1992 DISCOVERY & EXCAVATION IN SCOTLAND An Annual Survey of Scottish Archaeological Discoveries, Excavation and Fieldwork EDITED BY COLLEEN E BATEY PUBLISHED BY THE COUNCIL FOR SCOTTISH ARCHAEOLOGY ISBN 0901352 11 X ISSN 0419-41IX NOTES FOR CONTRIBUTORS 1 Contributions should be brief statements of work undertaken. 2 Each contribution should be on a separate page, typed or clearly hand-written and double spaced. Surveys should be submitted in summary form. 3 Two copies of each contribution are required, one for editing and one for NMRS. 4 The Editor reserves the right to shorten published contributions. The unabridged copy will be lodged with NMRS. 5 No proofs will be sent to Contributors because of the tight timetable and the cost 6 Illustrations should be forwarded only by agreement with the Editor (and HS, where applicable). Line drawings should be supplied camera ready to suit page layout as in this volume. 7 Enquiries relating to published items should normally be directed to the Contributor, not the Editor. 8 The final date for receipt of contributions each year is 31 October, for publication on the last Saturday of February following. Contributions from current or earlier years may be forwarded at any time. 9 Contributions should be sent to Hon Editor, Discouery & Excavation in Scotland, CSA, c/o National Museums of Scotland, Queen Street, Edinburgh, EH2 1JD. Please use the following format:- REGION DISTRICT Site Name ( parish) Contributor Type of Site/Find NCR (2 letters, 6 figures) Report Sponsor HS, Society, Institution, etc, as appropriate. Name of Contributor: (where more than one, please indicate which name should appear in the list of contributors) Address of main contributor. DISCOVERY & EXCAVATION IN SCOTLAND REGION DISTRICT Site Name Parish Name of Contributor Type of Site or Find NCR (2 letters, 6 figures) Report Sponsor: HS, Society, Institution, etc, where appropriate Address CONTENTS Notes for Contributors 2 Map of Regions/Districts 4 Editorial 5 Archaeological Contributions 7 RCAHMS Report 89 Index of Contributors 101 Subject Index 103 Borders Region 1. Berwickshire 2. EttrickandUuderdale 3. Roxburgh 4. Tweeddale Central Region 5. Clackmannan 6. Falkirk 7. Stirling Dumfries & Galloway Region 8. Annandale and Eskdale 9. Nithsdalc 10. Stewartry 11. Wigtown Fife Region 12. Dunfermline 13. Klrkcaldy 14. North-EastRfe Grampian Region 15. Aberdeen 16. Banff and Buchan 17. Gordon 18. Kincardine and Deeside WESTERN 19. Moray ISLES Highland Region 20. Badenoch and Strathspey 21. Caithness 22. Inverness 23. Lochaber 24. Nairn 25. Ross and Cromarty 26. Skye and Lochatsh 27. Sutherland Lothian Region 28. East Lothian 29. Edinburgh 30. Midlothian 31. West Lothian Strathclyde Region 32. Argyll and Bute 33. Bearsden and Milngavie 34. Clydebank 35. Cumbemauld and Kilsyth 36. Cumnock and Doon Valley 37. Cunninghams 38. Dumbarton 39. EastKilbride 40. Eastwood 41. Glasgow 42. Hamilton 43. Inverclyde 44. Kitmamock and Loudon 45. Kyle and Carrick 46. Clydesdale 47. Monklands 48. MotherweU 49. Renfrew 50. StrathkeMn Tayslde Region 51. Angus 52. Dundee 53. Perth and Kinross Orkney bland* Area Region-s^ District •-, Shetland Islands Area DUMFRIES 6 GALLOWAY Western ble> Islands Area EDITORIAL As in previous years, the material presented here is wide-ranging, both regionally, but also chronologic- ally. The inclusion of underwater work is a welcome addition, and will inevitably increase in future years in line with legislation. The established admixture of entries from both amateur and professional archae- ologists, remains throughout all aspects of the work presented, and much of the work undertaken in Scottish archaeology throughout the year is represented here. There are a few exceptions however, and perhaps those in receipt of funding from Historic Scotland should be reminded that it is a condition of support that an entry is provided to DES! As in previous years, many of the entries have had to be standardised, and in some cases abbreviated, so it is essential that anyone reading these summaries consults the fuller original versions held in the NMRS. When an individual object is reported either to a museum or directly by the finder, details are included because the find spot may be of significance. As a reminder, it should be pointed out that when an indi- vidual contributor has submitted a number of entries which appear together, the contributor's name appears only with the first of those entries. I hope that this clears up any problems which may have arisen! An additional plea to those contributors who include C14 determinations (and indeed this is encouraged); it would be most helpful if full details of the Lab code and ± variables are included. This helps others who use DES as a research tool. The omission of a Scottish Bibliography in this volume needs explanation. After consultation with several readers and contributors, it would appear (with a single exception!) that the Bibliography is not missed. This is rather a surprise, but it does seem that information concerning reports on work completed to publication would be of use. To this end, I am currently discussing how best to present such information within the scope of the RCAHMS contribution in the volume. It is worth repeating from previous editorials that: the production timetable for DES is tight and becomes increasing difficult as the volume grows in size. It would be most helpful if contributors could forward information immediately it becomes available so that it can be processed in good time. The final date by which contributions should reach the Editor is 31 OCTOBER. This allows editing, checking of grid refer- ences, limited correspondence about problems and enquiries to be undertaken before the Printer's deadline of the beginning of December. The text is then set, proofs checked and the printing undertaken in January.... This schedule does not allow for any delays, and there are a few simple ways in which contrib- utors can assist the process: 1. Please type or print clearly all entries. 2. Check you are providing all the information required, as shown on the form supplied. 3. Provide two copies of each entry on separate sheets of paper. 4. Supply good quality, clear illustrative material at the time of submission if at all possible. Illustrations should be on film or bromide rather than photocopies. 5. Ensure that the Sponsor's name is clearly indicated. Thanks are due to the Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland for the Region/District map, provided as a guide to the exact locations of Regions and Districts, and for the detailed and illustrated report, showing the ever-increasing range of the Commission's work. This is an important element and of considerable value for local researchers. Thanks are also due to Historic Scotland for reports of excavations and surveys funded by the Department. The vital task of checking the accuracy of the grid references supplied in the entries has been undertaken again by Ian Fleming of the National Monuments Record. This has been carried out with great speed and efficiency in relation to the information supplied, and since a-great many had to be slightly amended, it would be helpful if people could amend their original records. Thanks go to Ian for his patience. Additional thanks are offered to HS and to RCAHMS for their continuing substantial financial contribu- tions towards publication. C E Batey Glasgow Museums BORDERS BORDERS REGION the field slopes gently to the edge of the high upper bank of the Tweed on which the fort and the hollow are situated. Beyond the bank on the NW arc the fall to the field and then to the river level BERWICKSHIRE DISTRICT forms a terrace widening to the W. The impression of a built embankment is gained. Around Wedderlie (Westruther parish) NMS The site generally slopes gently from SW to NE. The hollow is dry Lithic artefacts and apparently drains by seepage, though perhaps by a buried field- NT 6451 A collection of 141 lithic objects, collected around drain. In the spring of 1991 a horizontal growth-line was observed Wedderlie during this century, has been donated to the NMS by Mrs on the NE outer face of the site from the height of the nearby J Gordon. The collection includes a stone axe, arrowheads, Leaderfoot Viaduct, prompting the thought that a structural scrapers, knives, blades, flakes and perforated stone discs. discontinuity existed. The growth-line had gone at the later survey of Registration numbers: BE 620-2. BMA 4100-4237. the site but was at approximately the same level as the terrace noted Daybook no: DB 1990/30. above. To the S of the road are a small lay-by and a low field bank, the latter forming an arc running in with the lips of the hollow. The measurements for the hollow given assume that it formerly ETTRICK & LAUDERDALE DISTRICT extended to this field bank. Some 10m further S, a shallow depression runs concentric to the field bank. This feature was first Priorwood Gardens (Melrose parish) J Lewis noted as a soil-mark on an air photograph displayed at the fort site. It NT 549 340 Exploratory trenching was carried out to assess the may represent a fort or annexe ditch diverting drainage from the depth of overburden and the extent and nature of the underlying hollow, or an old road or cart-track line skirting the S side of the archaeological record in the SE corner of the flower garden. Partially hollow. exposed at the extreme S end of the site, l.lm below the present The large embanked hollow does not appear to have been ground surface, was a metalled road, aligned N/S and possibly previously remarked upon. The size, shape and situation of the associated with the nearby Cistercian Abbey of Melrose.