelectrical substations and a new escalator shaft wereinstalled. As the installation of these three featuresinvolved significant ground disturbance, andfollowing the intervention of John O’Keeffe of theEnvironment and Heritage Service, the developerskindly agreed to fund a programme of investigationwithin the areas which were to be affected. Thesubsequent excavations were directed by PeterMoore, formerly of the Centre for Archaeological

Fieldwork, who had been sub-contracted toundertake the investigations by Margaret Gowen &Co Ltd on behalf of Dunnes Stores.

In addition to the possibility of archaeologicaldeposits of medieval date surviving at the site, thediscovery of a coin weight of 17th-century date(Robert Heslip, pers comm) during the constructionof the Woolworth’s and Burton Building suggestedthat significant deposits dating to the developmentof this part of the city in the 17th and 18th centuriesmight also survive. In comparison to the uncertaincharacter of medieval settlement in the area ofcentral Belfast (Macdonald 2006), the developmentof the modern city is far better understood.Following the issuing of a grant in May 1604(Hatchell 1848, 48-9, no lxxix.33), Sir ArthurChichester began to develop Belfast as an, at least,partially planned town aligned on the northern bankof the Farset (Gillespie & Royle 2003, 1). The newplanned town was centred upon the areaimmediately north of the Farset, away from theapparent focus of medieval activity to the south ofthe river. This change in focus reflected theimportance of the mouth of the Farset as ananchorage in developing the trading role of Belfast.Initially, the town developed around High Streetand Waring Street. Gillespie has noted that incomparison to the pattern of burgage plots on thenorthern side of High Street, those on the southernside are more irregular and do not continue intoAnn Street, even though it apparently follows theline of a pre-existing routeway to the ford (Brett2004, 54). This observation suggests that the area

Ulster Journal of Archaeology, Vol 65, 2006

EXCAVATIONS WITHIN THE WOOLWORTH’S AND BURTONBUILDING, HIGH STREET, BELFAST

PHILIP MACDONALDCentre for Archaeological Fieldwork, School of Geography, Archaeology and Palaeoecology,

Queen’s University, Belfastp.macdonald@qub.ac.uk

with an appendix by DAVID M BROWN

Excavation of three trenches within the Woolworth’s and Burton Building, High Street, Belfast took placein 2003. Although limited in scale, the investigations produced evidence consistent with the historicallyand cartographically attested sequence of Belfast’s development from the late 17th century onwards.

Significantly, however, the results of the excavation also suggested that prior to an episode of reclamationin the 17th century much of the area between High Street and Ann Street may have been an exposed

estuarine mud flat that was unsuitable for settlement. These observations challenge the conventional viewthat the area between High Street and Ann Street is necessarily the most probable location for medieval

settlement in Belfast.

49

investigated in the 2003 excavations was not part ofthe initial town plan, which was described in thePlantation Commissioners’ report of 1611 as being‘plotted out in good forme’ (PRONI Ref T/811/3;Benn 1877, 86), but was part of the area developedduring the subsequent expansion of the town.

Despite the presence of Chichester’s fortifiedhouse (built in 1611), the parish church (rebuilt in1622), and the likely routeway to the ford, thedevelopment of the area to the south of High Streetwas apparently slow and piecemeal, being achievedthrough the use of building leases (Gillespie &Royle 2007, 6). The Market House located on thecorner of High Street and Cornmarket was built in1664, replacing an earlier Town Hall probablylocated in the same area and first noted in 1639(Benn 1877, 216-18), whilst the ford was onlyreplaced by the Long Bridge during the 1680s(Benn 1823, 166; Brett 1985, 2). It was theeconomic development of Belfast in the late 17thcentury that led to the expansion of both the urbanpopulation and the number of houses situatedwithin the town. This growth was contained bymaking more intensive use of property that hadbeen already leased (Gillespie & Royle 2003, 2).The construction of a series of lanes, or entries, inthe area between High Street and Ann Street,including Crown Entry, which is first recorded asPringle’s Entry in 1760 (Gillespie & Royle 2003,13), facilitated this phase of development andproperty subdivision. Cartographic anddocumentary evidence indicates that developmentof the area centred round the 2003 excavationscontinued through the final quarter of the 17thcentury and into the 18th century. Phillip’s 1685maps of Belfast shows that the western end of AnnStreet was not developed at this date (Gillespie &Royle 2003, maps 4, 5) and Gillespie notes a leaseof 1709 referring to the construction of houses inthe back gardens of pre-existing buildings frontingon to the High Street (Registry of Deeds, Dublin,4/231/908; Brett 2004, 54). By the end of the 18thcentury, as the economic focus of Belfast had begunto shift from commerce to industry, and followingthe introduction in 1767 of new leases by the fifthearl of Donegall, Ann Street and High Street hadbecome unbroken ranges of two- and three-storeybuildings. During the 19th century development ofthe area continued, its Georgian houses werereplaced by grander Victorian warehouses andshops, and it became a place of fashionableshopping. Following the introduction in 1872 of thetram system with its terminus in nearby CastlePlace and the opening of Royal Avenue in the1880s, the area increasingly became the businessand commercial centre of Belfast, a role it has

maintained to the present day (for images of thearea during the 19th century see Walker & Dixon1983, 2-4, 6-9; 1984, 2, 28).

THE EXCAVATIONSAlthough all three excavation trenches were locatedinside the Woolworth’s and Burton Building (Fig1), prior to the building’s construction the trenchpositions would all have been situated withindifferent properties. Perhaps inevitably, given thearea’s slow and piecemeal development, thestructural sequence which can be reconstructed forthe location of each trench is markedly different.Consequently, a separate description of the knownbuilding sequence for each trench location, derivedfrom the available cartographic, documentary andrepresentational evidence, prefixes the followingaccounts of their stratigraphic sequences. Theexcavations were undertaken in difficultcircumstances, often at great pace and in low light.In all three trenches, contractors working for thedeveloper had mechanically excavated a number ofthe deposits and features prior to the beginning ofthe excavation. As a consequence, many depositsand features, particularly those associated with the19th- and 20th-century horizons, were recognizedonly in section and inevitably remain imperfectlyunderstood.1

Trench One (J34007427)Trench One was located on the southern side of theWoolworth’s and Burton Building immediatelyadjacent to its frontage with Ann Street. The trenchwas initially 4.9m long and 3.2m wide, with its longaxis aligned approximately north/south, althoughits dimensions were significantly reduced asexcavation progressed. It was positioned close tothe eastern wall of the building which formed theproperty’s boundary with Crown Entry. BothPhillips’ 1685 maps and the apparent 18th-centurycopy of a 1696 survey show the location as part ofa large undeveloped plot; however, Maclanachan’smap of Belfast indicates that a single-storeyproperty occupied the site by 1715 (Gillespie &Royle 2003, maps 4-7; Brett 2004, figs 48-50). Thetrench was located within the property division ofNo 6 Ann Street, which is recorded as beingoccupied by the merchant Robert Telfair in theearliest Belfast directory (1807), although thesubsequent directory indicates that his premises hadmoved to No 11 Ann Street by the following year(Adams 1992, 36, 73). A heavily foreshortenedbird’s-eye view of Belfast suggests that the site wasoccupied by a two- or three-storey property by 1863(Royle 2007, pl 4) that formed the premises of MrsCampbell, a butcher, in 1877 (Anon 1877, 71).

50

Despite a trend for building larger warehouses andproperties in the immediate vicinity during thesecond half of the 19th century, the 1901-02Ordnance Survey 1:2500 series and a second bird’s-eye image of 1900 (Royle 2007, map 4, pl 5)indicate that No 6 Ann Street remained a discreteproperty into the 20th century, although an 1871Ordnance Survey map of Belfast indicates that theproperty may have been renumbered No 8 AnnStreet during the third quarter of the 19th century.

The excavated sequence in Trench One wasdivided into three phases: the most recent two ofwhich related to the Woolworth’s and BurtonBuilding and its 19th-century predecessor, whilstthe earliest represented an apparent dump of humicsoil that overlay a layer of apparently redepositedestuarine clay, also known as ‘sleech’,2 that, in turn,sealed a horizontal timber which was associated

with two wooden piles and dendrochronologicallydated to the first quarter of the 17th century. Astratigraphic discontinuity between the deposits ofthe earliest phase and those of the later twoprobably represented an episode of truncation thatwas associated with the construction of the 19th-century building on the site. Consequently, noevidence associated with buildings on the siteduring the 18th century was recovered from thetrench.

The variously tiled and laminate floor (101) ofthe Woolworth’s and Burton Building wassupported by a layer of reinforced concrete (102) upto 0.65m thick, which had been laid upon a dump ofhardcore (103) of varying extent and depth(maximum thickness 0.42m). The hardcore sealedtwo features associated with the 19th-centuryproperty on the site. These were: in the southern

Fig 1 Site location, showing the position of the excavation trenches.

51

part of the trench a complex of deposits (107/115and 111) that represented a truncated series of stepsthat led up into the property, and in the northern partof the trench an area of brick flooring (104). Thetruncated steps consisted of a base of mortar cappedby brick. Evidence for only two steps wasuncovered. The lower (107/115) being relativelycomplete and located at the southern end of thetrench, the higher (111) being represented only by atruncated deposit of mortar located immediately tothe north of the lower step. The lower step extendedacross the entire width of the trench and was at least0.90m deep. An L-shaped cut (112) through thesurface of the lower step extended beyond thesouthern and western edges of the trench. Thisfeature (width 0.30m) was filled to the survivingsurface of the step (107/115) with loose gravel andbricks (113) and represented an episode ofalteration to the steps. It is unlikely that the brickcapping formed the original surface of the steps,which were probably finished with stone slabs thatwere removed prior to the 19th-century building’sdemolition. That the probable foundation cut for thebuilding’s eastern wall (109) did not extend into thearea covered by the steps (see below) suggests thatthe steps were features external to the frontage ofthe 19th-century building. The mortar base of thelower step (115) sealed a linear spread of compactgritty loam (106) that possibly represented the fillof a northeast-southwest aligned drain that ranunderneath the 19th-century building. The area ofbrick flooring (104) in the northern part of thetrench sealed both a truncated feature (130), whichwas only recognized in the north-facing section ofthe trench, and a foundation cut (109), that wasprobably associated with the eastern wall of the19th-century property. The truncated feature (130)was 0.50m wide and 0.16m deep and of uncertainpurpose. It was filled with a dark sandy loam (128)that overlay a primary fill of orangey-brown gravel(129). Only the western edge of the foundation cut(109) was exposed in the trench; it was filled with acompact deposit of rubble and fragmented brick(108). The foundation cut (109) only extended for alength of 2.15m along the northern part of theeastern edge of the trench. That it did not continueinto the southern half of the trench suggests that thefront of the 19th-century property was set furtherback from Ann Street than the current building,presumably to accommodate the external stepsidentified in the southern part of the trench.

The steps (107/115 and 111), possible drain(106), foundation cut (109) and truncated feature(130) all overlay, or cut, a variety of mortar-richdeposits that were recorded by the excavator as asingle context (114) and which were probably

associated with the construction of the 19th-centuryproperty. These deposits in turn overlay thetruncated surface of a cultivated soil (105).

The cultivated soil (105) extended throughoutthe trench, except where it had been truncated bylater features, and had a maximum depth of 0.50m.It contained a large assemblage of finds dating tothe second half of the 17th century, including claypipes mostly of northern English manufacture,window glass, fine vessel glass and bottle glass, anda wide range of pottery including sgraffito, gravel-free and gravel-tempered wares from North Devon,slipwares, combed slipwares and brown and redearthenwares from Staffordshire, some Continentalslipwares and a variety of local earthenwares, aswell as numerous fragments of animal bone andshell. It overlay a similar humic soil whichcontained lenses of both light blue estuarine clayand dark organic material that included fragmentsof wood (120). This lower deposit, which had amaximum depth of 0.20m, had not been cultivatedand the presence of lenses of estuarine clay withinit suggested that it had been subject to periodicepisodes of flooding as it accumulated. It alsocontained a finds assemblage dating to the secondhalf of the 17th century, including northern Englishclay pipes, and various North Devon andStaffordshire wares, as well as two sherds of localcoarseware which are possibly late medieval. It isarguable (see below) that both of these layers of soilrepresent material dumped on the site, possiblyover an extended period of time, which wassubsequently used as a garden. The lower deposit(120) directly overlay a deposit of relatively soft,greyish blue, estuarine clay (124), the nearhorizontal upper surface of which (sampled as 125)was demarcated by a spread of thick, organicdetritus and wood that presumably represented thesurface of the northern bank of the lower reaches ofthe Blackstaff. The estuarine clay (124) wasexcavated for a depth of 0.30m in a sondage locatedat the southern end of the trench. A small amount ofcultural material, including brick fragments, burntbone, sherds of North Devon gravel-free ware,glass and a clay pipe dated to the second half of the17th century, was recovered from the estuarine clay.The relative softness of the deposit suggests that itwas redeposited; it is probable that the distributionof post-glacial estuarine clay within the immediateenvirons of Belfast may have been altered asmodification of the river and reclamation workbegan during the 17th century. Excavation revealedthat the relatively soft estuarine clay (124) sealed asingle, horizontal timber (126) whoseapproximately east/west alignment broadlycoincided with that of the street frontage and which

52

extended across the entire width of the trench (atthis depth, 1.8m). The timber was a plank or beamthat varied in width between 0.25m and 0.30m, was0.04m thick and contained two bored holes(diameter 33mm). It lay upon the upper surface of adarker and more compact deposit of estuarine clay(133). This deposit was excavated for a further0.20m and, although it contained some fragmentsof animal bone and shell, at this depth excavationwas abandoned. Following its removal for thepurposes of dendrochronological dating (Sample noQ10480), two substantial wooden piles (131, 132)

of unrecorded length were found beneath thehorizontal timber pushed into the estuarine clay(133). A dendrochronological date of AD1619 ± 9years (within a 95% confidence range) wasestablished for the timber (see Appendix).

It is not certain what type of structure isrepresented by the horizontal timber (126) and itsassociated piles (131, 132). That they wererecovered at a depth of 0.30m below theundisturbed detritus-littered surface (125) of theestuarine clay suggests that they are not intrusive,although it is possible that they could have sunk a

Fig 2 Trench One: north-west-facing section. The position of the horizontal timber (126) and the piles(131, 132) have been projected on to the section as they were uncovered approximately 0.2m from the

south-eastern edge of the trench.

53

small distance through the relatively soft upperdeposit of estuarine clay (124) (Fig 1). It is possiblethat they were part of a trackway which ran acrossthe estuarine silts that formed the northern edge ofthe River Blackstaff. The presence of two boredholes within the horizontal timber (126) suggeststhat it was reused, although the timber was tooslight to have been part of a support or foundationfor a substantial structure and it was not a reusedship’s timber (David Brown, pers comm). Thepresence of a timber structure within the estuarineclay indicates that this part of Belfast was notnecessarily suitable for habitation prior to the 17thcentury and that the unaltered course of theBlackstaff may have been located to the north of theprevious estimates (eg Gillespie & Royle 2003, fig2; Royle 2007, map 5), which have notunreasonably been based upon the location of the‘new cutt’ of the river depicted on the late 17th-century maps of Belfast (Gillespie & Royle 2003,maps 4-6). The dendrochronological date of theplank (124) also provides a terminus post quem forthe accumulation of soil (105, 120) above theestuarine clay. It is not obvious how such a depth ofsoil (in total approximately 0.70m) could haveaccumulated naturally prior to the construction ofbuildings on the site by 1715 as indicated by thecartographic evidence (see above). This suggeststhat the soil was deliberately dumped at the site,presumably in an effort to reclaim the ground. Thatlenses of estuarine clay were present within thelower, uncultivated part of this soil (120) suggeststhat the process of reclamation was piecemeal andinterrupted by episodes of flooding. How thisprocess of reclamation was organized is uncertain;presumably, it was undertaken by the Chichesterfamily in order to create new burgage plots to leaseout. That Phillips’ maps (Gillespie & Royle 2003,maps 4, 5) depict this location as being enclosedand possibly used as a garden, a rolestratigraphically confirmed by the cultivated soil(105), suggests that this phase of reclamation wascompleted by 1685.

Trench Two (J33967434)Trench Two was positioned immediately adjacentto both the Woolworth’s and Burton Building’sfrontage with High Street and its eastern wall whichformed the shop’s boundary with Crown Entry.Initially, the trench was 5.3m long and 2.3m widewith its longest axis aligned approximatelynorth/south. The size of the trench was significantlyreduced during the course of the excavation. One ofPhillips’ 1685 maps shows that the trench was in alocation which contained a two-storey property(Gillespie & Royle 2003, map 4; Brett 2004, fig

49), although study of the apparent copy of the1696 survey suggests that Phillips’ map might notaccurately represent the character of the minorbuildings which it depicts on the site (Gillespie &Royle, 37, map 6; Brett 2004, fig 48). The relevantmap of property divisions within Belfast preparedfor the purposes of sales through the IncumberedEstates Court indicates that during the mid-19thcentury the trench was located within the propertyof No 17 High Street (Gillespie & Royle 2003, map14; Brett 2004, map 21). It is possible, however,that the construction of the Forster Greenwarehouse on the adjacent site at No 1 High Streetin 1867 (Patton 1993, 186) prompted therenumbering of the properties at the western end ofHigh Street, because in the Belfast street directoriesof 1877 and 1878 the property immediatelyadjacent to Crown Entry is listed as No 11 HighStreet (Anon 1877, 177; Anon 1878, 113). Alongwith the adjacent property (ie No 15 High Streetpre-1850; No 9 High Street post-1877), it wasleased by Lord Donegall to Stewart Banks in 1767(Gillespie & Royle 2003, map 14; Brett 2004, map21) and it is likely that one of the two-storeybuildings with dormer windows represented in anengraving of High Street in 1786 (for areproduction of a late 19th-century copy of thisimage see Bardon 1982, 39) was built on the siteshortly after this date. The property is recorded inJoseph Smyth’s Belfast Directories of 1807 and1808 as being the premises of Alexander Sinclair, awollen draper (Adams 1992, 35, 72), althoughBigger noted it was occupied by Ursula McBride, amilliner and haberdasher, at the beginning of the19th century (1902, 85). A watercolour drawing of1851 suggests that the site was occupied by a three-storey building by the middle of the 19th century(Hill 1925, 179). This building is featured inphotographic images of High Street dating between1872 and 1880 (National Library of Ireland:Lawrence Stereograph Collection Nos 2497, 2506,2513; Walker & Dixon 1984, 2, 28), and appears tohave survived into the early 20th century, albeitwith a heavily altered façade (National Library ofIreland: Lawrence Collection no C2415 and UlsterMuseum: Welch Collection no W10/21/192; seeWalker 1976, 125; Walker & Dixon 1983, 7).

As with Trench One, the stratigraphic sequencein Trench Two can be divided into three phases. Thetwo most recent phases relate to the Woolworth’sand Burton Building and its 19th-centurypredecessor. They are separated from the earliestphase by a stratigraphic discontinuity, probablyassociated with the construction of the 19th-centurybuilding, that has removed any evidence for theearlier buildings which occupied the site. The

54

earliest phase consisted of a curvilinear feature,apparently of medieval date, which was sealed by alayer of redeposited estuarine clay.

The tiled floor of the Woolworth’s and BurtonBuilding and its underlying support of reinforcedconcrete and hardcore were all removed as a singlecontext (201). These deposits varied in depthbetween 0.35m and 0.45m. Their removal revealed,on the eastern side of the trench, the rubble-filledfoundation of the building’s eastern wall. To avoidundermining this standing wall, the foundation wasnot excavated although it was observed that it cutthrough a number of features associated with the19th-century property built on the site. Thesefeatures included the truncated remains of asubstantial brick wall (205), partly exposed in thenorthern end of the trench, which was built on thesame, approximately east/west, alignment as HighStreet. This wall (205) was bonded with asubstantial brick-built wall (202) that was at least1.0m thick and which extended, perpendicular tothe first wall, along the western side of the trench.These walls survived to a maximum height of tencourses (0.80m) and were built on a foundation ofrubble (224) that filled a cut (212) with a maximumdepth of 0.45m. A sherd of creamware, dated tosome point after the mid-18th century, wasrecovered from the foundation’s fill (224). Thewalls (202, 205) were not removed and theremainder of the excavation of Trench Two wasrestricted to the eastern half of the trench. Theeastern wall of the modern building also cut

through localized deposits of charcoal-rich loam(204) and dark clay (206) which were probablyassociated with the demolition of the 19th-centurybuilding. The spread of dark clay (206) overlay adisturbed floor of brick and cobbles (207) whichwas set into an underlying deposit of mortar andrubble (203) that extended throughout most of theeastern half of the trench. Associated with the floor(207) was a rectangular, brick-built feature (208;dimensions 0.45m x 0.50m) which survived to adepth of three courses (0.23m) and was built upona foundation of mortar (213) that was cut into theunderlying mortar and rubble (203). The functionof this feature (208) is uncertain; however, it mayhave represented the base of a structural pillar.

Both the foundations (212) of the substantialbrick-built walls (202, 205) and the possible pillar(213) cut through a loose deposit of mortar andrubble (203). Although this deposit varied inthickness (0.10m to 0.25m) its base formed arelatively even horizon. It was probably associatedwith the construction of the 19th-century propertyon the site and in the southern end of the trench itoverlay the truncated surface of a possible negativefeature (210), of unrecorded form, which was filledwith a gravel-rich loam. Artefactual materialrecovered from this possible feature included asmall number of pot sherds probably dating to thesecond half of the 18th century, as well as a numberof residually-deposited finds of 17th-century date.

The possible negative feature (210) was cutthrough a thick (depth 0.55m - 0.60m) deposit of

Fig 3 Trench Two: plan of primary fill (219/220/222/223) of partially exposed curvilinear feature (218).

55

estuarine clay (215) that physically overlay anatural deposit of sand (216) and also filled all butthe base of a curvilinear negative feature (218) thatwas cut into the sand (Fig 3). The estuarine claycontained a single lens of organic-rich loam (217)indicating that it accumulated in more than a singleepisode of deposition. Where the estuarine clayfilled the curvilinear feature (218) it was excavatedas a separate context (221). The estuarine clay (215,221) contained a small number of sherds ofEverted-rim ware (Audrey Gahan, pers comm).Everted-rim ware, or medieval Ulster coarsepottery, is part of a ceramic tradition which datesfrom c 1250 to c 1625 (Cormac McSparron, perscomm). The estuarine clay (215, 221) waspresumably deposited in a series of flood events.Although it contained cultural material, that adeposit of estuarine clay accumulated at this siteduring the medieval period suggests that theimmediate locality was not necessarily ideal forsettlement during this period. The curvilinearfeature (218) was only partially exposed in the baseof the trench. It extended for an exposed length of2.80m, was at least 0.65m wide, had a maximumexposed depth of 0.50m and probably formed asmall gully. The base of the feature was filled witha thin (0.05m) deposit of organic-rich loam(219/220/222/223). The lack of depth of theprimary fill suggests that the gully had not been cutlong before the inundation events associated withthe deposition of the estuarine clay (215, 221)began. As a consequence of only being partiallyexposed, the function of the gully remainsuncertain, although it may have been a propertyboundary or drainage ditch.

Trench Three (J33967430)Trench Three was located centrally within theinterior of the Woolworth’s and Burton Building.Initially, the trench was 5.50m long and 2.40mwide, with its long axis aligned approximatelyeast/west. As with Trenches One and Two, thedimensions of the trench were significantly reducedduring the course of the excavation, until only anarea in the northeastern corner of the originaltrench, 2.20m in length but still 2.40m wide, wasavailable for investigation. The trench was locatedwithin an apparently uncultivated walled enclosureincluded in both Phillips’ 1685 map and theapparent 1696 survey (Gillespie & Royle 2003,maps 4, 6; Brett 2004, fig 49). It is not clear whenthe area occupied by the trench was first built on;however, the town plan of 1757 suggests that theenclosure was developed by the middle of the 18thcentury (Gillespie & Royle 2003, map 8). Pencilannotations made by Brett to one of the maps of

Belfast prepared for the purposes of sales throughthe Incumbered Estates Court suggest that Trench 3was located towards the end of the narrowpassageway known as Bigger’s Entry (ibid, map14; Brett 2004, 55, map 21).3 This alley was firstrecorded in 1789 (Gillespie & Royle 2003, 11), butby 1850 its western end had been incorporated intothe rear of the property occupying Nos 5-9 HighStreet, possibly forming an open yard (cf ibid, map14; Brett 2004, 55, map 21). This property formedpart of the site of the Forster Green warehouse builtin 1867 (Patton 1993, 186), which occupied the siteuntil the construction of the Woolworth’s andBurton Building in 1929-30.

Mechanical excavation by contractors removedseveral deposits of relatively recent date. Theseincluded the Woolworth’s and Burton Building’smodern tile floor (301), its reinforced concrete base(302), an underlying hardcore of mortar and rubble(303) and, in the southern part of the trench, a layerof bricks (304) that could have formed part of afloor associated with the Forster Green warehouse.The brick-built surround (312) of a modern,concrete lift shaft (311) extended along most of thesouthern edge of the trench, whilst the concretebase (309/310) of a still standing structural pillar,itself laid upon a wider concrete footing (315),extended across much of the northwestern part ofthe trench. For health and safety reasons thesefeatures and deposits were not removed.Consequently, subsequent excavation was restrictedto the northeastern part of the trench.

The deposits and features noted above, all eitheroverlay or cut a flagged floor (306) that was laid onan approximately east/west alignment. The flagsmeasured up to 1.60m by 0.80m in size and wereapproximately 60mm thick. Although whenexcavated the flags were badly damaged andcracked, they had originally been carefully laid ona 0.20m thick deposit of loose, sandy mortar (313).At the eastern end of the trench, one of the flags hadbeen lifted and replaced with an area of brick (305)0.80m by 0.80m. It is uncertain whether the flagsformed a floor internal or external to a building. Aterminus post quem for this phase of activity wasprovided by finds recovered from the floor’sunderlying bed of mortar (313), which included19th- or 20th-century window glass as well asearlier, residually deposited material that included aDelft tile of late 17th- or early 18th-century dateand a sherd of creamware, probably dating to somepoint after the mid-18th century.

The flagged floor’s bed of sandy mortar (313)overlay a sequence of levelling deposits, up to0.35m thick, made up of several layers of loose,sandy soil mixed with mortar, brick and building

56

rubble (307, 316) that contained several sherds of,possibly residually deposited, local blackware of17th- or 18th-century date. These levelling depositsoverlay a series of ‘tumble’ deposits (319, 320, 324,325, 326) associated with the demolition of twoparallel brick walls (317, 318), alignedapproximately east/west. Both walls consisted of adouble row of bricks, although they were markedlydifferent in character and their widths variedbetween 0.22m (318) and 0.25m (317). The wallssurvived to a height of three courses(approximately 0.35m) and were set 1.10m apart.The northernmost wall (318) was butted on itsnorthern side by an area of brick flooring (323) that

extended beyond the northern edge of the trench, onits southern side the wall’s rubble-filled foundation(334) was supported by a single course of bricks(321). The southernmost brick wall (317) was builtupon a foundation of large stone slabs (327/328),which were probably the uppermost survivingcourses of an earlier wall (342) (see below). Thenorthernmost wall (318) apparently terminated, atits western end, in a poorly understood north/southaligned drain built of brick and slate (322/337). Themodern lift shaft (311 and 312) had destroyed anystratigraphic relationship between the southernmostbrick wall (317) and the drain (322/337). Thefunction of the two parallel brick walls is not

Fig 4 Trench Three, north-eastern part: plan of earliest two phases consisting of stone-built walls (341,342) and underlying covered, brick-edged drain (343) cut into estuarine clay (332).

57

certain; however, given the narrow width of the gapbetween them and the differences in their characterand foundations it is probable that they represent anarrow passageway formed in the gap between twoseparate buildings – possibly the western end ofBigger’s Entry. The best dating evidence for thisphase is provided by the finds residually depositedin the foundation (334) of the northernmost wall(318) which include sherds of 18th-centurycreamware and Belfast delftware of late 17th- orearly 18th-century date.

The foundations of the two brick walls (334,327/328) and the north/south aligned drain(322/337) all cut through a mortar-rich deposit ofsandy gravel with brick inclusions (329), which inturn overlay a poorly understood sequence ofredeposited estuarine clay (340) and dark brownloam (339). Fragments of clay pipes dating to thefirst quarter of the 18th century were recoveredfrom the redeposited estuarine clay (340), whilst apottery assemblage dating to the second half of the17th century and pantiles of 17th-century date wererecovered from the dark brown loam (339). Theselayers sealed or butted against the base of twostone-built walls, one aligned approximatelyeast/west (342) and the other aligned north/south(338/341). The east/west aligned stone wall (342)was built on the same alignment and in the sameposition as one of the later brick walls (317) and thesurviving upper courses of the stone wall (327/328)were probably used as a foundation for the brickwall. Both walls were approximately 0.80m thick,crudely faced on both sides with large stone slabsand built with a core of smaller stone. Thesimilarity of the two walls suggests that they wereoriginally part of the same structure. They wouldoriginally have formed a right angle but the preciserelationship between them could not be establishedbecause their junction was destroyed by theinsertion of the lift shaft (311). Foundation cuts forthe stone walls were not recognized; however, theyappear to have been cut through a deposit of darkbrown clay loam (345) which was only partiallyexcavated but contained 17th-century pottery fromNorth Devon as well as locally made earthenwares.The dark loam apparently sealed an approximatelynorth/south aligned brick-edged drain (347) thatphysically underlay one of the stone walls(338/341). The drain was 0.32m wide and exposedfor a length of approximately 1.0m. The drain wascovered by a plank (343) which was lifted for thepurposes of dendrochronological dating (Sample noQ10481). Unfortunately, a large part of the timberhad been truncated by woodworking and it was notpossible to establish a precise date for the timber’sfelling, although a date in the first quarter of the

17th century was considered most likely (seeAppendix). The covered, brick-edged drain was cutinto the surface of a deposit of firm blue-greyestuarine clay (332) which was excavated to a depthof 0.35m and found to contain a small number offinds including pantiles and pot sherds of 17th-century date. The recovery of cultural material ofthis date from the estuarine clay (332) provides aterminus post quem for the brick-edged drain (347)as well as the remainder of the stratigraphicsequence in this trench. It also suggests that duringthe 17th century the site was an exposed estuarinemud flat.

As noted above, the approximately east/westaligned brick wall (317) was built on the samealignment as the stratigraphically earlier stone wall(342). Interestingly, the approximately north/southaligned, timber-covered drain (347) was also builton the same alignment and in the same position asthe stone wall (338/341) (Fig 4) and the later brickand slate drain (322/337). This superimposition ofwalls and drains reflects continuity in the use of thesame building plots between the 17th and 18thcenturies.

DISCUSSIONThe results of the excavations within theWoolworth’s and Burton Building are consistentwith the historically and cartographically attestedsequence of Belfast’s development from the late17th century onwards. Arguably, the mostsignificant findings of the excavations were thediscovery of the curvilinear gully of medieval date(218) in Trench Two and the observation that thoseparts of the site represented by Trenches One andThree were exposed estuarine mud flats untilreclamation deposits were dumped upon themduring the 17th century.

The precise date and function of the curvilineargully (218) cut into a deposit of natural sand (218)in Trench Two are not obvious; however, thefeature probably represented the truncated remainsof a medieval drainage ditch or boundary that wasinundated relatively soon after it was cut. No otherfeatures of medieval date were identified during thecourse of the excavation, nor was cultural materialof medieval date residually deposited in the laterarchaeological horizons. Although the excavationshave been relatively small in scale, the failure tofind any other evidence of medieval activity is notobviously a result of poor levels of archaeologicalpreservation. The stratigraphic sequencesuncovered in all three trenches demonstrated atendency for successive phases of construction tobe physically built above each other, albeit with aslight truncation of deposits associated with

58

building on the site during the 19th century.The lower phases of the stratigraphic sequences

recorded in both Trenches One and Three suggestthat the area between High Street and Ann Streetwas an exposed estuarine mud flat, presumablylocated adjacent to the northern bank of theBlackstaff, until the reclamation works of the 17thcentury. No evidence has been recovered from the2003 excavations, or the numerous bore holes thathave been dug in the area (Manning et al 1970, 149-50), for a pre-17th-century erosional discontinuitywhich could have removed evidence of medievalsettlement in the area. Consequently, it is reasonableto assume that the area was a low-lying tidal mudflat during the medieval period. Such an area wouldhave been unsuitable for permanent settlement,although the presence of the curvilinear feature(218) cut into a deposit of natural sand (216) withinTrench Two suggests that the area locatedimmediately adjacent to the southern edge of HighStreet may have been suitable for some form oftemporary occupation or activity during themedieval period. It is interesting that the naturalsubsoil in Trench Two was sand (216), whilst inTrenches One and Three the natural subsoil wasestuarine clay (133, 332). The natural subsoilrevealed in Brannon’s 1984 excavations along theedge of Pottinger’s Entry was also sand (Brannon1988, 80), suggesting that a sand ridge might haveoriginally extended to the south of the Farset alongthe line of High Street. These sand deposits arepresumably comparatively recent estuarine depositsformed as a result of tidal influence in the estuary.Comparable deposits overlying the post-glacialestuarine clays have been found in several boreholes in the central and harbour areas of Belfast,although some of these have been identified as apossible marginal facies of the post-Glacial sleech(Manning et al 1970, 149-52). Whether the depositof sand encountered in Trench One and inBrannon’s excavations in Pottinger’s Entry wouldhave formed a wide and high enough ridge to createa space between the Rivers Farset and Blackstaffthat was suitable for settlement in the medievalperiod is debatable, particularly as it is located in anarea prone to flooding during exceptionally hightides. Significant flood events in the centre ofBelfast occurred in 1775, 1796, 1819, 1838 and1869 (O’Byrne 1946, 29-30; Gillespie & Royle2003, 1), whilst the apparent copy of the 1696 mapmarks areas along High Street that were susceptibleto flooding (Gillespie & Royle 2003, map 6). It isuncertain whether the construction of the LongBridge in the 1680s would have increased thechances of flooding by altering the tidal regime ofthe Lagan, but that the curvilinear feature in Trench

Two was filled with a deposit of estuarine claysuggests that it was inundated and that flooding wasalso a significant problem during the medievalperiod.

The significance of the observations arisingfrom the 2003 excavations in the Woolworth’s andBurton Building regarding both the suitability ofthe area between High Street and Ann Street forsettlement in the medieval period, and the lack ofevidence for medieval activity in the area is furtherexplored in the author’s review of the historical,cartographic and archaeological evidence formedieval settlement in Belfast presented elsewherein this volume.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThe excavations were diligently carried out in frequentlydifficult circumstances by Peter Moore with theassistance of Keith Adams, Nick Beer, Janet Bell, NaomiCarver, Eamon Donaghy, Ruth Logue, Bronagh McIlhoneand Brian Sloan. The author is particularly grateful toRuairí Ó Baoill who contributed all of theunacknowledged artefact identifications used to date thesite’s stratigraphic sequence. Dave Brown kindlycontributed a dendrochronological report upon thetimbers sampled from the excavation. Colm Donnelly,Audrey Gahan and Cormac McSparron have also beengenerous with their knowledge, and their assistance inpreparing this report is gratefully acknowledged.

NOTES1 Both the finds and site records from the excavations

are temporarily housed in the Centre forArchaeological Fieldwork within the School ofGeography, Archaeology and Palaeoecology, Queen’sUniversity, Belfast.

2 The tenacious blue-grey estuarine clay known as‘sleech’ is post-glacial in date (Manning et al 1970,144-52); however, in the central Belfast area some ofthis distinctive ‘natural’ deposit incorporates post-medieval cultural material. This appears to be aconsequence of changes in the silting regime of theLagan estuary, possibly caused by dredging andreclamation of the Lagan from the 17th centuryonwards. In addition to including cultural material, theredeposited sleech is a noticeably softer deposit thanthe undisturbed post-glacial deposit.

3 Bigger’s Entry, a narrow L-shaped alleyway, waslocated between Nos 11 and 13 High Street. The entrywas named after the family of David Bigger,grandfather of Francis Joseph Bigger, thearchaeologist and editor of the second series of theUlster Journal of Archaeology. Nos 9, 11 and 13 HighStreet originally formed the Bigger tenement whichthe family had reportedly occupied since the middle ofthe 17th century (Bigger 1902, 85; O’Byrne 1946,121). F J Bigger apparently took great pride in hisfamily’s long association with both their premises onHigh Street and their house in Bigger’s Entry.O’Byrne records that it was his intention to write a

59

detailed description of the old house as a typicalexample of a Belfast tenement occupied by the samemerchant family for centuries (1946, 121). AlthoughBigger never published this planned account, he didproduce a paper of the merchants of High Street in thebeginning of the 19th century (1902). This paper wasillustrated with a reconstructed view of the HighStreet, titled ‘Ye High St. Belfast in the Olden Days’and presumably drawn by Bigger himself. Theillustration features prominently both the MarketHouse and the Bigger family’s shop, which is flankedby the premises of ‘R . Patterson’ and ‘J. McCrakin’.Although the Pattersons and McCrakens were familiesthat maintained premises and lived on the High Street,their homes and shops were not located either side ofthe Bigger premises. Bigger presumably added themas a tribute to both Robert Patterson the ironmonger,who was well known in connection with the thenBelfast Museum, and Henry Joy McCracken, who hadled the United Irishmen at the Battle of Antrim andwho was subsequently executed outside the MarketHouse in 1798. A simplified version of Bigger’sillustration, ostensibly of the Market House but alsofeaturing the premises formerly occupied by hisfamily, formed one of the four panels which decoratedthe uniform cover of the second series of the UlsterJournal of Archaeology.

REFERENCESAdams, J R R (ed) 1992 Merchants in Plenty, Joseph

Smyth’s Belfast Directories of 1807 and 1808, with anHistorical Introduction and Bibliography of BelfastDirectories to 1900. Belfast.

Anon (ed) 1877 The Belfast and Province of UlsterDirectory for 1877, vol ix. Belfast.

Anon (ed) 1878 The Belfast and District Directory, andUlster Guide, for 1878. Belfast.

Benn, G 1823 The History of the Town of Belfast. Belfast.Benn, G 1877 A History of the Town of Belfast from the

Earliest Times to the Close of the Eighteenth Century.London.

Bigger, F J 1902 ‘Merchants in the High Street of Belfastat the beginning of the nineteenth century’, UJA (2ndser) 8, 84-9, 138-42.

Brannon, N F 1988 ‘In search of old Belfast’, in Hamlin,A & Lynn, C (ed), Pieces of the Past, ArchaeologicalExcavations by the Department of the Environment forNorthern Ireland 1970-1986, 79-81. Belfast.

Brett, C E B 1985 Buildings of Belfast 1700-1914 (revedn). Belfast.

Brett, C E B 2004 Georgian Belfast, 1750-1850, Maps,Buildings and Trades. Belfast.

Gillespie, R & Royle, SA2003 Irish Historic Towns AtlasNo. 12. Belfast. Part I, to 1840. Dublin.

Gillespie, R & Royle, S A 2007 Belfast c.1600 to c.1900,The Making of the Modern City. Dublin.

Hatchell, G (ed) 1848 Calendar of Patent Rolls of JamesI, Dublin.

Hill, E D 1925 The Northern Banking Company Limited,An Historical Sketch Commemorating a Century ofBanking in Ireland by the First Joint-Stock BankEstablished in that Country 1824-1924. Belfast.

Macdonald, P 2006 ‘Medieval Belfast considered’, UJA65 (2006), 27-46.

Manning, P I, Robbie, J H & Wilson, H E 1970 Geologyof Belfast and the Lagan Valley. Belfast.

O’Byrne, C 1946 As I Roved Out. Belfast.Patton, M 1993 Central Belfast, A Historical Gazetteer.

Belfast.Royle, S A 2007 Irish Historic Towns Atlas No. 17.

Belfast. Part II, 1840 to 1900. Dublin.Walker, B M 1976 Shadows on Glass, A Portfolio of

Early Ulster Photography. Belfast.Walker, B M & Dixon, H 1983 No Mean City, Belfast

1880-1914 in the Photographs of Robert French.Belfast.

Walker, B M & Dixon, H 1984 In Belfast Town, 1864-1880, Early Photographs from the LawrenceCollection. Belfast.

60

Two samples of timbers were submitted for thepurposes of dendrochronological analysis from theexcavations at the Woolworth’s and BurtonBuilding (Table 1).

METHODOLOGYMethods at Queen’s University Belfastdendrochronology laboratory in general followthose described by Baillie (1982) and EnglishHeritage (Anon 1998). Details of the exact methodsused are described below.

The slices provided were split into sections toease measurement. The samples were then preparedwhile still damp. The best-looking radii wasselected and prepared for measurement. A Stanleyknife was used to remove rough wood on the topsurface. Then using a scalpel knife with a number26 blade a finer cleaner surface was produced.Where the wood sample was soft or needed to bemade clearer a razor blade was used. A mixture offinely ground chalk and water was spread onto theprepared surface. This was to define the annualtree-ring boundaries more clearly for measurement.

The sections, which were selected for datingpurposes, were measured to an accuracy of 0.01mmusing a microcomputer-based travelling stage. Thetree-ring series obtained for each sample wasplotted onto graph paper to facilitate visualcomparisons between the tree-ring patterns. Inaddition cross-correlation algorithm CROS84(Munro 1984) and Cros73 (Baillie & Pilcher 1973)was employed to search for positions where thetree-ring series were highly correlated. Thesepositions were then checked visually using theplotted graphs. All the measured sequences were

compared with each other and any found to matchwere combined to form a site master chronology.These and any remaining unmatched tree-ringseries were tested against a range of regional andlocal chronologies using the matching criteria: hight – values, replicated values against a range ofchronologies at the same position, and satisfactoryvisual matching. Where such positions are foundthese provide calendar dates for the tree-ringsequence.

The tree-rings dates produced by this processinitially only date the measured tree-rings presentin the timber. The interpretation of these dates relieson the condition of the final rings in the sequence.If the samples end in the heartwood of the tree thena terminus post quem date is indicated by the dateof the last ring plus an addition of the minimumexpected number of sapwood rings which aremissing. Where some sapwood or the heartwood-sapwood boundary is present, then a death daterange can be calculated using the maximum andminimum number of sapwood rings likely to havebeen present. The sapwood estimates are aminimum of 10 and a maximum of 46 annual rings,where these figures indicated the 95% confidencelimits of the range. These figures are applicable tooaks from Ireland and Britain. In the Belfastlaboratory we use an estimated sapwood range of32 ± 9 years. If the bark edge survives then a deathdate can be directly obtained from the date of thelast ring.

RESULTSSample Q10480This sample yielded 178 annual growth rings whenmeasured. Included in this total are 19 sapwoodrings that are not complete. The centre or pith of thetree is not present on the sample. The measuredtree-ring series obtained from this sample wascompared with a suite of both regional and localIrish chronologies. Extremely significant andconsistent correlation values (t = 7.51***; cfBelfast Index Master, t = 5.32***; cf HillsboroughFort, Co. Down, t = 5.32**; cf Pottagh House, CoLondonderry) were found. These and other results

APPENDIX: DENDROCHRONOLOGICAL REPORT ON TIMBERSSAMPLED FROM EXCAVATIONS WITHIN THE WOOLWORTH’S

AND BURTON BUILDING, HIGH STREET, BELFASTDAVID M BROWN

School of Geography, Archaeology and Palaeoecology, Queen’s University, Belfastd.brown @qub.ac.uk

QUB No. Context No. DescriptionQ10480 126 PlankQ10481 343 Plank covering drain

under masonry wallTable 1 Details of dendrochronological samplesfrom excavations within the Woolworth’s and

Burton Building.

61

62

indicate that the measured tree-ring series datesfrom AD1429 to AD1606. The best estimatedfelling date range for the tree, from which thissample was taken, will be AD1619 ± 9 years.

Sample Q10481This sample yielded 146 annual growth rings whenmeasured. This sample has been heavily truncatedso there is no sapwood or heartwood/sapwoodboundary present on the sample. It is likely that alarge number of heartwood rings have beenremoved from this sample. The centre or pith of thetree is not present on the sample. The measuredtree-ring series obtained from this sample wascompared with a suite of both regional and localIrish chronologies. Extremely significant andconsistent correlation values (t = 6.20***; cfBelfast Index Master, t = 4.76**; cf Toome, Co.Londonderry, t = 3.89; cf Corban Lough, Co.Fermanagh) were found. These and other resultsindicate that the measured tree-ring series datesfrom AD1337 to AD1482. The best estimatedterminus post quem for the felling date range for thetree from which this sample was cut is AD1514 ± 9years or later.

CONCLUSIONSThese are the first dendrochronological datedsamples, to be archaeological excavated, from thecentre of Belfast. The estimated felling date rangeof AD1619 ± 9 years for the tree which sampleQ10480 comes from falls into the earliest phase of

construction identified by dendrochronology in thenorth of Ireland. This period dates from aboutAD1610 to the late AD1630s.

Sample Q10481 has been heavily truncated bywood-working. This means that it is possible that alarge number of heartwood rings have beenremoved. Examination of the sample does indicatethat this has happened by looking at the angle of thecut across the annual growth rings. When thissample is compared with sample Q10480 we seethe wide rings at the start of the tree up to about1440 followed by much narrower rings. On sampleQ10480 there are about 150 narrow rings while onsample Q10481 there are only about 50 narrowrings. I would suggest that there are about 100annual growth rings removed from sample Q10481.The estimated terminus post quem for the fellingdate range for this tree is AD1514 ± 9 years or later,but it is suggested that the tree is likely to have beenfelled in the first quarter of the 17th century ratherthan the 16th century.

REFERENCESAnon 1998 Guidelines on Producing and Interpreting

Dendrochronological Dates. London.Baillie, M G L 1982 Tree-Ring Dating and Archaeology.

London.Baillie, M G L & Pilcher, J R 1973 ‘A simple crossdating

program for tree-ring research’, Tree-Ring Bulletin 33(1973), 7-14.

Munro, M A R 1984 ‘An improved algorithm forcrossdating tree-ring series’, Tree-Ring Bulletin 44(1984), 17-27.