Introduction
Salt is a necessary component of human and animal health, highly prized for its preservative properties and employed for purposes ranging from food to payment and ritual. From the medieval period onwards, the production, use, and exchange of salt formed an important part of the economic activity of European trading blocs and emerging nation states. On the Atlantic coasts of continental Europe, Portugal, Spain, and France established lagoonal salinas, i.e. shallow ponds which employed solar evaporation to obtain salt from seawater. In areas north of France, solar evaporation becomes less viable due to the cooler, temperate climate. Some regions of northern Europe were advantaged by geological or saline springs (e.g. in Cheshire in England and in Lüneburg in Germany), or by hypersaline groundwater in coastal locations (e.g. Læsø in Denmark). In other localities, such as the Baltic Sea, weak saline conditions disadvantaged Sweden and Finland (Norseng, Reference Norseng, Vedeler and Bugge2024). Marine salt could be extracted from coastal sedimentary deposits; from marine vegetation; or through forced evaporation by directly boiling seawater. These techniques were variously used across Norway and Denmark, the Netherlands, and Britain (Meier, Reference Meier2004; Van Geel & Borger, Reference Van Geel and Borger2005; Cranstone, Reference Cranstone, Harnow, Cranstone, Bedford and Høst-Madsen2012). These methods were more costly in terms of labour and fuel than those employed in southern Europe, whose countries continued to enjoy a competitive advantage throughout the medieval and post-medieval period. This advantage contributed to the political and strategic ambitions of European powers who relied on salt to provision growing overseas territories and markets. Despite calls for increased salt production to overcome shifting political relationships and over-reliance on foreign sources, northern Europe continued to rely on southern European sources to complement its own production (Hughes, Reference Hughes1925).
This article deals with attempts to obtain salt from seawater in northern Europe by focusing on the identification and excavation of a unique complex of sites situated on the north coast of Ireland and in use from the seventeenth to nineteenth centuries (Figure 1). They were created and developed during a period of conflict and dispossession as the British attempted to consolidate their control of the country, which affected the nascent industry (e.g. Gillespie, Reference Gillespie2006). The longevity of salt production in the complex demonstrates the enduring need for a source of salt as well as changes in scale and technology. These reflect efforts to increase output allied with a more settled Irish political and economic context and the expansion of overseas markets, all of which fostered entrepreneurial initiatives. While research on past salt production began with medieval or more recent sites, the majority of recent archaeological attention has been focused on prehistory (see Harding, Reference Harding2013; Morère Molinero & Domínguez del Triunfo, Reference Morère Molinero and Domínguez del Triunfo2024). Medieval and post-medieval sites have by contrast received less attention and, while saltworks of these periods have been investigated in Britain, the complex discussed here is the only salt production site of any period subjected to excavation on the island of Ireland.
Map of the north of Ireland and the Ballycastle sites.
Irish Salt Production
With little direct evidence of salt production in prehistoric or medieval periods, the archaeological study of Irish salt production has been limited. Of the methods of obtaining salt in northern Europe, extraction from tidal muds (sleeching) or peats (selnering) are unknown in Ireland to date. Given the degree of such activity on the Irish-facing shores of Britain, it may be that similar sites in eastern Ireland are yet undiscovered (see Shannon, Reference Shannon2023). While this may be the case, the direct boiling of seawater, later in combination with rock salt, remains the most visible means of salt production.
The earliest references to the production and transportation of salt appear in the aftermath of the twelfth-century Anglo-Norman invasion of Ireland. This must have remained a relatively limited industry on the island as a considerable quantity of salt continued to be imported during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, often in conjunction with other commodities from Brittany, England, and Spain (O’Neill, Reference O’Neill1987: 84–90). Important Irish ports in this regard were Dublin, Drogheda, and Waterford. By the sixteenth century, salt continued to be imported in sometimes large volumes, but there was considerable fluctuation in the volume of imports (Flavin, Reference Flavin2014: 163). Despite the overall impression of dependence on external sources, by this point a successful export trade in salted beef had developed. Along the north coast, seasonal salmon fishing required salt to preserve the catch. Vessels are recorded waiting at port to load enough fish to depart or occasionally picking up pre-packed barrels (Gardiner & McNeill, Reference Gardiner and McNeill2016: 7). Whether indigenous salt-making was supporting this business, or whether this was dependant on imported salt, is not known.
Early in the seventeenth century, salt production in Ireland becomes visible historically and Ballycastle, on the north coast, emerges as an area of importance. The great impediment to salt production from seawater was the lack of convenient and inexpensive sources of fuel for evaporation throughout the country. With a ratio of six to eight tons of fuel to produce one ton of salt, the lack of native coal resources and widespread deforestation hampered the industry (Whatley, Reference Whatley1987: 9). This difficulty was relieved at the beginning of the eighteenth century when English rock salt began to be imported into Ireland, while restrictions remained in place for British works (see below). By dissolving rock salt in seawater, the salinity of the brine was increased, reducing the quantity of fuel required to extract one ton of salt from around six tons of coal to one ton. Rock salt first appears in Irish customs records in 1719 (Ludlow, Reference Ludlow2010). Its availability for salt production became more pronounced as the century progressed. By 1750, 10,000 tons of rock salt were being imported annually, rising to 20,000 by the end of the century (Hamond, Reference Hamond1998).
The Ballycastle Bay Sites
The complex of salt-making sites in Ballycastle Bay was established by the MacDonnell dynasty. The MacDonnells were a powerful Gaelic family originating in western Scotland, who had established a foothold in Ireland by the fourteenth century (Hill, Reference Hill1873: 35–36). Their presence was assured in the north-east of the country by the sixteenth century through strategic marriage alliances and military victories over neighbouring clans. The sixteenth century also saw their lordship come into dispute with the English government, who sought their submission (Perceval-Maxwell, Reference Perceval-Maxwell1973: 3). Despite open conflict, they managed to retain most of their territorial possessions in north Antrim and maintain their Catholicism into the early years of the seventeenth century. This period saw the collapse of Gaelic control and the consolidation of English power in Ireland through colonization by Protestant settlers from Scotland and England. This project (The Plantation of Ulster) changed the nature of the connections between the MacDonnells and the west of Scotland; nevertheless, Sir Randal MacDonnell attempted to reform his estate according to the ambitions of the new regime and was made Earl of Antrim in 1620 (Hill, Reference Hill1873: 231).
Located close to the most north-eastern promontory on the island of Ireland, Ballycastle Bay occupies a strategic position close to the northern entrance to the Irish Sea. More crucial for salt production were the coal deposits found in the Carboniferous strata in the cliffs to the rear of the complex, offering a plentiful and rare (in Irish terms) source of fuel (Hamond, Reference Hamond1991). Three sites were established over three centuries of production: Ballyreagh Lower and Tornaroan were founded in the seventeenth century, with Broughanlea being added in the eighteenth century (Figure 1).
The origin and development of the complex of sites in Ballycastle Bay have been described by Forsythe et al. (Reference Forsythe, McConkey and Breen2018) and no more than a synopsis is required here. First referred to in the Earl of Antrim’s will of 1629, the operational works (Ballyreagh Lower and Tornaroan) appear as ‘salt pans’ on the 1655–58 Down Survey map (Public Record Office of Northern Ireland, henceforth PRONI: D2977/3A/2/36/1; D597/1/14). In 1720, Antrim leased the works to brothers Richard and William McGuire. The McGuires formed a shareholding partnership, which by 1735 was under the control of one of their managers, Hugh Boyd. Boyd was the leading industrial figure in the Ballycastle area in the eighteenth century, with interests in glass, collieries, and infrastructural improvements as well as salt. His tenure coincided with a period of expansion in the Irish salt industry due to a legislative reform that provided a tax advantage and the opportunities afforded by expanding markets (Forsythe et al., Reference Forsythe, McConkey and Breen2021). He made significant investments in the business and opened a new site at Broughanlea, while the site at Ballyreagh Lower appears to have gone out of use by this time. Upon his death in 1765, Boyd’s son inherited the business but failed to maintain its success and sold the lease in 1789. By c. 1823 salt production had ceased at the site, for reasons commonly attributed to the abolition of the tax advantage and lack of competitiveness (Ludlow, Reference Ludlow2010: 37); however, Irish salt production did continue throughout the nineteenth century at other locations (Forsythe et al., Reference Forsythe, McConkey and Breen2021).
The identification of the salt works locations was achieved by discovering foreshore features in the form of rectangular reservoirs cut into bedrock (McGill, Reference McGill1988, Reference McGill1989). The three reservoirs correspond well with the location of the ‘saltpans’ shown on the Down Survey map (see above; PRONI: D597/1/14). The sites function by admitting seawater through a rock-cut channel, which could then be retained by a sluice gate (Forsythe et al., Reference Forsythe, McConkey and Breen2018). Not only does this provide a convenient supply of seawater at all stages of the tide, but it also allows impurities to settle and therefore produces a purer salt. Similar features have been noted in Scotland (where they are known as bucket pots) and Wales dating to the sixteenth to nineteenth centuries (Whatley, Reference Whatley1987; Wilkinson et al., Reference Wilkinson, Locock, Sell, Brennan, Evans, Hudson and Moffat1988; Yeoman, Reference Yeoman1999). Excavations were conducted by the authors in 2014–15 in the hinterland of two of these reservoirs (Ballyreagh Lower and Broughanlea). These sought to confirm the presence of salt works and assess their nature as they developed. In addition, the excavation of Broughanlea was prompted by the risk of coastal erosion, which increasingly affects Ireland’s archaeological sites (see e.g. Westley & McNeary, Reference Westley and McNeary2014). The third site, Tornaroan, also features the remains of a seawater reservoir and a landing stage, but the area to the rear was subject to ongoing occupation and was therefore not excavated.
Ballyreagh Lower
The Ballyreagh Lower site is the easternmost of the three reservoirs and one of the earliest established. It presented challenges associated with later landscape activity, most notably the continued colliery activity in the cliffs to the rear which resulted in spoil migrating downslope to cover any built structures. To the east of the reservoir, a V-shaped indentation in the slope was noted and it was postulated that an upstanding structure had interrupted the deposition of spoil, resulting in this topography (Figure 2). After walling was located during testing, excavation was expanded to further reveal this structure.
Ballyreagh Lower coastal features, including the seawater reservoir and position of the excavation trench (graphics by J. Patience).
The excavation uncovered the remains of a stone-built structure above the beach, oriented roughly east–west (Figure 3). A square (4.65 × 4.84 m externally), easternmost room was uncovered first, with a doorway at its north-east corner. The area of excavation was subsequently enlarged to follow walling extending from the south-west corner westward to determine whether another room existed in this direction. No convincing evidence of a corresponding wall was detected running from the north-west corner and it was concluded that the south wall was part of a larger structure in this direction—an interpretation confirmed by a test cutting made outside the south wall into the slope toward the cliff face (see below).
Plan of the excavated building and occupation levels at Ballyreagh Lower. Context 210 (purple) is a trampled, coal-rich sandy clay layer overlying context 211, a light yellow-grey clay that contained finds of metal, charcoal, slag, and animal bone. The room abuts a longer south wall within which testing revealed a stone floor.
The earliest phase was the natural rounded beach stones loosely deposited across the interior of the room. These appeared looser toward the northern, seaward end of the trench and were inclined somewhat in this direction, representing the former extent of the beach in this area. In addition, two large unmodified beach boulders had been incorporated into the north-west and north-east corners of the building respectively. A yellow-grey clay was laid over the boulders in preparation for the masonry structure. The walls of the building were set directly onto this deposit, as there was no evidence of either a foundation trench or broader basal course. The deposit extended through much of the interior but was particularly thick (0.47 m) at the seaward end to level the ground. The upper surface of this deposit featured several construction-phase pits containing ash, coal, lime, clinker, and animal bone.
Above these features was a uniform 0.12 m thick band of coal fragments and earth spread throughout the interior of the structure. This context contained animal bone (sheep/goat) and cattle teeth, clinker, shell, and a fragment of the bowl of a clay pipe. This context, considered to be the building’s main occupation floor, revealed no structures such as furnaces that could be tied to the production of salt on an industrial scale. The interior of the building above the main working surface was filled with rubble from the surrounding walls. Most of the blocks were undressed or very roughly dressed and lying in a compact clay-like soil. The lack of stone outside the west wall would suggest that this wall was the source of the rubble inside the structure (see below). On top of the rubble a small fire setting had been created, and a button and whetstone were associated with it. Towards the top of the deposit, two sherds of black-glazed redware and green glass bottle sherds were recovered. While black-glazed redware is known as early as the seventeenth century in Ireland, becoming more common in the eighteenth/nineteenth centuries, its presence here obviously dates to the post-abandonment phase of the works.
The walls were built of locally sourced sandstone, and of double-boulder construction (0.65 m wide on average). The boulders were generally roughly dressed or not at all. A notable exception was the handstone from a damaged quern that was built into the structure’s south-eastern corner (Figure 4) and a broken trough stone with chisel marks found in the west wall. With plentiful building stone in the vicinity, the quern must have been deliberately brought to the site for a specific function before it became part of the wall. The doorway was 0.57 m wide and located in the building’s northern corner (in its eastern wall) away from the prevailing wind, and there may have been a window (one sill-like stone was recovered from the rubble). Extraordinarily, none of the walls were interlocked at their corners, thereby rendering the construction unstable; the prevailing north-west winds in this exposed coastal location would have buffeted the west wall (the wall that appears to have collapsed into the interior of the room). The roof of the building was most likely to have been thatched, since no slate or nails were recovered that would provide evidence of alternative materials. The exterior of the south wall appeared to feature smaller stones than the interior, which raises questions about the original interior/exterior of the building. In order to explore this further, a test trench was excavated to the south (landward) side of this wall. This exposed a 0.45 m high wall face (two to three courses) at the base of which were flat floor slabs that extended south into the trench (Figure 5). The flagstones were set at a higher level than the occupation surface uncovered within the excavated room to the north. This confirmed the presence of the complex continuing into the slope to the south, established on a more formal basis than the seaward room.
The lower part of a handstone from a damaged quern re-used as a block in the east wall of Ballyreagh Lower.
East-facing section across the southern wall of the Ballyreagh Lower structure (contexts 205/109). Contexts 101 and 201–203 represent overburden, contexts 106/204 are collapse including stones from the west wall, and contexts 206/210/211 are occupation levels.
Broughanlea Pan
Investigation of the later salt working site at Broughanlea was occasioned by damage caused by successive storm events, as this site is particularly exposed to the sea. Broughanlea were the salt works at the core of ‘The Ballycastle Colliery Saltworks’ whose control Hugh Boyd secured on 25 December 1735 by a deed of trust. They may have been constructed as early as the 1720s (Anon., 1733: 11; PRONI: D/562/1191). The works appear to have operated successfully at Broughanlea for the rest of the eighteenth century. A deed dated 1 May 1789 describes these works as ‘Those saltworks and salt houses, salt pans and salt stores thereunto belonging situate [sic] in the lands of Brochanlea on the sea coast…’ (PRONI: D509/773). The site appears on two later eighteenth-century maps as ‘Salt Pans’ and ‘Salt Works’ (reproduced and cited in McGill, Reference McGill2012: 5). A further map by Ayre (Reference Ayre1817) appears to show a central courtyard entered by an iron gate to the west, around which are a series of buildings. The building depicted on the east has a pipe leading to a square structure on the foreshore. By the first edition of the Ordnance Survey in the 1830s, this courtyard arrangement can still be seen but the site is labelled ‘Salt Pans in ruins’.
Recent survey established that many of the late eighteenth-century walls of the original complex could still be identified. Ayre’s square structure on the foreshore is a seawater reservoir, now partially quarried, lying to the east of the complex. This reservoir is the largest of the three sites (8.6 × 6.8 m) and features a rock-cut channel 20 m long entering at the northern corner. In addition, the site boasts the most complex means of retaining seawater, utilizing a sea cave known locally as the ‘Devil’s Churn’ to trap water in a pool (measuring c. 4 × 3 m) at high tide. A set of rock-cut steps have been carved into the shoreward end of the cave to allow access (see Forsythe et al., Reference Forsythe, McConkey and Breen2018: figs 5 and 6).
Plan of the boiling pan at Broughanlea (see Figure 8 for profiles).
The most remarkable survival in the complex is the original wrought-iron boiling pan lying in situ at the edge of the site. It belongs to the final, eighteenth- to nineteenth-century phase of salt production in Ballycastle Bay. The pan was periodically exposed by storm action that had, in the past, undermined it and caused it to partially collapse. A wall running around the edge of the site had been erected in 1967 but was neither tall enough nor strong enough to withstand the nearby sea. The winter storms of 2013 damaged the site and, as a result, the pan was excavated, recorded, and reburied with improved protection measures. The area of excavation had recently been used as a garden space with gravel laid over plastic sheeting. Once removed, a rich black layer of fine loamy soil was revealed, containing a mix of nineteenth- and twentieth-century finds (e.g. a leather shoe upper, clay pipe fragments, glass bottle, rosary beads). Below this was a lighter brown loam, with building rubble consisting principally of slate (some with nail holes), brick, roughly dressed stone, and a few fragments of nineteenth-century ceramics (blue and white transferware, white glazed ware). The concentration of slate was particularly noticeable towards the wall to the west; this roofing material for the pans house had clearly slid down the remaining rafters in this direction as the roof deteriorated.
The pan itself is almost square (5.13 × 4.84 m) and comprises a series of riveted plates (6–40 mm thick) forming a basin with a rim 0.4 m high around the edges (surviving best on the west side, least to the east). The pan had been made by a line of plates forming two cross members running across each other centrally and dividing the pan into quarters (Figure 6). These quarters were filled by additional plates to form successively smaller squares toward their respective centres. The rim of the pan was formed by a bent plate added to the edge of the pan, and a further plate then added to gain height. The examination of the pan surface revealed that repairs had been made. Boiling seawater in iron pans was very hard on the metal and the need for upkeep and maintenance is well documented (e.g. Whatley, Reference Whatley1987). The repairs were in the form of patches and bars that had been riveted on to the damaged area and did not follow the original pattern of the metal plates (Figure 7).
Part of the Broughanlea pan surface showing riveted bars and repair patches (photogrammetry by K. Westley).
At the north-western quarter of the site, some of the features underpinning the pans were exposed. The pan rested on stones set on a brick plinth that flared outwards at the midway point along the northern edge of the pan (Figure 8). This surviving half of the furnace entrance featured a row of beach cobbles extending under the pan that formed a base to set and burn coal, the remains of which was evidenced by white ash. The cobbles were underpinned by mixed deposits of ash, broken brick, and mortar, which acted as a bedding layer for the furnace structure, the last phase of salt making on site. During work to replace and strengthen the wall around the pan, an axle with wheel hubs was recovered (Figure 9). The 595 mm (2 ft) gauge is narrower than the more typical 3 ft (914 mm) gauge of later nineteenth-century industrial tramways in the locality. Boyd established one of the earliest tramways in Ireland in 1740; built to support the construction of Ballycastle’s harbour, the line had oak sleepers and fir scantlings (Dallat, Reference Dallat1975: 8). The form of the excavated wheel hub resembles English types employed on tramways in the early nineteenth century (Lewis, Reference Lewis1970: 335). While the wheels are unlikely to represent the earliest form of tram infrastructure in the area, they undoubtedly derive from a tramway that brought coal to the salt works.
Section of the brick wall and cobbling forming the support and grate under the boiling pan, and profiles across the pan at Broughanlea.
Axle and wheel hubs from the narrow-gauge wagon that serviced the Broughanlea saltworks.
Discussion
Salt works using the boiling method comprise a series of rooms with distinct functions. The largest and most important is the pans house, where the furnace and boiling pans were found, and it may feature a chimney, fittings for baskets of salt, and places to store tools and spares (rakes, shovels, and ironware). A second room is often the fore house, used to accommodate a cistern with seawater for the adjacent pans room, or perhaps as storage for fuel. Larger sites may have comprised accommodation, and further stores for barrels and equipment for onward transport. The stone structure at Ballyreagh Lower is likely to have fulfilled this storage function within the complex. None of this structure’s corner quoin stones interlocked, a major flaw that would have significantly weakened the building. That the room abuts a longer southern structure reflects the evolution of the complex: this storage annex must have been constructed after the main building with its internal floor slabs. Salt complexes in Britain have revealed well-dressed stone walling, flagstones, and even windows (see e.g. Whatley, Reference Whatley1982; Wilkinson et al., Reference Wilkinson, Locock, Sell, Brennan, Evans, Hudson and Moffat1988; Ewart et al., Reference Ewart, Stewart and Dunn1996; Hambly, Reference Hambly2012). Stone flooring would have improved drainage and cleanliness, within a potentially more substantial structure as yet unexcavated at Ballyreagh Lower (Ewart et al., Reference Ewart, Stewart and Dunn1996: 26). This expansion of the original complex is also implied by the re-use of damaged materials (the quern stone and carved stone) in the walls. However, the failure to finish the north-western corner properly meant the building would be susceptible to the prevailing winds and indeed it was this wall that ultimately collapsed. The structure may have been hastily erected in response to threat such as the theft of coal, or merely to protect the fuel from the elements; whatever the reason, it clearly was not constructed to last. Storehouses are a common component of Irish and British sites, being required for both fuel and drying salt, e.g. at Slade, Cock of Arran, and Port Eynon (Whatley, Reference Whatley1982; Wilkinson et al., Reference Wilkinson, Locock, Sell, Brennan, Evans, Hudson and Moffat1988; Colfer, Reference Colfer2014). Extant examples are better built than at Ballyreagh Lower, although survival bias is clearly a factor when attempting to make comparisons.
That few finds were recovered during the excavation is not untypical of an industrial site that was primarily a functional, working space. Finds from early contexts (construction phase) were mainly bone; bone, clinker, clay pipe, and fragments of corroded metal are associated with the early and working phases; and the glass and ceramic finds are uniformly late (post-abandonment). The main occupation level of the building provided ample evidence of crushed coal, and industrial waste in the form of clinker. The clinker waste may be compared to ‘bass’ (as referred to in Cheshire), a known by-product of the salt-making furnace. This mix of coal, ash, and salt gathered beneath the pans after firing and, by the nineteenth century, was recycled as building material for housing and roads (Lightfoot, Reference Lightfoot2000: 19).
Carved stone fragments had been re-used in the walls of the structure or were dislodged in its collapse. A sandstone block with a squared, central depression, well defined rim, and featuring chisel marks, probably belonged to some kind of stone trough or basin, possibly to capture brine dripping from salt baskets for re-use or bittern (unwanted salts) (Figure 10). The damaged handstone of a rotary quern raises questions about the nature of salt-making on site, e.g. whether a quern was used to crush salt crystals to the desired size. The key contemporary applications were for fisheries, which required a coarse salt that precipitated at lower temperatures, whereas salt for curing hides was finer. Normally this is achieved by controlling the boiling process/evaporation rate and, if a quern was employed for this purpose, it might imply a crude level of manufacture or salt-making skill. Precedents for crushing salt include a 1698 note by Sir John Lowther, who remarked that ‘French salt is so dear that they bid them send Scotch salt, coals and grindstones are also certain’; furthermore, crushers were employed to refine salt well into modern times (quoted in Whatley, Reference Whatley1987: 44; Hewitson, Reference Hewitson2015).
Carved trough stone with chisel marks, recovered in the collapse of the building at Ballyreagh Lower.
Other components of the site appear poorly suited to their purpose; siting a seawater reservoir on one of the narrowest tidal ranges in the country seems inefficient. Yet we have demonstrated that the reservoirs would have produced seawater in sufficient quantities to refill the pans over the average evaporation cycle (Forsythe et al., Reference Forsythe, McConkey and Breen2018). The reservoir at Broughanlea is the largest of the complex, capable of holding over twice the amount (52,600 litres) of the earlier Ballycastle Bay sites. The dimensions of the excavated pan at Broughanlea are somewhat larger than Kalmeter’s average for Scotland from 1720 (Smout, Reference Smout1978) and later Irish comparanda (see e.g. Tempest, Reference Tempest1942). Kalmeter’s example would have held a maximum of 6800 litres, and the Broughanlea pan 9800 litres. William Brownrigg (Reference Brownrigg1748) claimed a pan with a capacity of 8700 litres was the largest in Great Britain and by the end of the eighteenth century the largest examples held 11,400 litres (Whatley, Reference Whatley1984: 22). The Broughanlea pan therefore fits into a later eighteenth-century date range. Given the average local salinity of 3.4 per cent (Atkins, Reference Atkins, Barne, Robson, Kaznowska, Doody, Davidson and Buck1997), its working volume of 8000 litres would have produced 1360 kg of salt over an average evaporation cycle of 24 hours (the pan being refilled five times). This output compares well with other documented yields by this method (see e.g. Rees, Reference Rees1815). It is worth noting that the capacity of the seawater reservoir is such that two pans of this size could have operated concurrently on site. By contrast, the much smaller ‘Devil’s Churn’ at Broughanlea seems experimental or incomplete and could not have reliably provided an adequate supply of seawater.
Although the building originally surrounding the pan is largely gone, elements of the site, including the main seawater reservoir, flared hearth wall, slate roof, and tramway, bear comparison to other contemporary sites (e.g. St Monans in Scotland, see Lewis et al., Reference Lewis, Martin, Martin and Murdoch1999). In addition to the archaeological remains are fragmentary documentary accounts from the years 1787–88 (PRONI: D1375/3/30/25). These provide further insights into the structures, arrangement, and practise of salt-making on site. Bricks, timber, nails, and slate are mentioned in connection with maintaining buildings, but ‘straw for thatch’ indicates that traditional roofing methods persisted. Other items include salt baskets or creels, shovels, sacking, twine, locks, paper, and rope. As well as the salters, tradesmen included masons, carpenters, and labourers engaged in a range of tasks. More specialized individuals were paid for supplying ‘pan-plates’ and mending the pans, their efforts evident in the repairs noted at Broughanlea. A more general job was the repair and cleaning of a cistern, the latter evidently strenuous and requiring payment ‘for drink to the men cleaning the cistern’ (PRONI: D1375/3/30/25; see also Whatley, Reference Whatley1982).
The rather poor construction of the excavated Ballyreagh building would suggest that it was a hastily erected afterthought to the main complex, but this might also have ramifications for our understanding of the efforts made by Randal MacDonnell in the seventeenth century to modernize his estate. Having survived the tumultuous sixteenth century and managing to retain both their lands and their Catholic faith, the MacDonnells conspicuously set about embracing the new regime, introducing new Protestant settlers, establishing new towns and markets, and encouraging new commercial ventures. That some of these measures were undertaken to display administrative and commercial reform in a conspicuous manner to win favour with the new regime has been argued by McNeill (Reference McNeill2002, Reference Meier2004) at the MacDonnell estate site of Dunineny. It is tempting to draw similar conclusions at Ballyreagh, based on excavated evidence. However, while our investigation hinted at the presence of a larger, more formal complex, as a ‘showpiece’, it lacks the visibility and status of Dunineny. Nevertheless, there is no doubt that a market opportunity existed for the product. Ireland in the early seventeenth century had an established trade in salted beef and hides, and on the north Antrim coast new licences for lucrative salmon fisheries were granted in addition to already established fisheries on the Bush and Bann rivers (Went, Reference Went1958). The fragmentary Ulster Port records for the early seventeenth century indicate that salt was being imported into nearby coastal towns such as Coleraine and Carrickfergus in 1613–15, indicating that the Ballycastle operation could not meet all their requirements (Hunter, Reference Hunter2012).
Despite the inability to meet local demand, the Ballycastle works survived and sources later in the seventeenth century describe it as a valuable concern (PRONI: D597/2/56). The works were one of the few viable salt operations around the northern coastline but were vulnerable to disruption due to the instability caused by The Plantation of Ulster project. During the 1641 rebellion, the site at Ballycastle Bay witnessed the killing of two individuals—quite possibly the salter and his wife (Trinity College Dublin, TCD Ms. 838: fol. 074r). Similarly, during the Williamite Wars (1689–91), the works were seized by the Duke of Schomberg on behalf of the king, leading to a protracted struggle to regain the property and recover arrears (PRONI: D1375/3/27/3).
The Broughanlea pan represents not just the survival of the trials of the seventeenth century, but a step-change in production occasioned by an extended period of political stability and peace, legislative reform, the agency of individual entrepreneurs, and the development of market opportunities. The 1702 Salt Act had a transformative effect on the industry. Introduced by the Westminster Parliament (rather than Dublin), it permitted the importation of tax-free rock salt into Ireland from western Britain. This was an oversight on the part of the legislators rather than a deliberate incentive for the Irish industry, which nevertheless seized the opportunity to make salt production more profitable. By adding rock salt to seawater to increase salinity, the fuel to salt ratio was reduced from 6:1 to 1:1. As a result, salt-making became efficient, cost-effective, and no longer necessitated large quantities of good-quality and limited fuel (Ludlow, Reference Ludlow1993: 112; Forsythe et al., Reference Forsythe, McConkey and Breen2021). Hugh Boyd reported to the Irish Parliament that in 1721 his Ballycastle salt works was the only operation between Drogheda and Lough Swilly; however, since then, about twenty operations had been established ‘almost at every port and creek’ (Journal of the Irish House of Commons 31/1/1743: 539). The acceleration in production as well as competition necessitated the expansion of his Ballycastle complex, a new site at Broughanlea with a larger seawater reservoir and pans. Boyd also recognized the need for infrastructural improvement, with a more commodious harbour and a new tramway to facilitate the importation of rock salt and transport salt and coal more efficiently. Realizing his broader vision for the Ballycastle operation entailed a correspondence with a wider network of contemporary business and engineering contacts in Britain (Forsythe et al., Reference Forsythe, McConkey and Breen2018). Concurrently, the growth of trans-Atlantic and European markets was benefiting the Irish salt trade via a combination of energetic individuals and British Imperial expansion (e.g. Ludlow, Reference Ludlow1993: 205–06; Mannion, Reference Mannion2000; Mandelblatt, Reference Mandelblatt2007; Forsythe et al., Reference Forsythe, McConkey and Breen2021). They included fisheries in Newfoundland, plantations in the Caribbean, and markets in Scandinavia, Prussia, and Russia (e.g. Ludlow, Reference Ludlow1993, Reference Ludlow1997; Mannion, Reference Mannion2000; Mandelblatt, Reference Mandelblatt2007).
Conclusions
The complex at Ballycastle represents a unique archaeological survival illustrating the changing scale of industry in a rural location where a combination of natural resources, industrial endeavour, and expanding commercial contacts proved key to longevity. Successfully enduring over three centuries in a country not renowned for industrial achievements, the complex provides a counter-narrative to the perception of Ireland as lacking industrial endeavour (see Rynne, Reference Rynne2006). The site also speaks to emerging themes in industrial archaeological research beyond considerations of production and technological progress. There has been greater emphasis on understanding continuities and change and particularly social change and impacts on the working population (e.g. Palmer & Neaverson, Reference Palmer and Neaverson1998; Palmer, Reference Palmer2005). One of the reasons for the success of the Ballycastle saltworks was what Clark (Reference Clark, Casella and Symonds2005: 104) termed ‘an inherited landscape of labour’. Salt-making and coal and iron ore mining had been present in the area since the early seventeenth century and an already industrialized labour force was present when the opportunity to exploit new regulations and markets appeared.
In seventeenth-century Ireland, the provision of housing at industrial sites was principally a means to attract a skilled workforce to the country (Rynne, Reference Rynne2006: 436). Housing that crossed the ‘vernacular threshold’ (in architectural design and permanence) did not appear in appreciable number until the eighteenth century (Brunskill, Reference Brunskill2000: 28–29; Rynne, Reference Rynne2006). At Ballycastle, salt and coal workers continued to live in traditional forms of clustered housing such as the ‘clachan’ at Tornaroan. It is in the following century that the transformation in industry was matched by the construction of dedicated accommodation comprising a terrace of back-to-back cottages. While these were no doubt an improvement, they introduced a new architectural uniformity in façade, scale, and internal layout. Like the efficiencies of scale and infrastructure introduced at the saltworks, these workers homes encouraged regularity in routine and manners. The late arrival of such forms suggests that the ‘inherited’ labour force was sufficient to maintain salt production without attracting new specialists. Despite efforts to modernize production and conditions, Irish saltworks lost their tax advantage in the nineteenth century. This had a disproportionate effect on rural sites and many, including Ballycastle, closed as the scale of demand and increasing reliance on long-distance trading networks favoured capacious port cities in the accelerating, global economy.
Acknowledgements
This paper is dedicated with grateful thanks to draughtsman and friend, James Patience, 1960–2019. This work was supported by the Arts and Humanities Research Council (grant AH/L002175/1). We wish to thank Kieran Westley, Sandra Henry, Julie Campbell, Jay Calvert (Ulster University), Tony Corey, Maybelline Gormley, Stefanie McMullen (Northern Ireland Historic Environment Division), Brian Scott, and Emily Murray. Also, Patrick McBride, Peter McCann, Charles Ludlow, David Cranstone, Mark Brisbane, Michael Fradley, Danny McGill, and Nevin Taggart.
Open access
