ProcSocAntiqScot, 129 (1999), 577-596 abandonmene Th souterrainsf o t : evolution, catastrophe or dislocation? lan Armit* ABSTRACT This paper* considers the evidence for the abandonment of souterrains in that part of east central Scotland characterized Wainwrightby 'southernas Pictland'. evidenceThe suggests that most souterrains here were deliberately destroyed, or at least infilled, and that none seems to have outlasted the early third century AD. The process of destruction seems to have been associated with a significant degree ritualof activity previouslynot noted. postulatedis It thatevidencethe would allowsinglea for episode of abandonment 'souterrain(a abandonment horizon'), latethe secondin or early third century whichAD, might relatedbe majora to reorientation socialof politicaland structures, perhaps associated with changes Romanin frontier policy. THE SOUTERRAIN 'SOUTHERF SO N PICTLAND' Souterrains, albeit unde varieta r f epithetsyo , have been recognized sinc firse eth t stirringf so antiquarian interest in Scotland. As early as the 18th century, souterrains were being discovered, explored speculated an , d upon, whil arable eth e intensificatio Improvemente th f no s brougha t stead discoverieyw flone f wo s durin 19te gth h century. This gave ris numerouo et s antiquarian records of enormously variable quality. WainwrightT F foundee th , f modero r n studie f souterrainso s , recognize immense dth e variety in the form, and probably also in the date and function, of structures which had been classed as souterrains throughout Scotland (Wainwright 1953a). Indeed many shared little more than their subterranean setting. In order to facilitate meaningful analysis, therefore, he took the important step of isolating a distinctive group of large, generally stone-lined, curving, passage- like souterrains overwhelmingly concentrated in Angus and neighbouring Perthshire (Wainwright 1963). Where dating evidence was available (almost exclusively in the form of Roman objects), it appeared that this group could be placed broadly in the period from around AD 50-250 (ibid, 116). Despit greae eth t increas numbere th n ei knowf so n souterrains ove pasdecadese o rth tw t , this 'southern Pictland' group retain geographicas sit l integrity (illus 1). broan I d term 'southere sth n Pictland concentrate e 'see e b grou b o nt n pca Angun di d san lowland Perthshire, extending into northern Fife and south Kincardineshire. Important outliers are scattered south of the Forth in Midlothian and around the northern fringes of the * Schoo Archaeologf o l Palaeologyy& , Queen's Universit Belfastf yo , Belfas IN7 NBT t t This pape awardes rwa Chalmers-Jervise dth e prize. 578 SOCIET ANTIQUARIEF YO SCOTLANDF SO , 1999 Land over 200rr Souterrains O Cropmark ILLUS 1 The distribution of souterrains in eastern and southern Scotland (after RCAHMS 1994, with amendments) Lammermuirs virtuae th : l absenc f souterraineo s fro dense mth e distribution f cropmarkso n si the East Lothian lowlands, however, is quite remarkable. One of the few sites even tentatively identifie a souterrai s a d n comple thin i x s are t Catcrai(a a g sout f Dunbarho s recentlwa ) y disproved by excavation (AOC Scotland Ltd 1996). The correspondence in size, shape and construction, as well as geographical integrity, of the 'southern Pictland' group are such that this remains a useful, albeit loose, typological construct. For the purposes of this paper, therefore, souterrains outside Wainwright's 'southern Pictland' will be largely ignored, with the exception of those few located south of the Forth which figure in the later stages of the argument. ARMIT: ABANDONMENT OF SOUTERRAINS I 579 0 5 0 4 0 3 0 2 0 1 0 ILLU S2 Principal sites mentione texte th Airlie 1 :n d i Ardestie;2 Auchlishie;3 Balnadrum;4 Carlungie5 ; Castlelaw;6 ; Crichton7 Dalladies;8 Easte;9 r Moss; 10 Glencarse; 11 Hurly Hawkin; 12 Ironshill East; 13 Newraill; 14 Newstead; 15 Pitcur; 16 Redcastle; 17 Shirva; 18 Tealing; 19 West Grang Conof eo n A BRIEF HISTORY OF RESEARCH firse tTh modern excavation souterrainf so 'southern si n Pictland' were carrie Wainwrighy b t dou t himself, in 1949 and 1950, at Ardestie and Carlungie 1 (illus 2), and shortly thereafter at Carlungi (Wainwrighe2 t 1953b Longforgad an ) n (Wainwright 1956) initian A . l reviee th f wo problems associated with Scottish souterrains in general was also published by Wainwright (1953a). However, it was with the publication of Ardestie and Carlungie 1, accompanied by a thorough review of the antiquarian literature on the subject, that serious modern study of the Scottish souterrains began (Wainwright 1963). 580 SOCIET ANTIQUARIEF YO SCOTLANDF SO , 1999 ILLU S3 Glencarse, Perthshire :manf thio e seasn y i sit on ts e i centra l Scotland reveale aeriay db l photographye Th . stone principa e wallth f so l souterrai visible nar narros ea w white bands, whil interioe eth mucs ri h darker. dare Th k circular cropmark which overlap wides s it appear d ren represeno st remaine tth roundhousea f so . A second souterrain can be discerned in the lower part of the photograph, as a faint dark cropmark within a lighter part of the field (Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland © Crown copyright) Subsequent work, however, failed initially to capitalize on Wainwright's pioneering efforts. t unti earlIndeede no s th l y wa 1970 t i , s tha nexe tth t major serie excavationf so carries swa d out, at Northwaterbridge (Small et al 1974) and Dalladies (Watkins 1980a), both on the border between Angu Kincardineshired san mose Th . t significant step forward, however, came wite hth rescue excavation of the well-preserved souterrain at Newmill in Perthshire (Watkins 1980b), the accompanying reassessmen whole th f eo t 'southern Pictland' group (Barclay 1980 theid an ) r socio-economic implications (Watkins 1984) souterraie Th . n associated wit earlien ha r ford an t southern broch at Hurly Hawkin was also published around this time (Taylor 1982), although it beed ha n excavated rather earlier, between 195 1967d 8an . Sinc earle eth y 1980s, however, ther bees eha n little published work, althoug database hth e knowf o n site bees sha n enormously expanded, primaril evidence th y yb e derived from systematic aerial survey (illus 3). Indeed, the first 10 years of aerial survey more than trebled the number of known souterrain easn si t central Scotlan Maxwelf d(c sitelw 1987)sne continud an , foune b o et d ARMIT: ABANDONMEN SOUTERRAINF TO 1 58 | S dramatia t a c pace. Althoug fror hfa m fully assimilated importann a , t summar mucf yo thif ho s material has been published focusing on the area of south-east Perthshire (RCAHMS 1994). Only very recentl s fresyha h fieldwork begu yielo nt d importan resultsw ne t , muct i f ho buildin evidence th n go aeriaf eo l photography. Excavations have been carrie t durindou g 199t 8a Redcastle (Alexander 1998) and Ironshill East (McGill 1998) in the Lunan Valley, Castlepark near Brechin (D Alexander & K Cameron, pers comm); Easter Moss, Stirling (R Strachan, pers comm) word s alsan , kha o progresse n antiquaria a site f th o e n do n fin t Auchlishia d e near Kirriemuir (Dick 1996; 1997). e importanOn t resul f thio t s very recent wor s show thas ha kevei w e vastlt i tnho th y expanded database of known or suspected sputerrains revealed by aerial photography may be onl minimaya l reflectio f theino r original numbers t bota r h Fo Ironshil. l EasRedcastled an t , souterrains unrecognized by aerial photography have been identified by excavation, even though both were located on sites where other, well-defined cropmarks survived. Clearly the souterrains of 'southern Pictland' were even more densely distributed than the reassessment prompted by the aerial photographic evidence has allowed. CHARACTERIZIN 'SOUTHERE GTH N PICTLAND' SOUTERRAINS Gordon Barclay's paper (1980) include comprehensivsa e analysi forme th f ,so dimensiond san other aspect 'southere th f so n Pictland' souterrains attempo n d an , t wil made b l e her repeao et t his classificatory work usefuls i t I . , however summarizo t , principas ehi l conclusiond ad o t d san one or two observations from more recent work. 'southere Th n Pictland' souterrains generally tak fore tightla eth f m o y curving passage, which often widens slightly from the narrow principal entrance (usually placed at one end and know 'axiale th s na ' entrance terminale th o )t . Thed y varan , lengtn yi m 0 4 h d betweean m 2 n1 may have attached side passages linked to the main chamber through narrow subsidiary entrances. Recorded passage widths vary between 1.2 d 3.6mman . Where roofs survive, souterrains are always sufficiently high to allow unhindered passage for an adult, even if their entrances might be low and cramped. generalls i t I y accepted that souterrains would have been associated with surface structures, even though these have been positively identified only at Carlungie 1 (Wainwright 1963) and Newmill (Watkins 1980b). Elsewhere they have simply not been looked for, eg Pitcur and Airlie, recorde t recognizeno t dbu traces da contemporarf so y buildings Tealing e , (Jervisg3 e 1873d )an West Grang Conoeof n (Jervise 1862) elsor , e have been remove ploughingdby Redcastleg , e (Alexander 1998). Where identified, the above-ground structures appear to have had direct access to the souterrains via either the 'main' or side entrance. It seems probable, following Watkins (1984), tha surface tth e structure t Carlungisa Ardestid an e1 e represent ancillary buildings rather tha principae nth l above-ground building thesf so e settlements. aree whicn aOn i h perceptions have changed recentlvariete th n materialf i yo s y i s useo dt build souterrains antiquariae th f o l Al .