81 Geophysical surveys at abbey Peter Morris

Introduction

Coupar Angus abbey lay in the west of Strathmore marshy area. The British Geological Survey maps about 22km NE of Perth and 23km NW of Dundee. this local rise as being formed of Devensian glacial till Founded by Malcolm IV in about 1161, its monks (diamicton), whilst the lower land immediately around played an important role in the transformation of what is alluvium (clay, silt sand and gravel). The bedrock was a broad marshy valley between the Sidlaw Hills beneath is red sandstone of Devonian Age. (British and the Highland Boundary into what is now some Geological Survey) of the richest agricultural land in . Numerous The main abbey precinct traditionally lies within a benefactors made valuable gifts of land; its many estates square boundary with sides about 360m in length. This and granges brought great wealth and many extant was marked by a bank and ditch, the eastern remains charters and rent books allow considerable insight into of which can still be seen along the line of what is now its political and financial dealings. With regard to the a raised footpath called Thorn Alley (Illus 1). This nature of the abbey buildings, however, the authors square feature has long been held to mark the site of of a review of the Cistercian abbeys of Britain were a Roman camp, a number of which can be found in led to conclude ‘it is sadly true that we know less about Strathmore. The nearest is at Lintrose only about 2km Scotland’s richest Cistercian house than about any other away to the SW. There is, however, no hard evidence of the order’ (Robinson 1998, 91). The investigations to support a Roman date for the enclosure and at the described below represent an attempt to improve moment the question of its age remains open. A section this situation. across the southern part of the boundary cut in advance In the post-Reformation period no serious effort of house building works revealed a U-shaped ditch seems to have been made to preserve the abbey fabric. 2.1m deep with a flat bottom (Mechan and Burnett The red sandstone blocks from which it was built now 1974). This would seem more likely to be part of the form part of numerous buildings in Coupar Angus and old mill lade system shown on the earliest Ordnance the surrounding area. Unfortunately this mining of the Survey maps than a Roman defensive structure. It may abbey ruins for building material has been so efficiently well be that the monastic boundary was not completely carried out that nothing of the original structure remains square and that its northern limit was actually along above ground except for one fragment of a gatehouse. In the bank of the Coupar Burn. truth, we have no knowledge of the size or disposition of At least two thirds of the square site is now built the abbey buildings though tradition strongly suggests over or enclosed as gardens and yards. The eastern that the present parish church occupies more or less the part, which will be referred to as the Precinct Field, same site as the original abbey church. If this is the case remains under cultivation and is a scheduled ancient and the abbey was built to a conventional Cistercian monument. North of the church, the Glebe Field is plan, the cloister would be expected to lie mainly within currently under grass. The churchyard is also mainly the area of the present graveyard. under grass and well populated with gravestones. After the monks’ departure at least part of the abbey church was used for parish worship until it was replaced in 1686 by a new church built from the remains of the Previous work old. A major rebuild of the 1686 church took place in 1780, by which time it is reasonable to think that the Little formal archaeological work has been carried out abbey had mostly disappeared. This church was, in in the immediate area. The reports on Coupar Angus turn, extended in 1831, before being replaced by the in the Statistical Accounts of Scotland (1799 and 1845) present building in 1859. (Statistical Account 1845, give the first useful descriptions of the site. During the Robinson 1998) rebuild of the church in 1780 it would appear that a number of fragments of the old abbey church (pillar bases, pavements, crypts, stone coffins) had been The site uncovered. A stone arch ‘of beautiful architecture’, which had remained standing in the middle of the Lying towards the west end of Strathmore, Coupar graveyard, was demolished to provide building stone Angus occupies a low ridge south of the river Isla some for the refurbished church. This fact alone suggests 6km east of its confluence with the Tay. The abbey site that there were significant monastic buildings within is on the southern outskirts of the present town (Illus the limits of the present churchyard. It is also stated 1) and is centred on a small rise in what was a broad, that ‘the northern wall of the oldest part of the present

Tayside and Fife Archaeological Journal vol 18 2012, 81–90 82 Peter Morris church rests on part of the foundation of what appears In 1993 AOC (Scotland Ltd) was commissioned to be the northern part of the abbey.’ (Statistical Account by Historic Scotland to carry out an archaeological 1845, 1144) evaluation of the Glebe Field in view of a proposal to Hutchenson (1887) reports various findings made build on this area. Resistivity and magnetic surveys by the local sexton when digging graves. These include were carried out followed by the excavation of six a pavement of small red tiles at a depth of 4ft below trenches and a number of trial pits. The results have surface immediately overlying two red sandstone coffins been reported in O’Sullivan’s (1995) excellent review and elsewhere in the graveyard a possible cist. No precise of the history of Coupar Angus. Essentially no abbey locations are given however. remains were identified but the field was found to In 1975 the Ancient Monuments Laboratory (AML), contain numerous burials. Various types of subsoil now part of English Heritage, carried out some investi- were identified and their distribution mapped. gations in the main Precinct Field east of the churchyard. Since 1993 a number of small scale investigations This included a fluxgate magnetometer survey of half mostly associated with house building works have been a hectare, (for location see Illus 1), a series of ground made in the western portion of the square boundary. resistivity profiles and a set of auger holes. The results Rees and Duffy (1995) investigated an old sawmill site are of interest when compared with more recent findings near the northern boundary of the probable precinct. (see below). The magnetics found no trace of the abbey This had been heavily disturbed, the only item of interest but ‘The site was magnetically responsive and produced recovered was a green glazed medieval pottery sherd a regular pattern of what seem to be NW–SE orientated found in the fill of a shallow NW–SE ditch. Roy (1999) ditches 1–1.5m wide. The resistivity survey gave no reports the excavation of two trial trenches in the garden clear evidence for any surviving masonry but augering of 5 Abbey Road. Here two courses of an E–W drystone showed considerable amounts of apparent occupation feature were uncovered; taken to be the precinct boundary material….At one extreme the survey could represent wall of the abbey or a related drainage feature. To the the remains of extensively robbed ranges of buildings north of this were the remains of a cobbled surface against a background of occupational disturbance and a possible N–S wall. Eason et al (2003) report the covering most of the field, and at the other an un- discovery of a fragment of old, red sandstone, wall important set of drains or furrows against a natural beneath the floor of a 19th century house in Precinct background.’ (Bartlett 1975). In other words they Street. Fyles (2004) reports that three rough drystone were unable to make much sense of their findings. walls were found on the site of a new garage which

Illus 1 Location map of geophysical survey areas: Glebe Field, churchyard and Precinct Field. AML75 shows area of magnetic survey carried out by the Ancient Monuments Laboratory in 1975. Geophysical surveys at Coupar Angus abbey 83 was being built near the southern limit of the square anomaly around the boundary of the churchyard (best boundary. These various works suggest that a variety of seen at the W end) is due to the modern perimeter path. abbey-related structures still remain, but the evidence is There are a few, rather indistinct, linear anomalies too small and scattered to allow any useful overview of present which may represent drains of some sort. Apart the site to be made. from these is not a great deal that could be related to any abbey structure.

This study Precinct Field

Between June 2006 and September 2011 the author The magnetic response in the Precinct Field is completely carried out a number of geophysical surveys aimed at different from that in the Glebe Field and churchyard delineating some of the abbey remains. These included (Illus 2 and 5). The point anomalies of the churchyard resistivity and magnetic gradiometry surveys in the and Glebe Field are absent and instead, over the southern Glebe Field, churchyard and Precinct Field, topsoil part of the field, we find a network of positive polarity susceptibility measurements in the Precinct Field and linear anomalies. Some of these are parallel to the field a series of electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) boundaries, but the two most prominent cut across profiles in the churchyard. the field diagonally. The source of these anomalies is unknown, but the most obvious explanation would be Magnetic surveys that they represent ditches of some type. Presumably these would have been dug mainly for drainage, but they Magnetic data were acquired using a Bartington might also have marked small field boundaries. A strip of type 601–1 magnetic gradiometer. It was measured magnetic data recorded to the east of Thorn Alley shows in 20m square grids walking zigzag. The line spacing little of interest which suggests that the anomalies do not was 1m with an in-line sample interval of 0.25m. After continue outside the precinct field boundary. Neither some minor levelling corrections to account for slight the owner nor the farmer of the field was aware of any changes in reading when walking in opposite directions drainage system of this type (pers comm). and small mispositioning errors the x,y,z data from the Immediately to the south of the southern churchyard individual 20m grids was merged. This dataset was wall there is an area of smaller, more complex, mostly then input to a computer mapping package (Surfer) linear anomalies. We shall examine this area in more where it was re-gridded at a 0.25m grid spacing detail when reviewing the resistivity survey. These before display. may well represent drainage features associated with a building of some sort. Glebe Field To the north the linear network mostly disappears under a broad strong anomaly cutting E–W across the The magnetic survey of the Glebe Field was rather field. A proton magnetometer traverse made along Thorn ‘noisy’ (Illus 2). The northern boundary of the field Alley showed its total field amplitude to be about 1000nT. is in part a high metal fence. An overhead electricity This is highly unlikely to be monastic. There are two line also runs along near this boundary, with a pole obvious explanations, either a pipeline of some sort or a carrying a sizeable transformer supported by metal guy geological feature. To the west the anomaly heads into the ropes being situated near the western corner. There is industrial area south of Candlehouse Lane. To the east a good scattering of reasonably strong point anomalies it has been traced for some 1.5 km, crossing the Coupar but these do not seem to show any particular order Burn and after a dogleg, which brings it into line with the or recognisable pattern. During the excavations in canalised Kettins Burn, following the line of that burn for 1993 in this field it was reported that ‘Correspondence about 400m before continuing east towards Flatfield. between the magnetic anomalies and the recorded After losing amplitude dramatically en route it was last magnetic features was low, and in general was found identified at about NGR NO 239 401. to characterise late features such as rubble pits and It has not yet proved possible to identify the source drains.’ (O’Sullivan 1995, 1057) of this anomaly. There are geological possibilities: the British Geological Survey has mapped a dolerite dyke Churchyard trending SW–NE parallel to the track of the old railway some 500m NE of the Precinct Field. A similar dyke could The churchyard again contains a broad scatter of easily produce this sort of anomaly though its more E– point anomalies, similar to that in the Glebe Field but W trend would be unusual. The fact that the anomaly rather more intense. This is a very typical graveyard follows the canalised Kettins burn so closely very much situation with lots of ground disturbance and bits suggests a man-made feature. The Coupar Angus parish of ferrous metal (posts, railings, coffin fittings etc.) entry in the Statistical Account of Scotland (1845, 1146) likely to be around. There are some lines of anomalies contains a description of Lord Hallyburton building a which correlate with lines of graves. This would suggest conduit beneath a local stream in order to drain some that some of the rather similar anomalies seen in the flat fields prone to waterlogging. Could it be something Glebe Field could also be related to burials. The linear of this type? 84 Peter Morris Electrical Resistivity and Magnetic Gradiometer surveys around Coupar Angus church Illus 2 together with inverse an ERT model profile Precinctin the Field. Geophysical surveys at Coupar Angus abbey 85

Immediately north of the big anomaly and parallel to topsoil or manure. ‘Stable dung, brewhouse grains, it we find a zone of disturbed globular looking anomalies. ashes of peats, ashes of the bakehouse, ovens and house On zooming in, this can be seen to contain a number of of peats were all provided by the monastery for the arable lines of strong point anomalies. This zone seems also fields’ (Franklin 1952, 71). Field walking carried out in to be present in the field to the east of Thorn Alley. If this general area recovered an assortment of medieval the big anomaly does indeed represent some type of material (King 1993). A comparison of the magnetic pipe this anomaly zone might well represent an area of susceptibility (Illus 4) and magnetic gradiometer (Illus soil disturbance associated with its construction. The 2) maps shows that there is no sign of any obvious source of the strong point anomalies is not obvious. They large anomalies on the magnetometer survey which might be related to pits of some sort though nothing correspond to the peak susceptibility values. There corresponding can be seen on the resistivity data. does, however, appear to be an enhancement in the amplitude of the linear magnetic anomalies seen on Comparison of 1975 and 2009 magnetic data the gradiometer map in the areas of highest topsoil susceptibility. A ‘habitation effect’ of this type is It is of interest to compare the latest magnetic data with exactly what might be expected if the linear magnetic that collected by the AML in 1975. The most striking anomalies found by the magnetometer are due to features of the old survey, a series of linear anomalies ditches in the less magnetic subsoil being infilled running parallel to Thorn Alley, are not seen on the new with the very magnetic topsoil. data. This rather suggests that they were agricultural artefacts. Some transverse anomalies on the other Resistivity surveys hand, running more perpendicular to Thorn Alley are visible on both old and new survey plots. These do not Resistivity data was collected using a TR Systems appear to have changed much in the last 35 years and, if resistivity meter with a 0.5m probe spacing. Data was deep enough to escape the plough, could well represent recorded in 20m square grids with line spacing and in- monastic age features (Illus 5). line sampling intervals of 1m.The work took the form of four separate surveys. In each case the 20m grids were Soil magnetisation: magnetic susceptibility downloaded to a computer, levelled, and combined into measurements a survey grid. The grids were then input to Surfer for the production of shaded relief images. It should be noted Topsoil susceptibility measurements at roughly 10m that as the four surveys were carried out in different x 10m intervals were taken over the precinct field years the moisture content of the soil and hence the immediately after ploughing in November 2007 using resistivity values recorded changed between them. a hand held, SM30 model, magnetic susceptibility In three of the four surveys the range of resistivities meter. The contoured map of the results is shown in found was rather similar and for these a single colour Illus 4. The first comment that can be made is that these scale was sufficient for display and is shown in Illus 2. readings are unusually high. ‘Normal’ soil susceptibility The resistivity values in the Glebe Field, measured in values in this part of Strathmore recorded using the very dry conditions, were roughly double those found same meter are most usually below 1x10-3SI. Empirical elsewhere. The colour scale used for the display here observation suggests that values of 2 x10-3SI and above has been adjusted so that the colours appear consistent are often an indication of some sort of archaeological across the whole plot. feature. The Coupar Angus field shows values which are almost all above 1 x 10-3SI and over half the area Glebe Field well above 2x 10 -3 SI. The values tend to increase towards the churchyard wall with a region of very high soil The resistivity survey of the Glebe Field (Illus 2) shows susceptibility (up to about 7 x10-3SI) being found S no trace of any type of building. The linear anomalies of the churchyard. that are present mostly relate to trenches dug during the Given the site’s scheduled status, no sub surface archaeological excavations in 1993. Then as now the susceptibility measurements were carried out. In main resistivity feature in the field was found to be ‘an 1975 however, during the course of the AML survey, extensive area of high resistance which extended from a number of deeper samples were taken using a 1m the centre of the field towards the E boundary where it hand auger. This showed that the topsoil susceptibility gradually petered out’. The excavations suggested that was about six times as great as that of the subsoil. At this was ‘produced by an extensive spread of upcast the time this was considered to be a rather large ratio stony subsoil’ interpreted as being the ‘spoil of site but given the high topsoil susceptibilities found in the levelling or of foundations on the adjacent site of the present survey, it does not seem to be unreasonable. Abbey Church and conventual buildings’ (O’Sullivan What the extremely high susceptibility zone repre- 1995, 1060). During the course of the present study two sents is unknown, though it is unlikely to be natural and NE–SW oriented expanding spread Wenner resistivity fairly certainly represents some zone of human activity. soundings were carried out in this field. One was centred It could possibly reflect an area of burning, be related to on the high resistivity area. The other to the SW was some sort of industry, or perhaps be a zone of imported outside it. The results of these suggest that up to a metre 86 Peter Morris of high resistivity material is present beneath the most the church to the north, the chapter house and monks intense portion of the anomaly, a figure which agrees rooms to the east and the refectory block to the south. reasonably well with the spoil thickness previously Inverse modelling of the profiles was carried out found by excavation. using the ‘res2dinv’ software package and the results of this are shown as a fence diagram (Illus 3b). As before, Churchyard it can be seen that the main area of high resistivity ground is E and SE of the present church. Even with the The most obvious resistivity anomaly feature in the knowledge that two, post abbey, churches once stood churchyard, apart from the modern perimeter path, in this general area it seems very likely that this high is a broad strip of higher values running roughly NW– resistivity zone represents some trace of the original SE across the centre (Illus 2). Unlike the ‘spoil’ anomaly abbey buildings. in the Glebe Field however the churchyard anomaly is more straight sided with its northern portion being Precinct Field somewhat cruciform in appearance, and could well represent the site of a previous building. On the ground The resistivity picture in the main Precinct Field is a small terrace can be seen which fairly certainly somewhat complicated. A broad strip of high resistivity represents the same feature. anomaly is first found in the extreme south of the field. There seems little doubt that the ground level in This can be followed NW and then round the outside the churchyard is rather higher than in monastic times. of the churchyard wall. It seems to end in one or more Some measure of this can be made at the remaining large circular features opposite the eastern end of the monastery doorway in the gatehouse at the SW corner Glebe Field. There seems to be little obvious sign of any of the graveyard. When this was built it would seem soil resistance feature associated with the very large likely that the ground either side was at the same height. linear magnetic anomaly, described above, which cuts Today it is necessary to climb five steps from the door- E–W across the northern part of the field. way level to the graveyard level. Also, as noted above, If the high peaks on the simple electrical resistivity Hutcheson (1887) reported the discovery of what profiles measured by the AML in 1975 are compared was thought to be part of the original abbey floor at to the anomalies on the new data we find a very good a depth of 1.2m below the ground surface. It may correspondence. This suggests that the resistivity dis- thus be that a survey with a resistance probe spacing tribution is reasonably persistent. An ERT profile was of 0.5m is measuring a little too shallow to effectively recorded across the area of high resistivity anomaly to see below the post-abbey overburden and that wider the east of the churchyard (between the black triangles probe spacings might give better results. on the resistivity plot of Illus 2) and shows a more To investigate this further a grid of 16 ERT profiles resistive unit, which reaches a thickness of about 1.5m were measured along the western part of the graveyard. at the centre of the profile, overlying material with Their precise positions depended on the availability somewhat lower resistance. of straight line routes between the gravestones but a A surface sample from a high and a low resistivity roughly 10m line spacing was achieved (Illus 3). The area were collected after ploughing had taken place in recording instrument employed was a Syscal Kid Switch early 2010. These were dried, crushed and sieved to 24 and the survey was carried out using a Dipole– separate out fragments greater than 2mm in diameter Dipole configuration. The dipole electrode spacing for examination under a microscope. The number of was 1m. During the course of the survey the distance larger grains separated out was reasonably low and between the two dipoles is stepped from 1m to 7m, fairly similar in both samples (~2.5% by weight); providing apparent resistivity measurements at seven neither sample could be described as stony. The rock average depths which step from 0.4 to 2m. An apparent types represented in these larger grains were similar in resistivity map was plotted for each of the seven depths. the two samples and consisted of a selection of ‘general All the resistivity maps show a generally similar purpose’ local materials including both probable Sidlaw picture, a roughly square area of low resistivity to the (lava) and Highland (Dalradian) elements. Both samples southwest of the churchyard with higher values around also contain a measurable quantity (~0.5%) of a black it especially to the north east. There is an area of ‘cindery’ material. This looks like charcoal but seems particularly high resistivity NE of the present church. rather too hard and could have come from some nearby The clearest resolution between the high and low industrial site or indeed even the railway, Coupar Angus anomaly regions seems to correspond to mean depths Station having been situated just to the north of the field. of investigation in the 1 to 1.2m range. Illus 3a shows Many of the 1975 AML hand augur borings were made the 1.2m map, which could well represent a heavily about 20m E of the eastern churchyard wall, which robbed out abbey located mostly within the area of the would put them within the high resistivity soil area. churchyard. Cistercian abbeys were built very much to They found ‘widespread deposits of dark brown a formula so the low resistance square to the west could soil containing charcoal which gave the appearance be the site of the cloister with the higher resistance areas of occupation material’ (Bartlett 1975). Was this around it corresponding to the main abbey buildings; ‘charcoal’ the same black material found in the new Geophysical surveys at Coupar Angus abbey 87

Illus 3 Coupar Angus Churchyard: a Apparent resistivity map at nominal depth of 1.2m derived from ERT profiles. b Fence diagram of inverse modelling of ERT profiles.

samples which had been ploughed into the topsoil? Buildings As its magnetic susceptibility is low it is unlikely to be responsible for the strong magnetic susceptibility In addition to the broad resistivity distributions, the values found in the topsoil. resistivity map exhibits a variety of linear features. The large resistance difference between the two Many of these are clearly related to the last ploughing soil types must lie in the fine grained fraction. Of these before the survey. Others reflect some of the linear the high resistance sample is noticeably more sandy magnetic features seen in the south of the field. There whilst the low resistance sample is definitely more are two places in the precinct field where rectangular clay rich. What does the resistive material represent? features can be identified which could mark the site of Is it redistributed spoil from the former abbey site as some sort of structure more sophisticated than a simple O’Sullivan (1995) suggests is the case in the Glebe Field drain or field boundary. In the extreme north a three or does it have some other source? The upcast material sided feature measuring at least 30m across can be in the Glebe Field is stony and lies beneath 0.3–0.4m seen on the resistivity survey. No fourth, western, side of topsoil. The resistive unit seen in the precinct field is visible but this could lie along, or beyond, the field is not stony and its upper portion at least forms part boundary. The function of this structure is unknown. of the present plough soil. It covers a considerable area Given its position adjacent to Candlehouse lane it and although the main concentration is to the east of could have equally well have had either agricultural the churchyard wall, the portion in the south of the field or industrial origins. Nothing is shown in this region is at quite some distance from the scene of any likely on the earliest large scale Ordnance Survey map of the major abbey buildings. On balance, it is suggested area (surveyed in 1863) so the feature could quite easily that this is a geological rather than an archaeological have monastic origins. feature. The circular elements to the north of the Immediately to the south of the southern churchyard Precinct Field would seem to represent regions where wall resistivity again suggests the presence of three sides the upper resistive unit has been scraped or dug away of a rectangular feature. This is some 20m in width and revealing the lower less resistive unit below. When protrudes some 12m from the wall. It has been surveyed and why this operation was carried out is currently on two occasions about two years apart. Whilst there unknown. have been some superficial changes, probably due to the 88 Peter Morris

All these factors combined strongly suggest that a red sandstone structure once stood in this region. Whether this was part of the abbey is of course open to question and needs to be investigated by excavation. It is, however, by far the most promising candidate for an abbey building found during the present surveys. It is also in the correct position. If we overlay the plan of a contemporary Scottish abbey (Newbattle) on that of Coupar Angus churchyard reducing it in size by 12.5% to avoid excessive overlap beyond the churchyard limits, the only significant protrusion remaining beyond the churchyard wall is in the area where the resistivity anomaly lies (Illus 5). One might expect to find a reredorter in this position which could certainly explain the complex set of drains in the area.

Conclusions

When the survey work described above was initiated, the hope was that it would prove possible to delineate at least some of the structures of the old abbey. Whilst an overall plan remains elusive the general pattern of high resistance features in and immediately adjacent to the churchyard certainly suggest the former presence of the main abbey complex. If the central core of the abbey was in what is now the present churchyard then where were the auxiliary buildings such as the ’s house, the hospital, the guests’ quarters, barns, workshops etc? We see no sign of them in either the Glebe or the Precinct Fields. This rather implies that they were either located to the north of the Glebe Field or to the west of the present Dundee Road. The small ridge on which the churchyard sits extends to the west, between Abbey Road and Precinct Street, and this would have provided a comparatively Illus 4 Precinct Field: topsoil susceptibility map. elevated and well drained building site. In the Precinct Field a network of linear magnetic and resistivity features would seem to represent a redistribution of the high resistivity soil by ploughing, set of drainage ditches. There is little evidence that the rectangular feature has remained essentially the these date back to monastic times but they certainly same. A broader high resistance linear anomaly runs could represent a set of pre-Improvement small fields across the centre of the rectangle parallel to the church- or paddocks. Dennison and Coleman(1997, 19) yard wall. This is interpreted as a later ditch cutting summarising information from the abbey rent books through the structure. There appears to be a broad, find references to various gardens around the abbey low resistivity, ‘moat’ around this rectangular feature: including a herb garden, mustard yard and orchards. something which the author has seen repeatedly The rough drystone walls described by Fyles (2004) around the sites of old church buildings in Perthshire also hint at field boundaries in the vicinity of the graveyards. An ERT profile measured across the abbey. There seems to be no sign, however, within rectangle, again parallel to the churchyard wall but the area surveyed, of any main precinct wall around offset from the possible ditch, showed distinct high the monastic buildings. A prominent linear magnetic resistance anomalies at the potential wall positions. anomaly which strikes NE–SW across the end church- As noted above, the magnetic survey results from this yard wall heading towards the probable abbey site region are perhaps the most complex found on the site could well mark the line of an old abbey drain. and consist of a series of small linear anomalies leading The topsoil in the Precinct Field has an unusually to and through the rectangle seen on the resistivity. high magnetic susceptibility implying significant These could represent associated drainage features. human activity. Electrical resistivity surveys in A significant number of red sandstone chips are found this field delineate shallow areas of high resistance in the topsoil in the neighbourhood of this feature, sandy soil overlying a lower resistance clay rich soil. something not observed elsewhere in the field. These features make it possible for practices such as Geophysical surveys at Coupar Angus abbey 89

Illus 5 Geophysical surveys around Coupar Angus Church: summary of main findings. Abbey plan shown is for (Robinson 1998) with a 12.5% size reduction applied. 90 Peter Morris ploughing to introduce artefacts into both magnetic King, M D 1993 ‘Coupar Angus Abbey, medieval finds; and resistivity survey results which change from year to flint scraper’,Discovery Excav Scot 1993, 100. year. O’Sullivan (1995) considers that high resistance Mechan, G and Burnett, A 1974 ‘Coupar Angus, anomalies found in the Glebe Field are due to upcast Pleasance Farm; Abbey Boundary’, Discovery Excav stony subsoil dumped whilst digging foundations for Scot 1974, 53. the abbey buildings. The rather large spread of the O’Sullivan, J 1995 ‘Abbey, market and cemetery: sandy (and not very stony) high resistance unit makes topographical notes on Coupar Angus in Perthshire, one wary of extending this hypothesis more generally with a description of archaeological excavations to the Precinct Field. On balance, it seems as if we are on glebe land by the parish church’, Proc Soc Antiq looking at geological features disturbed fairly randomly Scot, 125, 1045–1068. by farm work rather than some form of deliberate soil Robinson, D 1998 The Cistercian Abbeys of Britain, redistribution associated with the abbey. Batsford, London Rees, T and Duffy, A 1995 ‘The sawmill site, Queen Street, Coupar Angus, Discovery Excav Scot 1995, 99. Acknowledgements Roy, M 1999 ‘5 Abbey Road, Coupar Angus’, Discovery Excav Scot 1999, 70. I should like to thank Mrs Helen Muir, Mr Ian Statistical Accounts ‘Perthshire, parish of Coupar McLaren and the Scottish Ministers for permission Angus’ Statistical Accounts of Scotland (1799 to work in the Precinct Field, Rev. Bruce Dempsey and 1845 ) Edinburgh for permission to work in the Glebe Field, Dr Carol Pudsey for her invaluable assistance and Perth and Kinross Heritage Trust for their practical support and Abstract encouragement. I am also grateful to two anonymous Geophysical surveys carried out around the modern referees whose comments have allowed me to effect Coupar Angus Abbey Church appear to confirm that considerable improvements to this paper. most of the main complex of the former Cistercian abbey lay in the area of the present churchyard. A variety of resistivity and magnetic anomalies are References present in the neighbouring fields. These reveal an extensive drainage network, parts of which might Bartlett, A D H 1975 ‘Coupar Angus’,Ancient well be monastic, but there is little evidence for any Monuments Laboratory Report. Geophysics 5/75. detached abbey buildings. Variations of resistivity British Geological Survey ‘ Digimap’ (Digital and magnetic susceptibility in the ploughsoil produce Geological Map), www.bgs.ac.uk. artefacts in the survey data, but indicate considerable Dennison, E P and Coleman, R 1997 ‘Historic Coupar human activity in the area. Angus’, Scottish Burgh Survey Series. Historic Scotland. Keywords Easson, R, Hall, D and Hall, M 2003 ‘7 Queen Street, abbey Coupar Angus’, Discovery Excav Scot 2003, 105. Coupar Angus Franklin, T B 1952 A History of Scottish Farming. Cistercian Thomas Nelson. Edinburgh. geophysical Fyles, C 2004 ‘Elthorne, Coupar Angus’, Discovery magnetic Excav Scot 2004, 101. resistivity Hutchenson, A 1887 ‘Notes on the recent discovery of pavement and flooring tiles at the abbey of Coupar This paper was published with the aid of a grant from Angus and the cathedral of St Andrews’, Proc Soc Perth and Kinross Heritage Trust. Antiq Scot, 22, 146–147.