FAS

CASTLE SINCLAIR GIRNIGOE

CONSERVATION PLAN VOLUME 2 SIGNIFICANCE AND CONSERVATION

CAITHNESS SCOTLAND

NOVEMBER 2003

H ISTORIC BUILDINGS SECTION

CONSERVATION PLAN CASTLE SINCLAIR GIRNIGOE

VOLUME 2 SIGNIFICANCE AND CONSERVATION

Prepared for

THE CLAN SINCLAIR TRUST

Supported by

Registered in England No. 2801722 VAT Registration No. 599 0974 69 FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS LTD University of York TELEPHONE (01904) 433952 King's Manor FACSIMILE (01904) 433935 York YO1 7EP E-MAIL [email protected]

CLIENT CLAN SINCLAIR TRUST 137 Claxton Grove London W6 8HB

PROJECT TEAM Dr Jonathan Clark BA MA DPhil Andrew Copp BA MA Justin Garner Lahire BA Sandra Jack BA MA Richard Jackson BA Amy Jones BA MA Adam Nash BSc MA

REPORT PREPARED BY Dr Jonathan Clark BA MA DPhil Sandra Jack BA MA

REPORT REVIEWED BY Rochelle Rowell BA MA DPhil

REPORT AUTHORISED BY Justin Garner-Lahire BA

Registered in England No. 2801722 VAT Registration No. 599 0974 69 FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd i

LIST OF CONTENTS

Contents Page

PART 3 CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE 1 3.1 SUMMARY 1 3.2 BASIS OF ASSESSMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE 3 3.3 GENERAL STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE 4 3.4 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE FOR ELEMENTS ZONE BY ZONE 5 3.5 ISSUES AND VULNERABILITIES 10

PART 4 POLICIES 12 4.1 POLICIES FOR THE RETENTION OF SIGNIFICANCE 12 4.2 POLICIES FOR CHANGE AND THE ENHANCEMENT OF 14 SIGNIFICANCE 4.3 POLICIES FOR ACCESS, PRESENTATION AND USE 15 4.4 POLICIES FOR MANAGEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION 17

PART 5 IMPLEMENTATION STATEMENT 18 5.1 UNDERSTANDING THE STRUCTURE 18 5.2 OPTIONS FOR TREATMENT 21

PART 6 GAZETTEER 28 ZONE 1 THE OUTER BAILEY 28 ZONE 2 THE NORTH RANGE 37 ZONE 3 THE TOWER HOUSE 40 ZONE 4 THE INNER BAILEY 42 ZONE 5 CASTLE HAVEN 48 ZONE 6 SURROUNDING AREA 50

Appendices

J Preliminary tourism survey Ji

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd

PART 3

CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd 1

PART 3 CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE

3.1 SUMMARY

The site which is the focus of this Conservation Plan is historically significant within Caithness, having served as the seat of the Earls of Caithness for over two centuries. Since its abandonment, Castle Sinclair Girnigoe has taken on iconic status within the region, and is a well-known landmark and tourist attraction. Despite this, the site is at great risk from continued dilapidation and exposure along the sea coast. This threat has been internationally recognised with the castle’s placement on the World Monument Fund’s 2002 watch list of the 100 Most Endangered Sites in the World. This Conservation Plan is intended to aid in the preservation of this site through the acknowledgement, retention and enhancement of its cultural significance.

Heritage Asset Castle Sinclair Girnigoe is the result of construction on and occupation of the site from the late 14th to the late 17th centuries. Buildings remain standing within the Inner and Outer Baileys, and of particular note for their high level of preservation are the West Gatehouse and Tower House. Archaeological deposits on the site may relate to all periods of the castle’s occupation and disuse, and represent an invaluable record of the site which has never previously been investigated.

Statutory and Non-Statutory Designations The Inner and Outer Baileys of the castle are protected as a Scheduled Ancient Monument. As stated above, the castle was included in the World Monument Fund’s 2002 watch list of the 100 Most Endangered Sites.

Vulnerability The site has been in a state of ruin for over three hundred years and has been steadily deteriorating throughout this period. This process has accelerated over the last century, and the castle is now in danger of further collapse and loss of fabric, putting the structural stability and future survival of the castle at risk. Inevitably, this entails the loss of significant archaeological and architectural evidence, crucial to the understanding of the site, as well as the degradation of a highly valuable heritage asset. The castle is currently hazardous to the public, and further deterioration will raise serious doubts over the viability of future accessibility.

Summary of Policies This Conservation Plan encompasses policies for the retention of significance, for guiding change and the enhancement of significance, policies for access, presentation and use and for the management of the site and the implementation of a management plan. These policies, briefly summarised, are:

Policies for the retention of significance • Actions today should not compromise the availability of cultural resources in the future. • The castle must be consolidated to prevent further loss of historic fabric, areas of known structural weakness remedied as a matter of priority, and measures to prevent further deterioration undertaken. • Any proposals for the site of the castle should be based on an understanding of its archaeological and historical significance and should be sensitive to this. • Any proposals for the site of the castle should be based on an understanding of its environmental

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd 2

significance and should be sensitive to this. • Efforts should be made to identify more closely the archaeological evidence relating to the outworks of the castle. • Evidence for the deliberate modification of the marine environment and the preservation of archaeological evidence below water should be fully assessed.

Policies for change and the enhancement of significance • Prior to the finalisation of any development proposal, an appropriate scheme of archaeological evaluation must be undertaken. • Any development of the castle should seek to retain and enhance its historic and landscape contexts. • New build in any proximity to the castle should be sensitive to the historic setting and reversible, whilst respecting the extent of the scheduled monument and its immediate surroundings. • All fabric intervention or ground works associated with the development of the site should be either archaeologically monitored or undertaken by a suitable archaeological contractor. • Where there is opportunity, efforts should be made to understand the site more fully, both in terms of the archaeological evidence in and around the castle complex, and in relation to its landscape setting. • Where structural archaeological features are uncovered in situ, they should be preserved through either consolidation or backfilling, depending on archaeological and practical considerations.

Policies for access, presentation and use • Sustainable and structured visitor access should be provided in and around the castle, designed in accordance with site layout. • Dangerous areas and structures must be made safe where public access is to be provided into the site. • It is necessary and desirable that disabled access be provided, as far as possible, across the site. Where such access remains difficult or impossible, alternative forms of site presentation will be provided. • Access to the castle should be improved, enabling all visitors to reach the site easily and without damage to local environmental significance. • Interpretation at a wide variety of levels should be provided on site. • Public and academic awareness of the site should be raised, highlighting its historical, archaeological and architectural significance. • Visitors will be encouraged to use appropriate entry routes into the site in order to discourage access across former structures which can cause damage to the site. • Where practicable, the provision of visitor service will be restricted to the outskirts of the site. • Long term financial provision should be made for the repair and upkeep of the site.

Policies for management and implementation • A management plan/programme will be prepared for the site and reviewed at regular intervals. • Joint promotion with other cultural attractions in the north Caithness area will be reviewed. • Provision for the storage and curation of collections associated with the castle site should be made locally. • The Clan Sinclair Trust will seek full consultation with appropriate bodies in the drafting and implementation of a full management plan/programme for the site. • Regular reviews of the condition of all elements should be undertaken in order to identify areas in need

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd 3

of repair and consolidation.

3.2 BASIS OF ASSESSMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE

The identification of cultural significance in this document is based upon the recommendations of James Semple Kerr as set out in The Conservation Plan (1996), and on the general guidelines in the Heritage Lottery Fund’s Conservation Plans for Historic Places (1998). The cultural significance of any historic place is unique - it is derived from the particular history, archaeology, topography and condition of the site. The assessment of this significance for the purposes of a Conservation Plan is more detailed than that provided for the purposes of designation as a legally protected site. The aim is not simply to rank the place within a set of comparable places in order to identify and protect those of most importance, but rather, to provide a clear and detailed assessment of that comparative significance and of the significance of individual elements within the place. This provides the owners and users of historic places with a clear assessment, based on detailed research, of the significance of the whole site within its historic and geographical context and of the importance of its individual elements. The Conservation Plan allows for the formulation of management and development plans in which the retention of that significance is paramount.

To be effective, therefore, each Conservation Plan must base its assessment of significance on criteria relevant to the place, and the issues addressed will vary from one Conservation Plan to another. For that reason, it is important that the criteria emerge as a logical progression from the understanding of the site and are clearly set out to facilitate their discussion between the drafters and the users of the Plan.

In the case of Castle Sinclair Girnigoe, individual elements have been assessed for their significance on the basis of their ability to demonstrate the following: development of fortifications; military history; international history or culture; Scottish history; local history; associational links; quality of archaeological information; archaeological potential; aesthetic qualities; amenity value; issues of local pride and/or familial identity and pride; the symbolic role of the castle in the landscape; visual and imaginative impact; development of domestic arrangements within castles; association with notable persons and events; architectural significance; contribution to sense of place; setting within the wider landscape; innovations in structural design.

Ranking of significance Furthermore, using the criteria set out above, significance has been ranked in the following way:

• International significance - those elements which demonstrate connections with international history and culture. • Exceptional significance - elements which can be demonstrated to have specific relevance to British and local history or culture, and/or are of extraordinary or unique archaeological or architectural merit. • Considerable significance - elements which can be strongly shown to demonstrate several areas of cultural significance. • Some significance - elements which can be shown to demonstrate at least one area of cultural significance. • Little significance - elements which can not be shown to demonstrate any particular cultural significance but which are not intrusive.

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd 4

• Intrusive - elements which are identified as intrusive may include those which have a degree of cultural significance, but which detract from elements of greater significance.

Two contexts for the assessment of significance Significance is presented in this document in two forms:

1. General statement of significance. 2. Significance of surviving elements.

The usefulness of this method was felt to outweigh its limitations substantially. In applying a wide, but site- specific, set of criteria in two different ways, significance is identified as closely as possible. This should facilitate the drafting of conservation policies and, if used always in concert with Part 1, Understanding the Site, should generate high-quality debate regarding the best future management of Castle Sinclair Girnigoe. We advise, however, that the significance statement is revisited and revised within seven years, as future research and changing priorities will almost certainly require revisions to be made.

Mode and implications of the assessment No scoring system has been employed; assignment to a category of significance is a value judgement based on the knowledge and professional expertise of the drafters of the Conservation Plan in consultation with the Clan Sinclair Trust, who have responsibility for the site.

This ranking of significance is designed to be of assistance in understanding the relative importance of different elements of the site. It is critical, however, that the designation of ‘some significance’ and ‘little significance’ should not be regarded as a suggestion that individual elements might be removed or damaged without affecting the significance of the site as a whole. Rather, the system should assist the formulation of positive policies regarding the deceleration of physical deterioration, the general enhancement of the site, the sensible targeting of limited budgets, and the commissioning of further research.

3.3 GENERAL STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE

Castle Sinclair Girnigoe is of international significance for the following reasons: • The Sinclairs were a family of national importance throughout the medieval period and still hold the Earldom today. Their many descendants still populate much of the North Highlands. As the hereditary seat of the Clan Sinclair, the castle is the focus for the international family organisation which has strong links to the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand (international history and culture, Scottish history, associational links, issues of familial identity and pride, the symbolic role of castles in the landscape, association with notable persons). • The castle is an example of a 16th century Scottish tower house complex, in a good state of preservation and maintaining much of its internal planning (Scottish history, quality of archaeological information, archaeological potential, the symbolic role of castles in the landscape, development of the domestic arrangements within castles, architectural significance).

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd 5

Castle Sinclair Girnigoe is of exceptional importance for the following reasons: • The castle presents a record of development, use and abandonment within a maximum period of 300 years (Scottish history, local history, quality of archaeological information, archaeological potential, development of the domestic arrangements within castles, architectural significance). • Architectural innovation is demonstrated several times in the construction of the castle, such as in the considerable length of the northwest bretasche and its inclusion of a fireplace, and in the use of a cantilever system above the oriel window (quality of archaeological information, visual and imaginative impact, architectural significance, innovations in structural design). • The castle holds iconic status within Caithness, and functions both as a source of pride and as an attraction for local people and tourists (local history, the symbolic role of castles in the landscape, amenity value, contribution to sense of place).

Castle Sinclair Girnigoe is of considerable significance for the following reasons: • The castle’s location on the edge of Sinclair Bay creates a great visual impact and has contributed to the reputation of the castle as a romantic ruin since the 18th century (aesthetic qualities, visual and imaginative impact, contribution to sense of place, setting within wider landscape). • The Sinclairs were amongst the earliest Scottish families to adopt artillery, and the castle is notable for including gun-loops and gun-ports in its construction (development of fortifications, military history). • The castle played a role in the Civil War when garrisoned by Cromwell’s troops in the 1650s (Scottish history, military history).

3.4 STATEMENTS OF SIGNIFICANCE FOR ELEMENTS ZONE BY ZONE

As described in Volume 1, the site is divided into six geographical zones which serve primarily as visual aids in the discussion of the site. These zones have no significance other than their occasional reflection of historical/structural areas.

Zone 1 includes the structures to northeast, southeast and southwest of the Outer Bailey of the castle (the structures commonly known as Castle Sinclair) and the western and southeastern barbicans. Zone 2 includes the structures of the North Range of the Outer Bailey. Zone 3 is formed by the Tower House. Zone 4 includes the structures of the Inner Bailey. Zone 5 is formed by elements associated with Castle Haven. Zone 6 consists of the Surrounding Area.

Zone 1 The Outer Bailey

General significance of zone 1 Zone 1 is composed of the structures in the northeast, southeast and southwest of the Outer Bailey, and the South and West Barbicans. This area has always formed an integral part of the castle complex and this is evidenced both by the dry moats surrounding the castle and by the fabric of the buildings. Now greatly ruined, the floor level of the courtyard and of many of the buildings has been raised by over half a metre through the presence

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd 6 of collapsed masonry. This creates considerable archaeological potential throughout this area, both for the clarification of the plan and in the assignment of function (local history, quality of archaeological information, archaeological potential, the symbolic role of castles in the landscape, contribution to sense of place).

1-1 The West Barbican The West Barbican is of considerable significance as it was part of the main access route into the castle and functioned, together with the gatehouse complex, in creating a highly defensive entrance. Although little now remains visible above ground, there is evidence of structures surviving which may provide more information on the form and nature of the bridge over the moat (development of fortifications, archaeological potential, innovations in structural design).

1-2 The West Gatehouse The West Gatehouse is of exceptional significance as the principal entrance to the castle, the second largest surviving structure, and as the clearest example of the chronological development of the site. Originally, this structure formed a keep-gatehouse, a rare form in Scotland, and the earliest building on the site. The entire ground floor is currently filled with rubble and may contain considerable archaeological evidence. The crossing of the dry moat is structurally and architecturally complex, and its relation to the West Barbican is also of note (development of fortifications, quality of archaeological information, archaeological potential, visual and imaginative impact, development of domestic arrangements within castles, architectural significance, innovations of structural design).

1-3 The South Range The South Range is of considerable significance as it is integral to the domestic planning of the castle and demonstrates multiple phases of construction. Part of the 15th century curtain wall is included in the Range and features early gun-loops. A considerable amount of archaeological evidence may be concealed by tumble within the stair tower (archaeological potential, development of domestic arrangements within castles).

1-4 The South Barbican The South Barbican is of considerable significance as part of the outer defences of the castle and in revealing the high level of security which surrounded the site (development of fortifications, archaeological potential).

1-5 The South Gate The South Gate is of considerable significance due to the complexity and defensibility of its entrance arrangements. The bridging of the dry moat by the north curtain wall demonstrates excellent construction skills and is a defining visual feature of the site (development of fortifications, quality of archaeological information, visual and imaginative impact, innovations in structural design).

1-6 The East Range The East Range is of considerable significance because it was integral to the functioning of the castle complex through the provision of vital service accommodation (archaeological potential, development of domestic arrangements within castles).

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd 7

1-7 The Outer Bailey Courtyard The Outer Bailey Courtyard is of considerable significance, having formed an enclosed space since the establishment of the castle. It is likely to contain archaeological deposits which span the entire period of the castle’s existence, including structures associated with domestic services (quality of archaeological information, archaeological potential, development of domestic arrangements within castles).

Zone 2 The North Range

General significance of Zone 2 Zone 2 is formed by the buildings of the North Range of the Outer Bailey. These buildings provided the principal lodgings ranges and hall within the Outer Bailey, and were of central importance to the daily functioning of the castle. Much of the fabric of the East Wing and West Tower remain standing. Collapse fills the ground floor of the entire range to a depth of over 1.0m and is likely to have preserved a considerable amount of information about the buildings (quality of archaeological information, archaeological potential, aesthetic qualities, visual and imaginative impact, development of domestic arrangements within castles).

2-1 The East Wing The East Wing is of considerable significance because it demonstrates the high quality of lodgings within the Outer Bailey, as evidenced by the provision of fireplaces and garderobes. Much of the fabric of this structure survives, and its relation to the South Gate is also of note (quality of archaeological information, archaeological potential, development of domestic arrangements within castles, innovations in structural design).

2-2 The Central Block The Central Block is of considerable significance due to its pivotal role as the hall within the Outer Bailey. Its direct relation to the flanking lodging ranges is of particular note in reflecting the arrangement of daily life within the castle. Much evidence is now lost through collapse; however, the ground floor is filled with rubble and may preserve further information about the form and structure of the building (archaeological potential, development of domestic arrangements within the castles).

2-3 The West Tower The West Tower is of considerable significance because of its role in the provision of lodgings within the Outer Bailey. The blocked opening reflects the changing use and function of buildings within the castle (quality of archaeological information, archaeological potential, development of domestic arrangements within castles).

Zone 3 The Tower House

General statement of significance The Tower House forms the high-status nucleus of the castle complex and is a coherently planned structure of the 16th and early 17th centuries. It is considered to be the seat of the Clan Sinclair and is a well-known building throughout Caithness. It is also a readily comprehensible building, and greatly enhances visitor understanding of the site (international culture, Scottish History, associational links, aesthetic qualities, issues

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd 8 of local pride, issues of familial identity and pride, visual and imaginative impact, contribution to sense of place, setting within wider landscape).

3-1 The Tower House The Tower House is of exceptional significance as it is architecturally and structurally distinctive and innovative. It incorporates unusual and unique features such as an enclosed bretasche heated by a fireplace, and a concealed muniments room. It is the best preserved building within the castle complex and was the focus of activity within the castle, both historically and currently, functioning in the past as a microcosm of the castle complex (development of fortifications, Scottish history, local history, associational links, quality of archaeological information, aesthetic qualities, amenity value, the symbolic role of castles in the landscape, development of domestic arrangements within castles, association with notable persons and events, architectural significance, innovations in structural design).

Zone 4 The Inner Bailey

General Statement of Significance The Inner Bailey was the focus for high-status activity and accommodation in the castle, and its utilisation has always been of fundamental importance. The survival of the entire complex is of particular note. Now much ruined, the structures are buried up to a depth of 1.0m but are likely to be well-preserved (quality of archaeological information, archaeological potential, development of domestic arrangements within castles).

4-1 The North Range The North Range is of considerable significance because of its relationship to the Tower House and its function as high-status lodgings. The ground floor is buried to a depth of 1.0m; however, it is likely to contain much information about the structure (quality of archaeological information, archaeological potential, development of domestic arrangements within castles).

4-2 The Great Hall The Great Hall is of considerable significance due to it important role within the castle complex. Now obscured by a covering of wall-tumble and turf, the structure may still stand to a significant height and may preserve considerable archaeological evidence (archaeological potential, development of domestic arrangements within castles).

4-3 The Eastern Barbican and Watergate The Eastern Barbican and Watergate are of considerable significance in providing seaward defences for the Inner Bailey. The utilisation of site topography is notable, as is the provision of seashore access by means of the sallyport (development of fortifications, quality of archaeological information, archaeological potential, visual and imaginative impact, innovations in structural design).

4-4 The South Range and Curtain Wall The South Range and Curtain Wall are of considerable significance due to their relationship to the Tower House and their domestic role within the castle complex. They preserve a considerable amount of information about

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd 9 the phasing and development of the site. The Curtain Wall incorporates embrasures intended for early hook guns. These structures played a vital role in the functioning of the castle and in its defence (development of fortifications, quality of archaeological information, development of domestic arrangements within castles).

4-5 The Inner Bailey Courtyard The Inner Bailey Courtyard is of considerable significance in forming an enclosed space from at least the 15th century. It is likely to contain archaeological deposits which span the entire period of the castle’s existence, and which may even pre-date the castle’s establishment (quality of archaeological information, archaeological potential, development of domestic arrangements within castles).

Zone 5 Castle Haven

General significance of Zone 5 The elements which constitute Zone 5 are of considerable significance due to their close relationship to the castle and the surrounding landscape. The coastal position of these elements is indicative of the importance of the sea to the inhabitants of Caithness throughout its history (Scottish history; local history; archaeological potential; visual and imaginative impact; contribution to sense of place; setting within the wider landscape).

5-1 Castle Haven Promontory Castle Haven Promontory is of considerable significance due to its probable association with the castle. Although obscured by turf, it is likely that enough evidence remains to identify and date the surviving structures more closely. It has the archaeological potential to retain evidence for the pre-castle use of the site (archaeological potential, setting within the wider landscape).

5-2 The Stack The Stack is of considerable significance due to its relationship with the castle and its potential to reveal further information on inhabitance of the site prior to the castle’s construction. It is also representative of the relationship of Sinclair Girnigoe to the broader landscape (development of fortifications; archaeological potential; aesthetic qualities; visual and imaginative impact; contribution to sense of place; setting within the wider landscape).

Zone 6 The Surrounding Area

General significance of Zone 6 The area surrounding Castle Sinclair Girnigoe is vital in contextualising the castle and creating the sense of place which is so distinctive to this site. It also provides some sense of the castle’s link to, and place in, modern- day Caithness. The situation of the castle on the edge of Sinclair Bay is indicative of the status of the earls, their wealth, and influence (local history, aesthetic qualities, the symbolic role of the castles in the landscape, contribution to sense of place, setting within the wider landscape).

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd 10

6-1 Noss Head Lighthouse Noss Head Lighthouse is of considerable significance as a highly distinctive building within the region and houses the Clan Sinclair Centre (international history, associational links, aesthetic qualities, amenity value, issues of familial identity and pride, architectural significance).

6-2 Cairn The Cairn is of some significance in demonstrating the antiquity and continuity of inhabitation in this area (Scottish history, contribution to sense of place).

6-3 Military Installations The Military Installations are of some significance in revealing the continuing importance of Sinclair Bay in the defence of the Caithness (development of fortifications, military history).

6-4 Coastal Earthwork The linear earthwork running west along the coast is of some significance due to the possibility of an early date for its construction, and its possible function as a former sea defence along Sinclair Bay or former outworks associated with the castle (archaeological potential, setting within the wider landscape).

3.5 ISSUES AND VULNERABILITIES

Castle Sinclair Girnigoe’s situation on the northeast coast of Scotland, coupled with its condition as an unconsolidated ruin, threatens the site’s future survival. The castle is statutorily protected as a Scheduled Ancient Monument. This designation includes the Inner and Outer Baileys of the castle and much of its immediate surroundings. However, there are a number of areas in which the castle and its significance are threatened.

Castle Sinclair Girnigoe preserves evidence for the occupation of the site from the late 14th century and for its use as the seat of the Sinclair Earls of Caithness into the 17th century. Some of this evidence has been identified in this Plan as being of sufficient cultural, historical and archaeological significance to warrant the preservation and enhancement of that significance. The explanation and presentation of this significance is currently non- existent, with visitors to the site and local inhabitants unaware of its development and importance.

Understanding With the exception of MacGibbon and Ross’s 1884 survey and its subsequent use by RCAHMS, very little academic study had been undertaken upon the fabric of the castle before the commencement of the current project. Academic awareness of the site is low, and it has received only passing references in recent scholarly works on tower houses. This may be due to the lack of publically available information upon the site, save for the surveys mentioned above. Understanding has been greatly enhanced by the recent scheme of archaeological investigation; however, the site would benefit from further below-ground investigation to verify findings thus far and to clarify aspects such as plan, function and dating. The history of the site prior to the erection of the castle, which is currently unknown, may also be explored by such investigation.

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd 11

Awareness Locally, the site is well known, attracting many tourists and providing a source of study and fascination for many residents and members of the Clan Sinclair; however, the castle is little known outside the region. Current site conditions prohibit large numbers of people visiting the castle, both for reasons of health and safety and for the prevention of damage to the structures.

Erosion and fabric loss The castle’s exposed position on the coast, coupled with its already ruinous condition, makes it extremely vulnerable to erosion and fabric loss. The recent survey has highlighted several areas of structural weakness in the buildings which urgently require intervention to prevent substantial loss of historic fabric. Without a high level of consolidation, the castle will continue to experience fabric loss and will become increasingly structurally unsound. Archaeological evidence is constantly being lost through erosion, making the understanding of the site more problematic. The unstructured visitor access which currently occurs enables access into vulnerable areas of the site which are easily damaged, and into areas which are unsafe. The unrestricted movement of visitors within the site is constantly causing small scale, accidental damage.

Access Access to the site is currently via a dirt track from the road to Nosshead. This track is unsuitable for disabled visitors, vehicles, or large numbers of pedestrians. The condition of the site is highly dangerous and presents a real risk to visitors. Movement around the site is both challenging and hazardous, and impossible for most disabled visitors. A scheme which seeks to remedy this situation would have to framed in terms of the current legislation of the Disability Discrimination Act (1995) and should meet the conditions of its final amendment, which comes into force in 2004.

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd

PART 4

POLICIES

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd 12

PART 4 POLICIES

As Castle Sinclair Girnigoe is a Scheduled Ancient Monument, statutory control already exists for the protection of the site. Any future changes which would affect the fabric and/or setting of the Scheduled Ancient Monument must satisfy the conditions imposed by this framework.

The following policies are grouped thematically in order to address effectively the issues and vulnerabilities identified above. They are based on the assumption that a detailed management plan for the site will be prepared, drafted in terms of the policy framework provided. These policies deal specifically with the retention and enhancement of the historical and cultural significance of the castle as identified in this Conservation Plan. They are based on two premises:

• the significance of the site should be understood and retained for future generations; • policies should provide a framework and guidance for the enhancement of the site and for the evaluation of any proposals which may affect it.

The following policies seek, therefore, to:

• place the conservation of the castle and its setting, and the protection of its significance for future generations, at the centre of future planning and site management; • implement effective regimes for repair and maintenance, protecting significance and historic integrity in line with conservation best practice; • enhance the heritage asset and value of the castle for public benefit without unacceptable physical or visual detriment to historically important features; • promote the understanding of the heritage significance of the site through interpretation and recreation; • facilitate public understanding and enjoyment of the site by promoting physical and intellectual access for all.

4.1 POLICIES FOR THE RETENTION OF SIGNIFICANCE

Policy R1: Actions today should not compromise the availability of cultural resources in the future. All proposals for works upon the castle and its surroundings should demonstrate how significance, as defined in Part 3.2, will be retained/protected.

Reason: Cultural resources are usually finite, easily destroyed but less easily regenerated. It is therefore vital that cultural resources are protected and maintained in the same or better condition as they are in today. This does not mean that no work can take place, but rather that work must be undertaken responsibly, and with careful planning for the future.

Policy R2: The castle must be consolidated to prevent further loss of historic fabric. Areas of known structural weakness must be remedied as a matter of priority, and measures to prevent further

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd 13 deterioration should be undertaken. An overall staged programme of works will be included in the management plan; however, structures which are in danger of immediate fabric loss will be dealt with urgently.

Reason: Structural stability through fabric loss is now at a critical point and several structures show advanced signs of imminent collapse. Further deterioration of the buildings will result in the loss of historic fabric and will jeopardise their future survival. Maintenance is necessary to ensure the survival of the castle and the preservation of architectural and archaeological evidence.

Policy R3: Any proposals for the site of the castle should be based on an understanding of its archaeological and historical significance and should be sensitive to this. The known or surmised location of features relating to structures or activities on site must be considered in all future interventions, and efforts must be made to retain their significance.

Reason: Castle Sinclair Girnigoe is highly important to the history of Caithness and the Sinclair family. Evidence which relates to past activities or which contributes to the site’s significance should not be endangered by future development of, or alterations to, the site. Evidence from the site discovered through previous interventions, recording or documentary research should be used to inform such decisions.

Policy R4: Any proposals for the site of the castle should be based on an understanding of its environmental significance and should be sensitive to this. Proposals should demonstrate how they fulfil the Highland Council Structure Plan aspirations for nature conservation and biodiversity (Highland Council Structure Plan - Policy N1: Nature Conservation; The Biodiversity Action Plan for Caithness 2003).

Reason: While work is urgently needed to conserve and consolidate the historic fabric, it should be undertaken with an appreciation of the high ecological value of the site.

Policy R5: Efforts should be made to identify more closely the archaeological evidence relating to the outworks of the castle. Areas thus identified should be respected in future proposals affecting the site and its surrounding areas.

Reason: The castle complex did not operate in isolation, and enjoyed a close relationship with the surrounding land. Outworks associated with the castle have not been closely distinguished or recorded, despite their importance. These must be identified in order that they may be understood and preserved in the course of future developments.

Policy R6: Evidence for the deliberate modification of the marine environment and the preservation of archaeological evidence below water should be fully assessed. Appropriate measures and management strategies must then be implemented to ensure their protection.

Reason: Historically, Castle Sinclair Girnigoe enjoyed a close relationship with the sea; however, this is an area which has been subject to little investigation and would benefit from further exploration. The nature of the

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd 14 maritime environment threatens the preservation of any archaeological remains and it is important that steps be taken to preserve this important aspect of Castle Sinclair Girnigoe’s history. These must also be awareness of the potential for sports divers to remove archaeological evidence from this site. The potential for sports divers to remove archaeological evidence from the site must also be recognised.

4.2 POLICIES FOR CHANGE AND THE ENHANCEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE

Policy CE1: Prior to the finalisation of any development proposal, an appropriate scheme of archaeological evaluation must be undertaken.

Reason: The archaeological impact of any proposed development must be fully evaluated prior to implementation. An appropriate scheme of evaluation should be designed to characterise and assess the condition and potential of buried archaeological remains, thereby clearly defining any archaeological constraints on the proposed development. Scheduled Monument Consent will be required for any evaluation works within the Scheduled Ancient Monument boundary.

Policy CE2: Any development of the castle should seek to retain and enhance its historic and landscape contexts.

Reason: The sea and landscape setting of the castle is highly characteristic of the site and contributes to the understanding of both its active use and its role as a romantic ruin from the 18th century. The context of the castle is of great importance in appreciating its significance and in aiding understanding of its history. Future development should be sensitive to this and should retain and enhance the castle’s significance, aiding future understanding and interpretation.

Policy CE3: New build in any proximity to the castle should be avoided. When this is impossible, it should be sensitive to the historic setting and reversible, whilst respecting the extent of the scheduled monument and its immediate surroundings. Where possible, historic views of the castle should not be destroyed, but enhanced.

Reason: The setting of the castle is integral to its understanding and archaeological significance. It is imperative that this be maintained and that new build should not detract from it. Historic views of the castle, as illustrated in the photographs held by RCAHMS, should be maintained to allow visitors to understand how it has altered and the processes which affect it. New build could utilise local materials and finishes.

Policy CE4: All fabric intervention or ground works associated with the conservation of the site should be either archaeologically monitored or undertaken by a suitable archaeological contractor.

Reason: Any work upon the site may reveal significant archaeological evidence. A full record of evidence uncovered, destroyed or altered must be kept to ensure that the site is better understood. It is necessary that all archaeological evidence be subject to assessment and analysis in order to further develop the interpretation and understanding of the site. Scheduled Monument Consent will be required for any works within the Scheduled Ancient Monument boundary.

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd 15

Policy CE5: When there is the opportunity, efforts should be made to understand the site more fully, both in terms of the archaeological evidence in and around the castle complex, and in relation to its landscape setting.

Reason: Archaeological survey has demonstrated the wealth of above-ground evidence associated with the castle and has highlighted the considerable potential for the survival of below-ground evidence. The area surrounding the castle is also likely to hold a vast amount of information about its function in and relationship with the landscape. Many questions remain over the history of the site, particularly over its use prior to the creation of the current castle and the function, plan and development of many buildings. Broader research questions also require examination, on issues such as the function of the castle in the post-medieval period, its social and political function, and its role within the landscape.

Policy CE6: Where structural archaeological features are uncovered in situ, they should be preserved through either consolidation or backfilling, depending upon archaeological and practical considerations.

Reason: A major aspect of archaeological investigation is to elucidate and display the history of the site. Removal of structural archaeological remains should, therefore, in the interests of sustainability, be resisted. However, another research imperative is the understanding of the earlier history of the site and this should be pursued when ground works or excavation allows.

4.3 POLICIES FOR ACCESS, PRESENTATION AND USE

Policy AP1: Sustainable and structured visitor access should be provided in and around the castle, designed in accordance with the site layout. Appropriate routes for visitors will be informed by the archaeological evaluation of any proposals.

Reason: Sustainable and structured access should be provided around the castle, sensitive to its character and state of preservation. Such provision will ensure visitor safety and a better understanding of the site.

Policy AP2: Where safe public access into the site is to be provided, dangerous areas and structures must be made safe. This will require some buildings to be consolidated, and steep drops and unsafe areas to be cordoned off.

Reason: It is of the utmost importance that visitors be able to view the castle without risk to their health and safety. This may require alterations to access within the castle and the creation of barriers to hazardous areas.

Policy AP3: It is necessary and desirable that disabled access be provided, as far as possible, across the site. Where such access remains difficult or impossible, alternative forms of site presentation will be provided in order to extend disabled appreciation of the site as far as is practicable.

Reason: The Disability Discrimination Act of 1995 requires that all public facilities be accessible to the disabled. Access, both physical and intellectual, should be maximised.

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd 16

Policy AP4: Access to the castle should be improved, enabling all visitors to reach the site easily and without damage to local environmental significance.

Reason: Current access is by means of a long dirt track which crosses several dykes and field drains. This route is unsuitable for many young, old and disabled visitors, preventing them from viewing the castle. A more readily accessible route is required in order to allow all visitors to reach the site with ease and to prevent damage to the surrounding environment. This may be achieved either through the purchase of land surrounding the castle for the construction of a new road, or the improvement of the current dirt track.

Policy AP5: Interpretation at a variety of levels should be provided on the site, with due respect for its nature and layout. This should utilise all available sources of information, such as historical, archaeological and photographic evidence, in order enhance the visitor understanding and experience.

Reason: There is currently no interpretation on site, making its understanding problematic. Explanation and illustration of the past form and function of the castle, and the identification of individual structures, would enable visitors to understand the history and development of the site as well as its present condition, improving the visitor experience. The interpretation of the site must be sympathetic to the layout and nature of the castle, in order to avoid detracting from its significance.

Policy AP6: Public and academic awareness of the site should be raised, highlighting its historical, archaeological and architectural significance.

Reason: The castle is of national significance, yet is little known outside Caithness. Efforts to raise awareness of the site would have a number of benefits, including integration of the site into academic studies of tower houses, increased visitor numbers, and a better understanding of the importance of the castle to the history of Scotland.

Policy AP7: Visitors will be encouraged to use appropriate entry routes into the site in order to discourage access across former walls and structures which can cause damage to the site.

Reason: Although it is desirable to make the site more visitor-friendly, illicit entry into the site through inappropriate routes will cause further damage to the fabric, and raises serious health and safety issues. The creation of visitor entry routes and a limited securing the perimeter of the castle will reduce these risks, while providing official entry routes.

Policy AP8: Where practicable, the provision of visitor services will be restricted to the outskirts of the site.

Reason: The provision of visitor services on the castle site will have a negative impact on the setting of the monument. Suitable remote locations should be identified which will not impact on the immediate setting.

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd 17

Policy AP9: Long-term financial provision should be made for the repair and upkeep of the site.

Reason: Although repair and consolidation can be undertaken in the short-term, long-term maintenance is required to ensure the survival of this vulnerable monument. The financing of this process must be sustainable. Charging visitors an entrance fee to the site may provide a sustainable source of income.

4.4 POLICIES FOR MANAGEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION

Policy MI1: A management plan/programme will be prepared for the site at the earliest opportunity, and will be reviewed at regular intervals.

Reason: The management of the castle is vital to its future survival and requires a consistent and coherent approach. Regular reviews are necessary in order to meet the changing requirements of the site and its users, ensuring that the castle is preserved and presented at the highest possible levels.

Policy MI2: The joint promotion of other cultural attractions in the north Caithness area will be reviewed.

Reason: There are other cultural visitor attractions in the region under different ownership and management. Co-ordination and joint promotion would enhance the value of the heritage assets for public benefit and recreation.

Policy MI3: Provision for the storage and curation of collections associated with the castle site should be made locally.

Reason: In the preparation of this Conservation Plan, no significant collections of material associated with the site were identified; however, it is inevitable that archaeological material will be encountered in any consolidation of the monument and it is desirable that any such finds will be kept in the local area.

Policy MI4: The Clan Sinclair Trust will seek full consultation with appropriate bodies in the drafting and implementation of a full management plan/programme for the site.

Reason: Mechanisms for future decision making and consultation will be an active method of bringing people and interests together.

Policy MI5: Regular reviews of the condition of all elements should be undertaken in order to identify repair and consolidation requirements. Repair priorities should focus on those elements identified as in danger of imminent collapse or destruction. Quinquennial inspections of the buildings will be carried out to examine structural condition and to prevent further damage to the historic fabric.

Reason: There are a number of elements which require intervention at an early stage in a conservation programme in order to prevent their permanent loss. Regular examinations will prevent serious unmonitored deterioration of historic fabric, ensuring the site’s future preservation.

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd

PART 5

IMPLEMENTATION STATEMENT

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd 18

PART 5 IMPLEMENTATION STATEMENT

Located dramatically on the southern edge of Sinclair Bay, Castle Sinclair Girnigoe is a unique site in Scotland, preserving an entire castle complex from the Renaissance period, with elements from earlier periods. The site is of national and international significance for both its archaeology and its historical associations and today, although dangerous and undeveloped, still acts as an informal tourist attraction within Caithness and a focus for identity and history within the region. The castle has fascinated visitors for over 300 years and it is both necessary and desirable that this should continue through the introduction of broad public access to the site.

The structural condition of the castle is such that the fabric now requires major work to ensure its future survival, necessitating schemes of integrated conservation, archaeology and structural engineering. The upkeep of the castle requires both short-term and long-term investment; however, it also presents a unique opportunity to raise the profile of this internationally significant site through its development as a sustainable visitor attraction. The fascinating history of the site, coupled with its intriguing buildings and spectacular location, will enable its presentation to the public in a varied and dynamic way, illustrating the significance and uniqueness of this monument.

Following the policies outlined in Part 4 of the Conservation Plan, this project has four principle aims: • Stabilising the monument and retaining its significance. • Developing the site as a sustainable tourist asset of regional and national importance. • Providing safe public and disabled access (in accordance with the Disability Discrimination Act of 1995) so that the significance of the monument can be appreciated by all. • Presenting the understanding and significance of the monument to all.

In meeting these aims, the current condition of Castle Sinclair Girnigoe presents a range of obstacles; Part 5 outlines a scheme of works for consolidation and presentation which seeks to resolve these issues. The threats and problems facing the site are outlined in the following section and this is followed by a discussion of the options available for the treatment of individual structures and distinct areas. Finally, the vision for each part of the site is outlined.

The phasing of the works on the castle will be determined by conservation concerns. Structures identified to be in need of urgent repair or consolidation will be dealt with as a matter of urgency whilst subsequent works will be undertaken in advance of the site being opened to the public. A phased scheme will be developed which will enable archaeological and structural works to be undertaken, whilst maintaining visitor access to as full a degree as possible.

5.1 UNDERSTANDING THE STRUCTURE

In order to preserve Castle Sinclair Girnigoe for the future, it its necessary that threats affecting the site, both general and specific, are recognised in order that they may be prevented or their effects treated in the most efficient manner possible. Every structure within the castle presents a unique set of conditions and issues for its consolidation and preservation.

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd 19

The Outer Bailey

The Outer Bailey is badly affected by the extremes of weather resulting from the castle’s location upon the edge of Sinclair Bay. High winds are destabilising the upper parts of structures, particularly the West Gatehouse stack, and are worsening the strains caused by off-centre loads. Damage caused by high wind speeds across the site is increased by the movement of blown particles, such as sand and grit, causing severe surface damage to stonework and mortar. Considerable weathering and erosion is occurring both externally and internally in the clay mortar used across the Outer Bailey, causing shakes and splits in structures and threatening collapse. The decay and weakening of this mortar is also creating compressive strains. Water infiltration of wall cores has caused decay and weakening of the clay mortar matrix, and buried masonry tumble may be exerting forces upon the above-ground structures, causing them to shift as deterioration occurs. The impact or extent of such movement is currently unquantifiable. Structural failure at Sinclair Girnigoe is a gradual process, worsened by the extremes of weather each season. This process will continue if curative and preventive works are not undertaken.

The role of the Outer Bailey as the entrance route into the castle complex has caused considerably high levels of visitor degradation. The original access route, via the West Gatehouse, is little used, as it is at some distance from the path to the site. Instead, the South Gate has become the focus for visitor entry. Entrance by this route requires the visitor either to scramble over the dangerous slope in the dry moat and the remains of the East Range, or to retrace their steps and climb over the remains of the South Range; both of these routes are physically unsafe. Access across the South Barbican is causing general degradation, erosion and dislodging of stonework, whilst the possible east wall of the East Range is being degraded by access through the South Gate from the dry moat. The fabric in and around the West Gatehouse is also being damaged by visitor access, with general degradation and erosion occurring in the area of the West Barbican, a high level of surface erosion and frequent dislodging of stonework adjacent to the Gatehouse entrance passage, and damage to the party wall between the chamber and stair tower.

All structures within the Outer Bailey are endangered by ongoing erosion across the site; however, specific structural threats affect two of the most substantial buildings within this area. The West Gatehouse is highly significant within the site, preserving evidence for the earliest phase of the castle’s occupation and for its final recasting as a renaissance residence. The surviving stack forms an important part of the castle’s skyline; however, it is free standing above ground-floor level and is subject to considerable movement by the wind. At the base of the stack, the entrance passage is experiencing great structural problems, resulting in the partial collapse of the vault. The chamber to the southeast is filled by tumble and may be exerting forces upon the passage and stack, compounding their existing structural problems. The East Wing of the North Range is the most complete building within the Outer Bailey. Recent repairs to the northwest corner have prevented the loss of a significant proportion of fabric and have contributed to a better understanding of the structural dynamics; however, further work is still needed to consolidate this area. At the other end of the Range, the remaining corner of the West Tower is highly unstable, following the loss of the northeast and southeast wall. Without consolidation, this fabric is in danger of collapse.

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd 20

The Tower House

As the most substantial structure within the site and the historical heart of the castle complex, the Tower House is of considerable importance to the history, development and understanding of the site.

The natural processes of decay and erosion are accelerated within the Tower House due to its current state of disrepair. The loss of the roof, upper floors, windows and doors intensifies the threats presented by natural factors, most particularly with regard to the impact of wind speeds. Internal wind speeds are vastly increased due to the vortex effect and varied pressures created by differing volumes within the Tower House. It has been estimated that wind speeds within the tower could reach as much as 250 mph in storm conditions. The combination of wind speed and the movement of blown particles is causing the northwest wall of the north wing to shear away from the body of the tower. Furthermore, due to the use of high-strength mortar in the construction of the Tower House, fabric loss is occurring not stone by stone, but in large expanses of fabric, as may be seen around the former oriel window and wall head. As in the Outer Bailey, exposed wall heads have enabled water ingress which is now eroding the soft clay mortars of the wall core. Other natural factors are also affecting the Tower House. Vegetation has become established on parts of the structure and birds are known to nest within and around the building. A soft band of rock within the northwest cliff-face is experiencing accelerated erosion and is creating a deep recess which may undermine the cliff above.

Degradation caused by visitor access is less of a threat within the Tower House, as visitor access is currently impossible above the ground floor. Damage is largely confined to low-level vandalism and the general dislodgement of stones in the basement and ground floors. Access into the Tower House, however, is problematic. The original route, by means of a bridge across the dry moat, is impossible following the decay of the bridge and the dereliction of the North Range. The current means of access is through an opening forced through a loop in the basement. The continued use of this opening is causing ongoing degradation of the wall core and historic fabric at this point and it is desirable that an alternative means of access is found.

The Inner Bailey

Without scaling the cliffs, the Inner Bailey can only be reached by entering the ground floor of the Tower House. Entry via the Sea Gate and the East Barbican is not normally attempted by visitors. Stonework throughout the Inner Bailey is covered with turf, providing a measure of protection against visitor damage; however, general degradation and dislodging of stonework is occurring to the wall between the Courtyard and East Barbican due to visitor access in this area. The erosion of the northwest cliff face is particularly pronounced below the North Range, raising serious concerns about its safety.

The Surrounding Area

There is no statutory protection of any land outside the immediate vicinity of the castle. Archaeologically significant areas, such as Castle Haven, are therefore unprotected and may be subject to damage. There is also considerable potential for further archaeological evidence to survive in the vicinity of the castle. The only access route to the castle is by means of a long single track road from Staxigoe and an uneven dirt track from the road to the site. This route is not suitable for large numbers of visitors or the disabled. Any significant

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd 21 increase in visitor numbers without the improvement of this route may incur ecological damage to this land. However, the land surrounding the castle is currently held in private ownership, preventing improvement of access arrangements. The castle is approached from the southeast, encouraging visitors to enter the dry moat and approach the castle through the south curtain wall or South Gate. This route has caused some erosion of the moat edges, particularly compounding the water-logging caused by a small brook expelling into the goe.

5.2 OPTIONS FOR TREATMENT

There are a number of possible options for the treatment of each structure within the castle. These options must be considered in terms of their impact upon the significance of the castle, their implications for the structural stability of the building and their importance to the enhancement of out understanding of the site.

ZONE 1 THE OUTER BAILEY

The West Gatehouse Option 1 Demolish to 2nd or 3rd floor level. Option 2 Construct a new supporting structure on the site of the gatehouse to stabilise the stack. Option 3 Keep the stack through the reinstatement of the existing walls of the porter’s lodge to form structural buttresses, introducing a minimum amount of new fabric.

As discussed above, the West Gatehouse is a highly significant structure within the castle complex and forms an important part of the distinctive site skyline. Although resolving the immediate issues of safety and structural stability, the substantial loss of fabric required by Option 1 would directly impact upon the significance of the Gatehouse and is therefore unacceptable. Option 2 avoids the loss of historic fabric and enables the retention of significance; however, it necessitates the introduction of a prominent new element into the Outer Bailey. The insertion of such a building is likely to have a negative visual impact upon the site as a whole, making this proposal unviable. Option 3 would enable the chimney stack to be safely retained, ensuring the maintenance of significance. Although introducing new fabric, the reinstatement of existing walls would constitute a sympathetic intervention. Option 3 is, therefore, the preferred course of treatment.

Vision for the West Gatehouse • The failing vault over the entrance passage will be examined, allowing it to be strengthened and consolidated. • The chamber to the south of the stack will be examined to assess any structural impact upon the structure of the stack and gate passage. Engineering solutions for the stack and entrance passage will dictate the treatment and possible clearance of this chamber and any intervention will be subject to archaeological supervision. It is not intended that this chamber will be accessible to the public. • The original floor and walls of the porter’s lodge will be exposed so that the option of rebuilding these enclosing walls to act as structural buttresses to the chimney stack may be explored. If these walls are rebuilt, the new masonry will be clearly differentiated from original fabric. • Current access to the porter’s lodge through the curtain wall from the moat will be closed and the wall reformed using stone which is easily differentiated from historic fabric. • The repair and consolidation of the West Gatehouse will enable its use as the principal entrance route

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd 22

into the castle complex. The overburden within the passage will be cleared to the latest phase of use. • Archaeological investigation of the West Barbican is necessary prior to the reinstatement of access across the western dry moat, and will examine the original form and location of access in order to improve our understanding of this significant structure. This work will inform the creation of the modern site entrance. • A modern access route, in the form of a bridge or causeway, will be created across the western dry moat from the west barbican.

The South Range Option 1 Use the curtain wall as a site boundary and close the gap with a suitable fence. Clear the Stair Tower of rubble and allow visitors to enter the building. Option 2 Use the curtain wall as the site boundary and close the gap with a suitable fence. Access to the Stair Tower will be prevented by a grill fitted to the entrance doorway, allowing visitors to view the collapsed interior.

Both options ensure the prevention of further accidental erosion to the South Range due to visitor access; however, the provision of access into the stair tower in Option 1 would necessitate its clearance, which is likely to be a costly operation, with unknown structural implications for the West Gatehouse. Option 2, on the other hand, allows visitors to examine the interior of the Stair Tower and discern its form, without disturbing the internal fabric or archaeological deposits. This is the preferred option.

Vision for the South Range • The curtain wall will be utilized to act as a site boundary with a fence used to close the gap. • There will be visual, but not physical, visitor access into the Stair Tower.

The East Range Option 1 Installation of a barrier system to prevent visitors getting too close to the drop into the dry moat. Minimal consolidation of the exposed elements of the East Range. Option 2 Expose and consolidate the outer eastern wall of the East Range to act as a barrier.

The access route from the dry moat into the East Range has been created since the castle’s dereliction, presenting a danger to visitors and damaging the historic fabric. Option 1 would remove the safety threat posed by this area; however, it would introduce a new alien element onto the site, and is likely to interfere with views of the Tower House. Option 2 would enable a more sensitive approach to this structure. The eastern face of the wall is already exposed and suggests that at least two metres of the wall survives below the current ground surface. Part exposure and consolidation of the wall would avoid introducing new elements, while preventing visitors from walking into a vertical drop. It would also improve the legibility of the castle plan to the visitor.

Vision for the East Range • Further archaeological evaluation will be undertaken before any subsequent decisions on treatment are made. In situ preservation is preferred for any archaeological remains uncovered. • Pending the results of evaluation and an assessment of long-term cost implications, the current preferred option would be the use of the outer wall of the Range as a barrier to the dry moat.

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd 23

The South Barbican and South Gate Option 1 Restoring the access route through the South Gate, dry moat and North Range of the Outer Bailey, thus giving authenticity of access. This route will avoid the South Barbican. Option 2 Sealing of lower access route through the South Gate and dry moat with a metal grille and installation of a metal grille over the doorway from the South Barbican. A route will be formed to the gate which avoids the South Barbican.

Option 1 would improve visitor understanding of the original access arrangements and would provide a means of visitor circulation; however, the cost of this work is likely to be prohibitive. Option 2 would prevent potentially dangerous access to the dry moat whilst maintaining views into this significant area. Option 1 will be used as a short-term solution for this area, whilst Option 2 will form the long-term aim for the treatment of the South Gate. Both options will minimise further damage to the South Barbican.

Vision for the South Gate • In the short term, the lower access route through the South Gate and dry moat will be shut off and a grille placed over the doorway from the South Barbican. A metal grille will seal off the lower entrance to the portcullis building. • A scheme of archaeological investigation will be carried out throughout the South Gate and South Barbican to examine evidence for the original access arrangements and to assess the viability of reinstating the access route through the dry moat to act as the site exit. • The access routes through the southeast curtain wall and the East Range will be sealed off, securing the site and preventing further damage to historic fabric. • A modern timber bridge will be erected between the Outer and Inner Baileys. The structure and form of the bridge will be informed by the archaeological evaluation of the South Gate and South Range complex.

The Outer Bailey Courtyard Option 1 Leave in current condition and provide an access route flanked by barriers between the West Gatehouse and the approach to the Tower House. Option 2 Leave in current condition and provide an open access route between the West Gatehouse and the approach to the Tower House. Fences would be installed around the inner perimeter of the Courtyard buildings. Option 3 Excavate down to occupation layers and protect with a membrane. The excavated floor level would then be utilised as the modern courtyard surface.

Options 1 and 2 would effectively protect the visitor from most safety hazards, mainly vertical drops, which might be encountered in the Outer Bailey; however, the route would require some build-up of the ground surface to provide disabled access and would seriously limit visitor access to the Outer Bailey buildings. Option 3, however, avoids this problem through the reinstatement of the near original floor level. This would also provide a better visitor understanding of the castle plan and its use. In many areas, the original level of the courtyard is close to the current ground surface, due in part to visitor erosion, and would require minimal excavation. Depending upon the treatment of the Courtyard buildings, either their original walls would act as a perimeter against vertical drops or a fencing system would be installed. Both alternatives would enable greater visitor

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd 24 access to the Outer Bailey buildings.

Vision for the Outer Bailey Courtyard • The courtyard will be excavated to the latest phase of use, prioritised according to areas where visitor access routes are to be laid out. A protective membrane will be laid across the historic surface and sealed with a suitable material which will function as the modern courtyard surface. The possible removal of turf in areas of the courtyard will help form an understanding of the East Range and its sequence of construction, and will aid in formulating a solution for access between the Outer Bailey and the Tower House. • Dependant upon the depth of overburden, the southwest curtain wall will be exposed to act as a site boundary. If this is not possible, a system of handrails or other barriers will be installed.

ZONE 2 THE NORTH RANGE

Option 1 Prevent visitor access by using a barrier system to create an access route across the Courtyard with minimal consolidation of exposed fabric. Option 2 Introduce a barrier system along the northwest wall of the north range to prevent visitor accidents, with minimal consolidation of exposed fabric. Option 3 Excavate and consolidate wall heads, allowing original fabric to act as a barrier system.

Option 1 would effectively protect the visitor from most safety hazards which might be encountered in the North Range; however, the introduction of a barrier system would effectively prevent visitor access to the range, detracting from the development of a thorough understanding of the castle and lessening the quality of visitor experience. Both Options 2 and 3 would effectively prevent the visitor from encountering the vertical drop; however, the use of original fabric and sympathetic materials in Option 3 would also provide a sense of enclosure within the Outer Bailey, thus improving the legibility of the castle plan to the visitor.

Vision for the North Range • The lower areas of the North Range will be exposed to help develop an understanding of the building and identify a structural solution for this particularly vulnerable part of the monument, which is in a dangerously unstable condition. • The wall heads will be defined and exposed to act as a physical barrier along the northwest elevation. They will also allow clear entrance into the buildings through original openings. The curtain wall will be anchored into the rubble fill of the buildings. • The West Tower will be consolidated through the introduction of a minimum of intrusive fabric. The possible use of the cross-wall between this area and the central block will be examined. No further archaeological examination will be carried out prior to consolidation. • The wall between the West Tower and the Central Block will be reformed in order to stabilise these structures. • Further consolidation work will be undertaken in the East Wing. This will include the reforming of the ground and first floors of the East Wing, through the insertion of a lightweight timber structure resting on wall plates within the original joist sockets. Visual access will be provided between storeys through the skeleton of the floor and an external wooden stair will provide access to the upper floor.

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd 25

• The East Wing will be essential in recreating the access route to the Tower House door.

ZONE 3 THE TOWER HOUSE

Option 1 Tie together the structure with floors, remove dangerous fabric and provide visitor access into the building. The building would remain an open ruin. Option 2 Tie together the structure with floors and remove dangerous fabric. Reinstate the main newel stair up to the second floor and provide public access to this level. Secure window and door openings to prevent access to areas with steep drops.

Both options will aid the conservation of the Tower House considerably; however, Option 2 would provide an enhanced visitor attraction and would enable a greater understanding of the castle to be developed.

Vision for the Tower House • Wind analysis will be carried out within the Tower House to ascertain wind speeds and those areas which are most vulnerable to them. • The second floor will be reinstated to tie the structure together and lessen the impact of wind action around the building. • The benefits presented by the insertion of a further diaphragm floor below the height of the wall head will be examined as an additional aid in lessening the impact of wind action and in binding the structure together. • The external sea wall and the junction with the cross-wall at the level of the hall will be rebuilt. The east gable chimney and stair masonry will also be stabilised. • The walls and exposed stonework will be pointed. • Any new fabric introduced to stabilise the structure will be clearly differentiated from the original structure. • The wall heads will be protected. • Wire mesh will be used to prevent further bird inhabitation. • Any rebuilding to limit fabric loss will be of the absolute minium in extent. All window and door openings will be made safe. • A timber stair will be reinstated in place of the main stair up to the second floor, enabling visitor access from basement to second-floor level. This will provide an enhanced visitor attraction, and a focus for interpretation and presentation within the castle. • The opening forced through the southeast basement wall from the dry moat will be blocked up to prevent further access by this route. • The overburden in the basements will be cleared under archaeological supervision and a fixed handrail provided to allow visitor access into the northwest basement space. • The overburden will be cleared to the latest phase of use within the ground- and first-floor chambers, under archaeological supervision. • Disabled access will be provided at ground-floor level only. • The area of the cliff face which is experiencing accelerated erosion will be reconstructed and sections which have become delaminated will be pinned to prevent further erosion.

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd 26

ZONE 4 THE INNER BAILEY

Option 1 Close off the Inner Bailey completely. Option 2 Erect localised railings around dangerous and/or fragile structures or areas. Option 3 Heighten the curtain wall, which would require some 3-dimensional reconstruction. Option 4 Clear the overburden from the site to the most recent use, consolidating structures for use as boundaries and for presentation to the public. Modern barriers will be introduced as necessary, where existing structures are not suitable to act as boundaries.

Option 1 would circumvent any safety issues, but would also effectively isolate one third of the castle from visitor inspection and appreciation, making it an unsuitable choice. Option 2 would also resolve any safety issues, but would be visually intrusive, requiring significant sub-surface intervention, and would limit the extent of visitor access. Option 3 avoids safety issues and sub-surface intervention; however, it would require a significant amount of new build in addition to the consolidation of the existing wall heads. More effective consolidation of fabric, enhanced visitor interpretation, and safe general access for all visitors are enabled by Option 4. This provides the least intrusive means of access in and around the Inner Bailey, and provides an enhanced visitor experience, making this the most suitable choice for treatment of this area. The use of handrails or 3-dimensional reconstruction would be utilised only where the clearance of overburden does not expose the curtain wall to a level appropriate for visitor safety.

Vision for the Inner Bailey • The wall heads will be cleared of vegetation, consolidated and protected. • Repointing will be carried out upon all stone walls, and unstable areas will be repaired. Inserted stonework will be clearly differentiated from original fabric. • The curtain wall will be investigated archaeologically in order to examine the suitability of its use as a barrier to visitor access. Where necessary, a handrail or limited stone replacement may be carried out. • The overburden will be cleared to the last phase of use and protected with a membrane, to act as the current ground surface. • All works will be subject to archaeological recording. • Visitor access in and around the Inner Bailey will be subject to the findings of archaeological investigation and analysis of safety issues. Access to certain parts of the site will be limited or prohibited as necessary.

The East Barbican and Sea Gate Option 1 Provide full visitor access to seashore through the Sea Gate. Option 2 Provide visitor access into the East Barbican, with a barrier at the entrance to the Sea Gate. Option 3 Erect a barrier at the curtain wall preventing visitor access into the barbican, and seal off the Barbican at the Sea Gate to prevent ingress from the shore.

Full visitor access to the seashore would raise very serious health and safety issues, due to the rapid tide in this area and the depth and temperature of the water, ruling out Option 1. Option 2 also raises health and safety concerns due to the difference in heights between the Inner Bailey courtyard and the East Barbican, making access to this area highly problematic. Option 3, on the other hand, would still provide good visual access into

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd 27 the East Barbican, while overcoming any safety concerns.

Vision for the East Barbican and Sea Gate • A barrier will be formed at the edge of the Eastern Barbican, preventing public access to the Sea Gate and seashore. • A grille will be fitted to the upper opening and a gate to the lower opening of the Sea Gate, to preventing access from the seashore to the north.

ZONES 5 AND 6 THE SURROUNDING AREA

Option 1 Upgrade the current access route from the road to Noss Head to make it suitable for heavier use. Option 2 Purchase fields adjacent to the castle for the creation of a new access route which will avoid the dry moat and other areas of archaeological sensitivity.

Upgrading the existing route would not overcome the risk of damage to the archaeology surrounding the castle, as the route runs in close proximity to Castle Haven. Option 2, on the other hand, would enable the creation of a route which deliberately avoided areas of archaeological significance and was constructed to be suitable for both disabled visitors and large visitor groups. This route would also avoid the dry moat, lessening the chance of erosion of its banks. Option 2 is, therefore, the preferred treatment for the site.

Vision for the Surrounding Area • Land adjacent to the castle will be purchased by the Clan Sinclair Trust. • An evaluation of archaeological remains relating to the inhabitation of Castle Sinclair Girnigoe will be carried out on the adjacent land. • A new access route to the castle will be created from the road to Noss Head. This route will avoid areas of archaeological sensitivity and be suitable for large numbers of visitors and the disabled. • A bridge will be constructed across the western dry moat to act as the principal access route into the castle, operating in conjunction with the West Gatehouse. • The car parking facilities will be upgraded to be suitable for larger numbers. • An off-site visitor centre will be created to act as an introduction to the site and as a focus for further interpretation.

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd

PART 6

GAZETTEER

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_element 1-1.wpd 28

PART 5 GAZETTEER

ZONE 1 THE OUTER BAILEY

1-1 The West Barbican

Description Located to the southwest of the dry moat, the West Barbican provided the principle means of entrance to the West Gatehouse and Outer Bailey and to the outermost defences of the castle. Traces of a structure are visible in this location in the form of earthworks and exposed masonry; however, a capping of turf currently prevents a closer examination of its form. It is likely to have formed an outer enclosure and may have contained additional service buildings. The structures related to the crossing of the moat are no longer extant.

Brand’s description of 1700 suggests that a bascule or drawbridge may have spanned the moat. This is supported by Pococke’s illustration, which shows the gatehouse with a tall arched recess running through the ground and first floors which would have housed the bridge when raised.

Status Part of the Scheduled Ancient Monument.

Significance Of considerable significance as the principal entrance to the castle complex.

Policies See Policies R1, R3, R4, R4, R5, CE1, CE2, CE4, CE5, CE6, AP1, AP5, MI5

Documentary and Pictorial Sources Brand, J. 1701. A Brief Description of Orkney, Zetland, Pightland Firth and Caithness (Edinburgh): 147, 155 Pococke, R. 1887. Tours in Scotland 1747, 1750, 1760 (Edinburgh): 160 CUCAP 1950s aerial photograph RCAHMS A83207/po

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_element 1-2.wpd 29

ZONE 1 THE OUTER BAILEY

1-2 The West Gatehouse

Description Located to the southwest of the castle complex, the West Gatehouse controlled access into the Outer Bailey Courtyard from the West Barbican. Originally a building of four storeys, the structure is now largely collapsed, with only the ground floor and stack surviving.

The West Gatehouse is constructed in roughly coursed gray Caithness stone, with finely worked red sandstone dressings on the second and third floors. A gate passage runs SW/NE under the north wall of the building and has collapsed at its western end. Entry was controlled by means of a portcullis, the housing for which is visible within the passage. A recess survives to the southwest of the portcullis slot and may have contained a bench for visitors awaiting entry. A doorway from the gate passage to the northwest provided access to the abutting two-storey porter’s lodge. Straight joints run between these two structures, revealing the porter’s lodge to be a replacement for an earlier structure on this site.

A series of chambers were provided to the southeast of the gate passage and abutting the curtain wall to the south. An arrow loop is visible within this fabric, overlooking the approach to the castle. The ground floor is now filled with masonry. The first floor was vaulted, and retains evidence for mural passages. The second and third floors are elaborated with sandstone mouldings across the exterior and dressed fireplaces internally. The northeast corner of the second floor retains finely moulded corbels for the support of oriel windows, which illuminated a great chamber.

The Gatehouse is the result of two phases of construction, the ground and first floors being built during the late 14th to mid-15th centuries. The second and third floors were erected as part of a scheme of heightening and remodelling undertaken in the late 16th and 17th centuries. In his illustration of 1760, Pococke shows a thick stringcourse separating the ground and first floors from the second and third, whilst the fenestration of these storeys is also shown to differ, reflecting their various dates of construction.

Status Part of the Scheduled Ancient Monument.

Significance Of exceptional significance for its role as the principal entrance to the castle complex and for demonstrating the multi-phasing of the site.

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_element 1-2.wpd 30

Policies See policies R1, R2, R3, R4, CE1, CE2, CE4, CE5, CE6, AP1, AP2, AP5, AP6, AP7, MI5

Documentary and Pictorial Sources Brand, J. 1701. A Brief Description of Orkney, Zetland, Pightland Firth and Caithness (Edinburgh): 147, 155 Calder, J. T. 1861. History of Caithness (Glasgow) Daniell, W. and Ayton, R. 1814. A Voyage Around Great Britain Undertaken in the Summer of the Year 1813 (Edinburgh) MacGibbon, D. and Ross, T. 1971. The Castellated and Domestic Architecture of Scotland Vol.2 (Edinburgh): 306-314 Pococke, R. 1887. Tours in Scotland 1747, 1750, 1760 (Edinburgh): 160 RCAHMS. 1977. Inventory of Monuments and Constructions in the County of Caithness (Edinburgh): 139-143

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_element 1-3.wpd 31

ZONE 1 THE OUTER BAILEY

1-3 The South Range

Description The curtain wall runs along the southeast of this range, forming its external boundary. This wall is of similar construction to that on the southeast of the Inner Bailey, suggesting they are contemporary. The presence of loops with hookgun sills in the Inner Bailey dates their construction to the late 15th century. A further series of loops, including a gun loop, overlooks the dry moat from the south range.

A rectangular staircase tower is located at the southwest end of the range, abutting the curtain wall and indicating its later construction. This building was accessed from the Outer Bailey Courtyard through a doorway in its northwest elevation, below a former armorial panel. A stretch of earlier masonry survives in the base of the northeast elevation and includes an opening. The positions of risers and landings are visible on the interior of the tower, and a series of windows overlook the courtyard to the north. This building provided access into the chambers of the West Gatehouse and the adjoining buildings of the South Range. The former presence of a two-storey building adjoining the stair tower to the east is evidenced by the survival of a first-floor doorway through the northeast elevation of the stair tower. A joist hole survives on the exterior of this elevation for the support of the first floor of the adjoining range, and toothings for the adjoining wall are present in the north corner. Some flagstones remain in situ at ground level.

Status Part of the Scheduled Ancient Monument.

Significance Of considerable significance as it is integral to the domestic planning of the castle and demonstrates multiple phases of construction.

Policies See policies R1, R2, R3, R4, CE1, CE4, CE5, CE6, AP1, AP2, AP4, AP5, AP6, MI5

Documentary and Pictorial Sources MacGibbon, D. and Ross, T. 1971. The Castellated and Domestic Architecture of Scotland Vol. 2 (Edinburgh): 306-314 RCAHMS. 1977. Inventory of Monuments and Constructions in the County of Caithness (Edinburgh): 139-143

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_element 1-4.wpd 32

ZONE 1 THE OUTER BAILEY

1-4 The South Barbican

Description Located to the south of the East Gate, the East Barbican formerly provided a further means of defending the entrance into the castle. The structure has been almost completely destroyed; however, examination of both historic photographs and the surviving fabric shows this to have projected at right angles from southeast elevation of the Tower House. The wall then continued to the south. This structure was possibly of two phases of construction, as suggested by a straight joint visible in a historic photograph.

Status Part of the Scheduled Ancient Monument.

Significance Of considerable significance for preserving part of the outer defences of the castle and for indicating the high level of security which surrounded the site.

Policies See policies R1, R2, R3, R4, CE1, CE4, CE5, CE6, AP1, AP2, AP5, AP7, MI5

Documentary and Pictorial Sources MacGibbon, D. and Ross, T. 1971. The Castellated and Domestic Architecture of Scotland Vol. 2 (Edinburgh): 306-314 RCAHMS. 1977. Inventory of Monuments and Constructions in the County of Caithness (Edinburgh): 139-143 RCAHMS photographs CA/30, CA/192

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_element 1-5.wpd 33

ZONE 1 THE OUTER BAILEY

1-5 The South Gate

Description The South Gate provided a highly complex and defensible means of entry into the Outer Bailey and comprised several independent structures. An entrance through the curtain wall adjoins the Tower House at its southwest corner. This was originally dressed with a sandstone surround; however, the surround has since been robbed out. A shallow rectangular recess with a moulded red sandstone surround which formerly held an armorial panel, is located above the entrance.

A dry moat separates the Outer Bailey from the Tower House and is bridged by a large arched opening in the northwest curtain wall. A partially removable wooden platform formerly provided access across the moat. The joist holes for the support of this structure are visible above the bridging arch in the curtain wall. The northeast jamb of a loop survives in the curtain wall at this level, associated with the fixed portion of the timber bridge.

Entrance was then gained to the lower floor of a two-storey building, defended by a portcullis, now partially surviving at ground-floor level. This structure abuts the West Wing of the North Range and access is provided directly into the basement. Joist holes for the support of the roof remain in the northeast external wall of the North Range. The Outer Bailey Courtyard was reached through a doorway in the southwest elevation of the two-storey building. A steep slope up to the courtyard may conceal a flight of stairs, as indicated on the plan by MacGibbon and Ross.

The upper part of the South Gate is accessed from the Outer Bailey Courtyard by a stair, now totally collapsed under a turfed mound adjacent to the two-storey building. A landing at first-floor level provided access into the first floor of the portcullis building. From this upper chamber, the portcullis controlling entry into the outer West Barbican could be raised and lowered. A timber bridge formerly crossed the dry moat to the Tower House. Corbels for the support of this structure survive to either side of the Tower door and recesses are visible for the side rails. The bridge may have been partly removable. The North Range’s East Wing was also accessible from this landing at first-floor level. The jamb for a doorway to a further landing survives in the fabric of this building.

Status Part of the Scheduled Ancient Monument.

Significance Of considerable significance due to the complexity and defensibility of its entrance arrangements.

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_element 1-5.wpd 34

Policies See policies R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, CE1, CE4, CE5, CE6, AP1, AP2, AP3, AP5, AP7, MI5

Documentary and Pictorial Sources Brand, J. 1701. A Brief Description of Orkney, Zetland, Pightland Firth and Caithness (Edinburgh): 147, 155 Daniell, W. and Ayton, R. 1814. A Voyage Around Great Britain Undertaken in the Summer of the Year 1813 (Edinburgh) MacGibbon, D. and Ross, T. 1971. The Castellated and Domestic Architecture of Scotland Vol. 2 (Edinburgh): 306-314 Pococke, R. 1887. Tours in Scotland 1747, 1750, 1760 (Edinburgh): 160 RCAHMS. 1977. Inventory of Monuments and Constructions in the County of Caithness (Edinburgh): 139- 43

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_element 1-6.wpd 35

ZONE 1 THE OUTER BAILEY

1-6 The East Range

Description This range of buildings originally ran along the east side of the Outer Barbican courtyard, between the North and South Ranges. These buildings are now almost totally collapsed, and nothing remains visible from within the courtyard. Substantial masonry walling is, however, visible from the dry moat to the east. A much eroded chute is also visible, and this area was identified by MacGibbon and Ross as latrines. Turf and collapse prevent close identification of the structures within this range, although it is likely that they functioned as service buildings.

Status Part of the Scheduled Ancient Monument.

Significance Of considerable significance because of its role in housing service accommodation.

Policies See policies R1, R2, R3, R4, CE1, CE4, CE5, CE6, AP1, AP2, AP4, AP5, AP7, MI5

Documentary and Pictorial Sources MacGibbon, D. and Ross, T. 1971. The Castellated and Domestic Architecture of Scotland Vol. 2 (Edinburgh): 306-314 RCAHMS. 1977. Inventory of Monuments and Constructions in the County of Caithness (Edinburgh): 139-143

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_element 1-7.wpd 36

ZONE 1 THE OUTER BAILEY

1-7 The Outer Bailey Courtyard

Description The Outer Bailey Courtyard is bounded by ranges of buildings to the southeast, southwest and northwest, and a further range was located on the northeast side. The Courtyard provided access into these structures and to the Tower House and Inner Bailey across the drawbridge. Substantial overburden currently obscures the original ground surface of the Courtyard, but this may have consisted of flagging and may retain additional features such as wells or cisterns beneath this debris. MacGibbon and Ross show an oven towards the southeast. Although the buildings bounding the Courtyard have gone through several cycles of change and addition, it is likely that this enclosed space existed from the establishment of the castle in the late 14th or early 15th century, following the line of the current Curtain Wall.

Status This structure is part of the Scheduled Ancient Monument.

Significance Of considerable significance because of its provision of an open space within the highly developed castle complex.

Policies See policies R1, R2, R3, R4, CE1, CE4, CE5, CE6, AP1, AP3, AP5, AP7, MI5

Documentary and Pictorial Sources MacGibbon, D. and Ross, T. 1971. The Castellated and Domestic Architecture of Scotland Vol. 2 (Edinburgh): 306-314 RCAHMS. 1977. Inventory of Monuments and Constructions in the County of Caithness (Edinburgh): 139-143 Photographic archive held by RCAHMS

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_element 2-1.wpd 37

ZONE 2 THE NORTH RANGE

2-1 The East Wing

Description Originally a building of two storeys and a basement, this structure survives through much of the ground floor. Fireplaces and lockers are provided on each floor, as are mural latrines in the northwest corner, expelling onto the seashore. The ground floor was reached by means of a doorway from the courtyard in the southwest elevation, whilst the second floor was accessed from the staircase associated with the South Gate. The basement was reached either from the central building, or from the lower storey of the portcullis building. Corbels and beam sockets remain in the northwest and southeast walls for the support of the ground and first floors.

This building was constructed as part of the rebuilding undertaken in the late 16th and early 17th century, and functioned as a lodging range, as evidenced by the presence of garderobes and fireplaces on each floor.

Status This structure is part of a Scheduled Ancient Monument.

Significance Of considerable significance on account of its provision of high-status lodgings within the Outer Bailey and its relation to the South Gate.

Policies See policies R1, R2, R3, R4, CE1, CE2, CE4, CE5, CE6, AP1, AP2, AP3, AP4, AP5, MI5

Documentary and Pictorial Sources MacGibbon, D. and Ross, T. 1971. The Castellated and Domestic Architecture of Scotland Vol. 2 (Edinburgh): 306-314 Pococke, R. 1887. Tours in Scotland 1747, 1750, 1760 (Edinburgh) RCAHMS. 1977. Inventory of Monuments and Constructions in the County of Caithness (Edinburgh): 139-143

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_element 2-2.wpd 38

ZONE 2 THE NORTH RANGE

2-2 The Central Block

Description The Central Block was constructed as part of the rebuilding undertaken in the late 16th and early 17th century. This was a building of at least two storeys with a basement, and it has suffered from extensive collapse, the ground floor only partially surviving. The basement was accessed from the East Wing and additional doorways may exist in the southeast elevation, currently buried under wall tumble. The northwest elevation, overlooking the seashore, contains two chutes which may relate to latrines or rubbish disposal. MacGibbon and Ross’s plan of 1884 records a number of openings and mural chambers within this elevation, none of which are now visible. Despite large-scale collapse, the former presence of upper storeys is evidenced by toothings and a beam socket visible in the southwest elevation of the East Wing. Pococke’s illustration of 1760 supports this and shows the Central Block to have been illuminated by tall pointed windows, stretching over two storeys. At first-floor level, this structure probably functioned as a hall within the Outer Bailey.

Status This structure is part of a Scheduled Ancient Monument.

Significance Of considerable significance because of its probable function as a hall within the Outer Bailey.

Policies See policies R1, R2, R3, R4, CE1, CE4, CE5, CE6, AP1, AP2, AP4, AP5, MI5

Documentary and Pictorial Sources MacGibbon, D. and Ross, T. 1971. The Castellated and Domestic Architecture of Scotland Vol. 2 (Edinburgh): 306-314 Pococke, R. 1887. Tours in Scotland 1747, 1750, 1760 (Edinburgh) RCAHMS. 1977. Inventory of Monuments and Constructions in the County of Caithness (Edinburgh): 139-143

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_element 2-3.wpd 39

ZONE 2 THE OUTER BARBICAN

2-3 The West Tower

Description A building of at least two storeys and a basement, which abutted the western curtain wall, the West Tower has suffered considerable collapse. Only the southwest corner remains standing and part of the southeast elevation also survives.

The ground floor is mostly filled with rubble; however, two loops remain visible in the north wall, as does the jamb of a further opening. A fireplace is visible in the southwest wall of the ground floor, the flue now being exposed. The first floor has suffered extensive loss of fabric, but its height may be established from the position of a large socket for a spine beam in the southwest wall and a corbel for a wall plate in the northwest wall. Of particular note is the presence of a deliberately blocked arched opening in the southwest wall. This formerly provided access into a tower located on the west curtain wall, which now survives as only a few courses of masonry. This building is illustrated by Pococke, and a historic photo of c.1900 shows the building to have been at least two storeys in height. This building was constructed as part of the building works undertaken in the late 16th and early 17th centuries and provided further lodgings within the Outer Bailey, demonstrated by the inclusion of a fireplace at ground-floor level.

Status This structure is part of a Scheduled Ancient Monument.

Significance Of considerable significance due to its provision of lodgings within the Outer Bailey and preservation of phasing within its fabric.

Policies See policies R1, R2, R3, R4, CE1, CE4, CE5, CE6, AP1, AP2, AP5, MI5

Documentary and Pictorial Sources MacGibbon, D. and Ross, T. 1971. The Castellated and Domestic Architecture of Scotland Vol. 2 (Edinburgh): 306-314 Pococke, R. 1887. Tours in Scotland 1747, 1750, 1760 (Edinburgh) RCAHMS. 1977. Inventory of Monuments and Constructions in the County of Caithness (Edinburgh): 139-143 RCAHMS photograph CA/121

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_element 3-1.wpd 40

ZONE 3 THE TOWER HOUSE

3-1 Tower House

Description Tower House is on an approximate U-plan, of three storeys with a basement, and was erected from the late 16th to early 17th centuries, incorporating fabric from some earlier structures. It is constructed in dark-grey Caithness stone, with imported red sandstone used for quoins and dressings. Entered through the southwest elevation from the Outer Bailey by a removable bridge, the barrel-vaulted ground floor housed the kitchen, guard rooms and access to the basements. These rooms were well-furnished with mural cupboards and fireplaces, and a series of loops overlooks the seashore to the north and the dry moat to the southeast and southwest. The upper storeys were reached by means of a newel stair contained within the southeast projection. The window openings within the stair tower were also used as a means of accessing the wall walks within the Inner Barbican.

The first floor contained the hall, illuminated by large rectangular windows and a large oriel window at the high end, now largely collapsed. Cantilevering was used to support masonry above this window, and its timber housings are still visible above the window opening. The hall was heated by a substantial fireplace in the eastern wall. Access to a bretasche located on the northwest face of the Tower was provided from a vestibule between the hall and wing. This was a timber structure supported on a series of corbels and joist-holes, and heated by a mural fireplace. Although usually interpreted as a fighting platform, the Tower House’s late date of construction and the inclusion of a fireplace suggest that this was not its primary function. Instead, the bretasche may have functioned as a viewing platform, presenting a prospect of Sinclair Bay. It is also possible that it was used as a garderobe, as the Tower is notable for containing no other garderobes. The wing, at first-floor level, contained solar accommodation in the form of a heated chamber. It also provided access through a floor hatch to the muniments room, sandwiched between the kitchen and solar. This was a vaulted chamber used for the preservation of valuable documents and heated by means of a vent from the kitchen chimney, for the preservation of valuable documents. A newel stair situated in the northeast corner of the solar provided access to the second floor.

The second floor has suffered considerably from collapse, losing much of its upper masonry. The housings for a small bretasche are visible in the external southern elevation, accessed from the main newel stair. A heated chamber was located above the hall and illuminated by large rectangular windows, those of the southwest wall being notable as they were dormer windows. A small vestibule provided access between the main chamber and wing, and was set at a slightly lower floor level, with large windows overlooking the Inner Bailey. A mural fireplace and cupboards were provided. The newel stair in the northeast corner also provided access to a small chamber at third-floor level; however, much evidence relating to this has been lost through collapse.

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_element 3-1.wpd 41

Status This structure is part of the Scheduled Ancient Monument.

Significance Of exceptional significance because it is the heart of the castle complex and the most complete building on site.

Policies See policies RI, R2, R3, R4, CE1, CE4, CE5, CE6, AP1, AP2, AP3, AP5, AP6, AP7, MI5

Documentary and Pictorial Sources Brand, J. 1701. A Brief Description of Orkney, Zetland, Pightland Firth and Caithness (Edinburgh):147, 155. Calder, J. T. 1861. History of Caithness (Glasgow) Cordiner, C. 1780. Antiquities and Scenery of the north of Scotland (Edinburgh): 82 Daniell, W. and Ayton, R. 1814. A Voyage Around Great Britain Undertaken in the Summer of the Year 1813 (Edinburgh) MacGibbon, D. and Ross, T. 1971. The Castellated and Domestic Architecture of Scotland Vol. 2 (Edinburgh): 306-314 Pococke, R. 1887. Tours in Scotland 1747, 1750, 1760(Edinburgh) 160 RCAHMS. 1977. Inventory of Monuments and Constructions in the County of Caithness (Edinburgh): 139-143 Photographic archive held by RCAHMS

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_element 4-1.wpd 42

ZONE 4 THE INNER BAILEY

4-1 The North Range

Description A two-storey range formed by three rooms runs along the peninsula from the Tower House, and was constructed between the mid-15th and early 16th centuries. Only the portions of the Range associated with the Tower House now survive to any significant height; however, substantial earthworks preserve further evidence of internal arrangements.

Ground- and first-floor fireplaces, along with a pitched weathercourse, survive in the northeast elevation of the Tower House wing. The upper storey was reached by a staircase housed within a projection in the northwest wall. Garderobes are likely to have been included in this range, as evidenced by the presence of a drain through the northwest wall.

A joint is visible between the fabric associated with the Tower House and that which is largely collapsed, suggesting that this building was constructed in two phases, the Tower House being constructed to abut and slightly extend the existing range.

Status This structure is part of the Scheduled Ancient Monument.

Significance Of considerable significance due to its relationship to the Tower House and function.

Policies See policies R1, R2, R3, R4, CE1, CE2, CE4, CE5, CE5, CE6, AP1, AP2, AP5, MI5

Documentary and Pictorial Sources Daniell, W. and Ayton, R. 1814. A Voyage Around Great Britain Undertaken in the Summer of the Year 1813 (Edinburgh) MacGibbon, D. and Ross, T. 1971. The Castellated and Domestic Architecture of Scotland Vol. 2 (Edinburgh): 306-314 RCAHMS. 1977. Inventory of Monuments and Constructions in the County of Caithness (Edinburgh): 139-143 RCAHMS CA/192, CA/442

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_element 4-2.wpd 43

ZONE 4 THE INNER BAILEY

4-2 The Great Hall

Description Two large, rectilinear buildings are constructed along the north face of the peninsula, now much collapsed and preserved as earthworks. Masonry is now visible on only the northwest face of the Curtain Wall. A large rectangular structure (c.12.5m x c.6.0m) is located adjacent to the North Range, and its earthworks form an apparently undivided space, suggesting that it may have functioned as a hall. A large mass of masonry joins the southwest corner of this structure to the North Range and may have housed chimney flues or stairs. An opening survives through the northeast wall into another adjoining structure (c.6.5m x c.3.3m). The location and close relationship of these buildings suggests that the latter may have functioned as a service range for the hall.

MacGibbon and Ross recorded a vaulted passage terminating to the northwest. Traces of this structure are still visible in the cliff-face to the northeast.

Status This structure is part of a Scheduled Ancient Monument.

Significance Of considerable significance due to its function within the castle.

Policies See policies R1, R2, R3, R4, CE1, CE4, CE5, CE6, AP1, AP2, AP5, MI5

Documentary and Pictorial Sources Daniell, W. and Ayton, R. 1814. A Voyage Around Great Britain Undertaken in the Summer of the Year 1813 (Edinburgh) MacGibbon, D. and Ross, T. 1971. The Castellated and Domestic Architecture of Scotland Vol. 2 (Edinburgh): 306-314 RCAHMS. 1977. Inventory of Monuments and Constructions in the County of Caithness (Edinburgh): 139-143 RCAHMS CA/192, CA/442

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_element 4-3.wpd 44

ZONE 4 THE INNER BAILEY

4-3 The Eastern Barbican and Water Gate

Description The Eastern Barbican is formed by an enclosure set at a significantly lower level than the rest of the Inner Bailey, now obscured by turf and collapsed masonry. This is the probable location of a gate, although its form is not discernible. A trap-stair is located within this enclosure and provides access, by means of a flight of stairs and through a rock-cut passage, to a wider landing. A further flight of stairs leads down to an arched opening through the rockface, and onto the seashore. The voussoirs and springing of the arch survive, and traces of a hoodmould can also be discerned on the exterior. A loop is provided above the arch, suggesting the former presence of a landing at this point. No evidence survives of a door rebate, suggesting that the opening was either semi-permanently blocked, or had an iron gate. It is probable that this trap-stair functioned as a sallyport, used as an additional means of defence for the castle, as the seashore at this point does not lend itself as a natural harbour.

Status This structure is part of the Scheduled Ancient Monument.

Significance Of considerable significance because it provides seaward defences and provides access to the seashore.

Policies See policies R1, R2, R3, R4, R6, CE1, CE4, CE5, CE6, AP1, AP2, AP5, MI5

Documentary and Pictorial Sources Daniell, W. and Ayton, R. 1814. A Voyage Around Great Britain Undertaken in the Summer of the Year 1813 (Edinburgh) MacGibbon, D. and Ross, T. 1971. The Castellated and Domestic Architecture of Scotland Vol. 2 (Edinburgh): 306-314 RCAHMS. 1977. Inventory of Monuments and Constructions in the County of Caithness (Edinburgh): 139-143

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_element 4-4.wpd 45

ZONE 4 THE INNER BAILEY

4-4 The South Range and Curtain Wall

Description A stretch of Curtain Wall runs between the southeast corner of the Tower House and the South Range, surviving best where it is linked to the Tower. Two loops survive in this portion of wall and, adjacent to the Tower House, a further loop has been sliced through. Sockets in the sides of these embrasures demonstrate their function as gun loops for use with hook guns. A historic photo of c.1900 shows the eastern of these to have had a wide-mouthed gun loop. MacGibbon and Ross show a further six openings within the wall, now obscured by turf and tumble. The presence of the gun loops dates the curtain wall to the mid-15th century.

The South Range is located at the east end of the Curtain Wall and is formed by three rooms at ground-floor level. It is probable that this range was of at least one further storey. At the southwest end is a small rectangular structure which seems to have functioned as a garderobe, expelling through a chute in the Curtain Wall to the south. Two small rooms abut the garderobe, and in view of their location, are likely to have had a domestic function. Joints between these rooms and the large room which terminates the range to the east demonstrate several phases of construction. Due to its approximate E/W alignment and proportions it has been suggested that the easternmost room functioned as a chapel, possibly at first-floor rather than ground-floor level. Daniell’s illustration of 1821 shows a building in this location with two cusped windows in its northeast elevation.

Status This structure is part the Scheduled Ancient Monument.

Significance Of considerable significance in providing seaward defences for the Inner Bailey, and possibly housing a chapel and associated lodgings.

Policies See policies R1, R2, R3, R4, CE1, CE4, CE5, CE6, AP1, AP2, AP5, MI5

Documentary and Pictorial Sources Calder, J. T. 1861. History of Caithness (Glasgow) Daniell, W. and Ayton, R. 1814. A Voyage Around Great Britain Undertaken in the Summer of the Year 1813 (Edinburgh) MacGibbon, D. and Ross, T. 1971. The Castellated and Domestic Architecture of Scotland Vol. 2 (Edinburgh):

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_element 4-4.wpd 46

306-314 RCAHMS. 1977. Inventory of Monuments and Constructions in the County of Caithness (Edinburgh): 139-143 RCAHMS photographs CA/119, CA192, CA/442, CA919

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_element 4-5.wpd 47

ZONE 4 THE INNER BAILEY

4-5 The Inner Bailey Courtyard

Description The Inner Bailey Courtyard runs the length of the Inner Bailey, between the curtain wall and surrounding structures. This route is currently represented by an uneven track. The long, narrow peninsula constrained space within the Courtyard and it is likely that structures within this area were kept to a minimum. The only means of access to the Courtyard, and the buildings ranged around it, was through either the Tower House or Sally Port. Turf currently obscures the Courtyard surface, but it is likely that it was covered with stone flagging, as survives adjacent to the Tower House. The enclosed space represented by the Courtyard must have been in existence by the time the Curtain Wall was erected in the 15th century. However, it is likely that it was enclosed following the erection of the West Gatehouse in the late 14th or early 15th century.

Status Part of the Scheduled Ancient Monument.

Significance Of considerable significance due to its function as the centre of the Inner Bailey.

Policies See policies R1, R2, R3, R4, CE1, CE4, CE5, CE6, AP1, AP2, AP3, AP4, AP5, AP6, AP7, MI5

Documentary and Pictorial Sources MacGibbon, D. and Ross, T. 1971. The Castellated and Domestic Architecture of Scotland Vol. 2 (Edinburgh): 306-314 RCAHMS. 1977. Inventory of Monuments and Constructions in the County of Caithness (Edinburgh): 139-143 Photographic archive held by RCAHMS

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_element 5-1.wpd 48

ZONE 5 CASTLE HAVEN

5-1 Castle Haven Promontory

Description Castle Haven Promontory runs southeast, parallel to the Castle. Now concealed by a covering of turf, evidence remains upstanding for the exploitation of this area. Often known as Castle Head Dyke, a bank or turf-covered wall separates the promontory from the surrounding land. A 2.4m wide entrance is placed centrally along this boundary. A low masonry wall also runs around the edges of the promontory. It is probable that these features are associated with the castle, but without further investigation, closer identification of their function or date cannot be made.

Status No legal status.

Significance Of considerable significance due to its probable association with the castle.

Policies See policies R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, CE1, CE2, CE3, CE4, CE5, CE6, AP1, AP2, AP4, AP5, AP7, MI5

Documentary and Pictorial Sources Highland Council Sites and Monument Record. Sites and Monuments Record Enquiry for Rural Stewardship Scheme

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_element 5-2.wpd 49

ZONE 5 CASTLE HAVEN

5-2 The Stack

Description The Stack is defined as a rock outcrop to the northeast of Castle Haven Promontory. A sub-rectangular feature of masonry and earthwork construction can be seen surmounting the Stack. The lack of access hampers interpretation of this feature, but it is possible that these remains represent an additional fortification associated with Sinclair Girnigoe, or a hermitage predating the castle’s establishment.

Status No legal status.

Significance The Stack is of considerable significance due to its relationship with the castle and its potential to reveal further information on inhabitance of the site prior to the castle’s construction, and the relationship of Sinclair Girnigoe to the broader landscape.

Policies See policies R1, R3, R4, R5, CE1, CE2, CE5, CE6, AP5, MI5

Documentary and Pictorial Sources CUCAP aerial photograph c.1950s, A83207/po Photographic archive held by RCAHMS

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_element 6-1.wpd 50

ZONE 6 SURROUNDING AREA

6-1 Noss Head Lighthouse

Description A lighthouse established on the edge of Sinclair Bay in 1849 by Alan Stevenson. The lantern is diamond paned and sits on a short tower with a semicircular base. Egyptian detailing is displayed upon the Lighthouse keeper’s house. This building now houses the Clan Sinclair Centre.

Status A Grade II listed building.

Significance Of considerable importance in housing the Clan Sinclair visitor centre.

Policies See policies R1, CE2, MI2, MI5

Documentary and Pictorial Sources Highland Council Sites and Monument Record. Sites and Monuments Record Enquiry for Rural Stewardship Scheme

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_element 6-2.wpd 51

ZONE 6 THE SURROUNDING AREA

6-2 Cairn

Description This small cairn is located at a distance to the southeast of the lighthouse, and has been excavated at some unknown point in its history. It now survives to only c.0.4m in diameter and c.0.6m in height. Two slabs are visible within the cairn, as are several to its side.

Status No legal status.

Significance Of some significance in demonstrating the antiquity of inhabitation of the area.

Policies See policies R1, CE2, CE5, MI5

Documentary and Pictorial Sources Highland Council Sites and Monument Record. Sites and Monuments Record Enquiry for Rural Stewardship Scheme

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_element 6-3.wpd 52

ZONE 6 THE SURROUNDING AREA

6-3 Military Installations

Description A number of military fortifications are located in the area surrounding the castle. These include features such as possible World War II infantry trenching, a former radio station site, and an anti-aircraft battery. The preservation of these structures varies considerably.

Status No legal status.

Significance Of some significance in reflecting the continuing importance of the Sinclair Bay in the region’s defence.

Policies See policies R1, CE2, CE5, MI5

Documentary and Pictorial Sources Highland Council Sites and Monument Record. Sites and Monuments Record Enquiry for Rural Stewardship Scheme

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_element 6-4.wpd 53

ZONE 6 THE SURROUNDING AREA

6-4 Coastal Earthwork

Description A long linear earthwork runs from the west of the Outer Bailey and terminates by the jetty at Ackergill Tower. This substantial structure may be of some antiquity and may relate to former sea defences along Sinclair Bay or the outer ward of the castle.

Status No legal status.

Significance Of some significance due to possible association with the early occupation of the region and for its possible association with the Castle.

Policies See policies R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, CE1, CE2, CE3, CE5, CE6, AP2, AP5, MI5

Documentary and Pictorial Sources CUCAP aerial photograph c.1950s, A83207/po Photographic archive held by RCAHMS

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd Ji

APPENDIX J PRELIMINARY TOURISM SURVEY

Over the Easter bank holiday weekend, 18-21 April 2003, a preliminary tourism survey was carried out at Castle Sinclair Girnigoe by CST. Analysis of this small sample (approximately 100 respondents) by CASE showed:

37.5% of respondents were first time visitors to Castle Sinclair Girnigoe. 44% of respondents were non-Caithness residents. 10% were from overseas. 47.5% of respondents had travelled over 5 miles to visit the site. 45% of respondents planned to spend one hour or longer at the site. 55% of respondents were in a party of two. 33% were accompanied by children. 60% wanted more on site information about the castle. 37.5% wanted better signs on site. 30% wanted better footpaths. 35% wanted toilets on site. Of those staying in overnight accommodation, 44% were staying with friends and relatives.

These findings suggest a broad base of awareness about the castle amongst all categories of visitors and the high degree of public interest surrounding the site. The high percentage of local visitors demonstrates the continuing importance of the castle as a historic site for the people of Caithness and the potential for interesting repeated visits to the site. The number of visitors from outside Caithness and overseas is also highly significant when considered against the low level of publicity surrounding the site and the current lack of information on opening times and accessibility. These findings demonstrate the potential of Castle Sinclair Girnigoe as a major tourist destination within Caithness, of interest both to visitors to the region and to local residents. The desire for better information about the castle is marked, and suggests that on-site interpretation will considerably improve the visitor experience. The lower number of responses on questions over amenities and access routes may suggest that most respondents accept the condition of the site and lack of amenities as an integral part of visiting such a site without charge; however, it also demonstrates that a significant number of visitors are unsatisfied with the current standard of presentation and would be unhappy to pay for access to such a site. The question of access in and around the castle is particularly significant in this light, as increased numbers of visitors are likely to exacerbate existing problems. In conclusion, it can be seen that Castle Sinclair Girnigoe has the potential to function as a significant tourist destination within Caithness, with wide ranging appeal to a variety of visitors.

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd Jii

CLAN SINCLAIR TRUST VISITOR SURVEY

Interview No ...... Date ...... Time ......

Location ...... Weather ...... Interviewer ......

Respondent Male 0.1 Female 0.2

INTRODUCTION: Good morning/afternoon/evening. The Clan Sinclair Trust (with support from Caithness and Sutherland Enterprise) is undertaking a survey in order to find out about visitor awareness and satisfaction with Castles Sinclair & Girnigoe. I would like to ask you a few questions which should only take a few minutes. Thank you for your help.

1. How often, on average, do you visit this site?

Daily 1.1 Monthly 1.5 Two/Three times a week 1.2 Two/Three times a year 1.6 Weekly 1.3 Five/Six times a year 1.7 Fortnightly 1.4 First Visit 1.8 Other* 1.9

*(Specify)......

2. Do you live in Caithness?

Yes 2.1 No 2.2

3. Do you live in the UK? If yes what is your postcode?………………………………….

If no what is your Country of origin? *(Specify)......

4. Did you travel from home today?

Yes 4.1 No 4.2

If Yes go to Q6. If No Q5

5. What type of accommodation did you stay in last night?

B&B/guest house 5.1 Caravan/camper van 5.5 Hotel/motel 5.2 Youth Hostel 5.6 Self Catering 5.3 Friends/Relatives 5.7 Camping (tent) 5.4 Other* 5.8

*(Specify)......

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd Jiii

6. How many miles (kilometres) did you travel to get here today?

1 mile or less 6.1 10-20 miles 6.4 1-5 miles 6.2 20-40 miles 6.5 5-10 miles 6.3 Over 40 miles 6.6

7. How long (have or) will you spend at this site today?

One hour or less 7.1 An afternoon (4+ hours) 7.5 1-2 hours 7.2 An evening (3+ hours) 7.6 2-3 hours 7.3 All day 7.7 A morning (4+ hours) 7.4

8. Which of the following descriptions would you say most accurately describes you as a visitor to this site? Show card

Local resident 8.1 Business/conference visitor 8.5 Day tripper from outside area 8.2 Member of school trip 8.6 Holiday maker 8.3 organised party/club 8.7 Visiting friends/relatives 8.4

9. How many people are in your party?

One 9.1 3-4 9.3 6-10 9.5 Two 9.2 4-5 9.4 Over 10 9.6

10. Who are the other members of your party?

Children under 12 10.1 Other relatives 10.4 Children over 12 10.2 Friends 10.5 Spouse/partner 10.3 Children's friends 10.6

11. What is your main reason for visiting this site? Show card and tick one (Prompt)

Relaxation 11.1 Ancient Castles/Historic Interest 11.6 Place for family outing 11.2 Be alone 11.7 To view wildlife 11.3 Be with friends 11.8 Health and fitness 11.4 For a particular event 11.9 Clan Connections 11.5 Other* 11.10

*(Specify)......

12. Look at this list and tell me which activities you have participated or intend to participate in during your visit today. Show card and tick activities mentioned.

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd Jiv

Walking (short, under 2 miles) 12.1 Conservation volunteer work 12.6 Walking (long, over 2 miles) 12.2 Bird watching 12.7 Exercise dog (pets) 12.3 Cycling/mountain biking 12.8 Park car and relax 12.4 Other* 12.9 Picnic 12.5

*(Specify)......

13. Which of the following additional facilities or improvements would you like to see at this site? Show card and tick improvements (Prompt)

Better provision for children 13.1 Better provision for the disabled 13.8 Better footpaths 13.2 More information on nature/wildlife 13.9 A catering outlet 13.3 More information on the Castle 13.10 Some shopping facilities (Gifts, guide books) 13.4 Self catering accommodation 13.11 Some toilet facilities 13.5 Better signs 13.12 More organised trips/tours 13.6 More fun/entertainment 13.13 A nature trail 13.7 None 13.14 Other* 13.15

*(Specify)......

14. What do you particularly like about the site?

15. What do you particularly dislike about the site?

16. How did you find out about this site?

Word of mouth 16.1 Guide book 16.4 Tourist Information Centre 16.2 Saw sign when passing 16.5 Publicity in press/radio/TV 16.3 Always knew 16.6 Other* 16.7

*(Specify)......

17. Which of these age groups are you in? Show card

14-17 17.1 45-54 17.5 18-24 17.2 55-64 17.6 25-34 17.3 65+ 17.7 35-44 17.4 No response 17.8

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FAS_Volume 2 Castle Sinclair Girnigoe Conservation Plan.wpd Jv

18. Which of the following best describes your present employment situation? Show card

Working full time 18.1 Retired 18.5 Working part time 18.2 Full time education 18.6 Self employed 18.3 Housewife/husband 18.7 Unemployed 18.4 Other* 18.8

*(Specify)......

19. Do you visit other ancient monuments?

Yes 19.1 No 19.2

If yes where have you been and why?

20. Do you have Historic Scotland membership?

Yes 20.1 No 20.2

That completes the questions. Thank you for your time and cooperation.

FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS FIELD ARCHAEOLOGY SPECIALISTS LTD

UNIVERSITY OF YORK TELEPHONE (01904) 433952 KING’S MANOR FASCIMILE (01904) 433935 YORK YO1 7EP E-MAIL [email protected]