Fields and agricultural land - ancient?

zmgakt7uw2dvfs

Was recently home in south tipp and looking at the (lowland) townland where I live, it occurred to me that the surrounding fields and agricultural land in general must have been in continuous agricultural use for thousands of years. Have any studies been done on this subject? Obviously field boundaries would not be thousands of years old - but what is a field today in a place like Tipperary would most likely have been farmed for millennia, yes?

laoch na mona

Ireland was heavily forested until a few hundred years ago. I'm not an expert but I'd assume deforestation coincided with the population boom in the 1700s.

A History of Irish Farming, 1750-1950 by Jonathan Bell might be of interested to you. There's also the Irish agricultural history society

pedroeibar1

Crosby Unkempt Sign wrote: »

Was recently home in south tipp and looking at the (lowland) townland where I live, it occurred to me that the surrounding fields and agricultural land in general must have been in continuous agricultural use for thousands of years. Have any studies been done on this subject? Obviously field boundaries would not be thousands of years old - but what is a field today in a place like Tipperary would most likely have been farmed for millennia, yes?

Your best bet is to visit TippLibs - they would have articles on it.
The deforestation started at different times in different places, depending on local industry and landlords. There was a huge tanning industry in Ireland, it took lots of oak bark, the timber was used for staves for cooperage, being exported to France & Spain with the hides. We denuded much ourselves. Profit-grab by Planters (from Elizabeth I onwards) of mature timber for shipbuilding culled more of the native oaks. Smelting (requires charcoal) took care of the rest. Population growth in the 1700's was the final nail for 'ancient' native forests. Sadly too many Irish people have no regard for trees – landlords who had planting schemes and punished tenants for chopping down trees were excoriated (and are, even today, by many commentators on history). For proof just look at all the new houses around the countryside and the gardens are bare, not even a bush in sight, but an ubiquitous plastic slide and swing for the kids. At best it's a Lawsonia plonked next to a neighbour.:rolleyes:

Chisler2

Yes is the answer.  Much of the "lie of the land", sheep-tracks etc. of rural Ireland go back a looooong way.......which is why it is so distressing to see the massive assaults now where County Councils are deciding to drive "straight roads" through mountains to facilitate oil-tankers and tour-buses.  Not us!  Anyway......rant over, back on task!  You could look at the websites for The Ceide Fields in North Mayo and if possible visit.  It is a World Heritage Site and there is a creditable Visitors Information Center.  The historic perspective and celebration of it would bring a tear to the hardest heart..... plus spectacular views over the Atlantic on a clear day. Here is a starting-point:- http://whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/5524/

Peregrinus

Crosby Unkempt Sign wrote: »

Was recently home in south tipp and looking at the (lowland) townland where I live, it occurred to me that the surrounding fields and agricultural land in general must have been in continuous agricultural use for thousands of years. Have any studies been done on this subject? Obviously field boundaries would not be thousands of years old - but what is a field today in a place like Tipperary would most likely have been farmed for millennia, yes?

It's not an online resource, but if this topic interests you then you need to lay your hands on a copy of this book.

whisky_galore

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

Sadly too many Irish people have no regard for trees – landlords who had planting schemes and punished tenants for chopping down trees were excoriated (and are, even today, by many commentators on history).

Many farmers view afforestation as a 'waste' of good land.
On the other hand, the monoculture of conifers is probably not a good thing.

pedroeibar1

whisky_galore wrote: »

Many farmers view afforestation as a 'waste' of good land.

Yes, but ………….by omitting my final sentence you changed the context of what I said about the Irish and trees (“For proof just look at all the new houses around the countryside and the gardens are bare, not even a bush in sight, but an ubiquitous plastic slide and swing for the kids.”)
Trees do not need to be planted on prime land. REPS and tax /pension planning incentives also changed the views of many farmers on forestry. The old 'big landlords' were farmers too, albeit at one or two removes, but the land was theirs, their heritage. Look at the old Plantation counties, e.g. drive around North Cork, Sth Tipp., Carlow, etc. They planted in marginal land, in hedgerows, with an 'eye' to scenery; on the bigger estates the demesnes had roundels to protect trees and provide cover for game. Those people had an aesthetic sense, they wanted to beautify the countryside. Today the average farmer does not plant trees, and in general many trees are being destroyed by hedge-cutting, clearing boundaries/headlands. Nor does the McMansion owner have any aesthetic sense, as is apparent when you look at the homes on Daft.ie and the lack of planting.

Enclosure was well underway in Ireland by the late 1700’s following the repeal of the Navigation Acts by George III (done to help England, rather than to benefit Ireland), which led to a move to grazing from tillage – cattle = fences = fields.
I had a look at the TippLibs source I mentioned above but there are no articles on modern enclosures/field networks.

whisky_galore

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

Nor does the McMansion owner have any aesthetic sense, as is apparent when you look at the homes on Daft.ie and the lack of planting.

I don't believe Irish people nowadays have a sense of aesthetics, what with the vulgar McMansion as a poor copy of a 'landed gentry' house and more unneccessary palisade fencing springing up around the place than a South African suburb...however that is a discussion for another thread.

pedigree 6

Kind of related but is there something about the Irish system of field boundaries/ditches being in a particular style i.e being more curved and with bends than say the English style of straight ditches and square fields?

I think there was evidence of this in southwest Wales suggesting Irish occupation of farms there.

I think they did it this way for a human defence purpose too.

Peregrinus

Field boundary/ditch styles tend to vary according to a number of factors; the terrain, the soil type, the use to which the field is to be put, the dominant agricultural practise; the locally-available fencing/hedging material, etc. Culture is an influence, but it tends to be a small part of the mix. In countries like Ireland, Wales and England there are wide varieties of field/boundary types within each country, while lots of field/boundary types tend to be common to more than one country.

Locally, there might be historical-cultural distinctions. For example in an area that has been planted, fertile lowland areas might be farmed using methods imported by the planters, and this might result in field/boundary types which are noticeable distinct from the poorer upland soil farmed by the displaced locals. But of course the filed/boundary differences will also be influenced by the fact that the lowland soil is more fertile, is (generally) flatter and is farmed for different purposes than the upland soil. Plus, the consequences of displacement might mean the upland soils has a greater population density, and so smaller fields. It can be hard to disentangle all these influences. And then you have improving landlords who come along and subsidise emigration, and consolidate smaller holdings into larger, with fewer overall tenants, which again affects field patterns, but may affect them for Gael and Gall alike.

TL;DR: It's all very complicated.

4ensic15

Fields were not enclosed in Ireland before Norman times. The Irish landholding system under tanistry meant the tribe own a territory and individuals did not own any land.

Peregrinus

4ensic15 wrote: »

Fields were not enclosed in Ireland before Norman times. The Irish landholding system under tanistry meant the tribe own a territory and individuals did not own any land.

But they did, typically, have the exclusive use of particular areas of land (as well as the shared use of other, common areas of land). There typically would be, if not fences, then boundaries or barriers of some kind between the common areas (used for grazing) and the individual-farmed areas (mostly tilled), if only because how else would you stop the livestock eating the crop? And often there would also be boundary marks of one kind or another between the areas tilled by different individuals, to promote clarity and avoid disputes about who was entitled to harvest what crop.

pedroeibar1

4ensic15 wrote: »

Fields were not enclosed in Ireland before Norman times.

Really? If you are correct this must be a very big hoax.

Nobody has yet mentioned the rundale system which was a key influencer in many areas.