sign in sign up
<<
Home , Aldclune, Dunnottar Castle, Dupplin Cross, Forteviot, Glen Urquhart, High cross

Proc SocAntiq Scot, 122 (1992), 215-287

Reconnaissance excavations on Early Historic and other royal sites in , 1974-84; 5: A, Excavations & other fieldwork at , , 1981; B, Excavations at , -shire, 1983 , Excavation;C t sa Dunnottar, , 1984 Leslie Alcock* & Elizabeth A Alcock*

ABSTRACT This paper concludes the series of reports on excavations and related fieldwork, carried out between 1974 and 1984 by the on sites identified, on the evidence of written sources, as belonging to the Early Historic or Early Medieval period. The three excavations reported here, at Forteviot, Urquhart and Dunnottar, yielded very little direct archaeological evidence; but the associated fieldwork, aerial photography and historical research make important contributions to our knowledge of Pictish culture and society. At Dunnottar, an interesting cult focusrecognized,was hithertoa and unknown identified. fortwas Urquhart revealed potentate'sa landed estate at the time of the Columban conversion, with its associated fort and cemetery. Forteviot yielded evidence for a Pictish-Christian cemetery, and displayed the iconography of kingship on the occasion of the Scottish takeover of the Pictish kingdom.

CONTENTS

GENERAL INTRODUCTION ...... 216

DETAILED REPORTS ...... 218

A: EXCAVATION & OTHER FIELDWORK AT FORTEVIOT, 1981 Introduction ...... 8 21 . Topography, tradition & history ...... 219 The evidence of carved stones ...... 222 evidence Th excavatiof eo n ...... 8 22 . The evidenc aeriaf eo l photography ...... 0 23 . Summary: a wider perspective for Forteviot ...... 236

* 29 Hamilton Drive, Glasgow G12 8DN 21 | 6SOCIET Y OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 1992

B: EXCAVATION URQUHART SA T CASTLE, 1983 ...... 2 24 . History, identificatio settinn& g ...... 2 24 . Excavation results ...... 247 Interpretations: Early Medieval Urquhart and its community ...... 257 1: a hypothetical reconstruction of the early fort ...... 257 Ager: Airchartdan2 i qu nuncupatur: earln a y medieval community ...... 0 26 .

C: EXCAVATIONS AT DUNNOTTAR, 1984 ...... 267 History & topography ...... 267 Excavation results ...... 1 27 . Pother,n Du toward alternativn sa e identification ...... 6 27 .

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... 3 28 .

REFERENCES ...... 284

GENERAL INTRODUCTION In 1973 initiatee w , long-terda m research programme designe filScottiso dn t majoi a l p ga r h archaeology; namely, that represente settlemene th y db t archaeolog 'Dare th f kyo Ages' Earle th , y Medieval period Earle th r yo , Historic period majoA . r inspiratio r thinfo s polic s than yi wa t Scotland - in contrast to and south-west England - fortified sites which might be attributed to this period on the evidence of historical or quasi-historical references were fairly common; but despite this f them,o onle ,y on Dunadd received ha , d serious archaeological attention thad s an a ,t long ago as 1929 (Christison 1904; 1905; Craw 1930). Onc overale eth l polic beed yha n conceived discussioa , n documen prepares wa t d wite hth intentio f seekinno commente gth advicd san f otheeo r scholar fiele th d- bot n si h archaeologists and historians - on such matters as the reliability of some of the attributions, and the degree of priorit givee b particulao o yt nt r sites. Unfortunately, throug r own faulou o hn f , o that t discussion documen t publisheno s wa t d until 1981 (Alcock 1981) whicy b , h tim proposee th hal f o f d series of excavation beed ha sn completed brieA . f summar actuae th f yo l progres researce th f s o s hwa presene firsth givee f th o t n nti serie f excavatioso n reports (Alcock, Alcoc Fostek& r 1986). sitee th sf o reporte o Tw d here, Urquhar Dunnottad an t , forme6) r & (illude 3 th par: 1 sf o t original programm f excavatioeo fortifien no d sites thire Th .d one, Forteviot (illuaddes wa s , d15) : despite the fact that it was not fortified. The addition was made for two reasons. First, it had become apparent that the forts with which we were concerned were noble, or even, in some cases, royal. The written evidence for Forteviot suggested that this had also been a royal centre, initially Pictish, and subsequently Scottish as well. Second, during the 1970s, air photographs of Forteviot gave hints about the possible location of the royal centre, and suggested that it had a deep time dimension ,Lat e bacth eo kt Neolithic/Earl y Bronze Age phenomenoa , nmatchee whicb y hma t d a some royal sites in , and also in . Wherea previoue sth s report thin si s series have each been dedicate singla o dt e excavation, the present report deals with three sites. Thi s possibli s e because keepinn i , g witr previouhou s publication policy, we are concerned here only to report in detail those discoveries which relate directl Earle th yo yt Historic periodpresene th f O .t three sites, only Urquhart producey dan structure f thao s t date. Dunnottar, while yielding nothing earlier tha late-12te nth h centure th n yo site itself, none the less provides an occasion for discussing an important Pictish ritual focus and a ALCOC ALCOCKK& : RECONNAISSANCE EXCAVATION SCOTLANDN SI , 1974-84 217

EARLY HISTORIC FORTIFICATIONS IN SCOTLAND

/"•»..-•' Land Over 50011.

ILLUS 1 Map of Early Historic forts and other royal sites in Scotland. 1 - Sites excavated 1974-84: 1 Dumbarton; 2 Dunollie; 3 Urquhart; 4 Dundurn; 5 Forteviot; 6 Dunnottar; 7 St Abb's Head. 2- othe r sites with historical references Dunaverty8 : Tarbert9 ; Dunadd0 1 ; ; 11 Inverness; 12 ; 13 ; 14 Scone Inveralmond5 1 ; ; 16 Stirling; 17 ; 18 Dunbar 2 18 SOCIET ANTIQUARIEF YO SCOTLANDF SO , 1992

possibly related . Nothing medieval at all was found in the excavations at Forteviot. None the less, they provide a reason for surveying the evidence for the Picto-Scottish royal centre, especially in the light of the new aerial photographs, and an enhanced appreciation of the carved stones from Forteviot and its vicinity. t DunnottaA Urquhartd an r , enoug s presentehi dlatee herth rf eo medieva l remainse th n i , for f botmo h veridica interpretativd an l e sections mako t overale s a ,eth l stratification clear. Unlike the earlier reports, however, there is no transcription of the site records, embedded in a full report and reproduced in microfiche format. The site records, however, can be consulted in the archives of Glasgow University. It should be stressed that both these sites yielded a collection of stratified medieval material, principally pottery. case th f Urquhart eo n I , ther alss eolargwa a e collectiof no well-preserved animal bones. These could form the subject matter of a valuable research programme on High Medieval archaeology, but not by the present authors. This report complete recore sth d publicatio r excavationsou f no , accompanie sucy db h wider discussions as the excavation results, together with our growing familiarity with the sites, have prompted hopee W . , however, that possiblultimatele b y writma o et t yi finaea l pape f moro r e general conclusions. This may be of value to other researchers by suggesting where we would consider it most profitable to follow up the present programme, and where priorities might lie for e futureth . Meanwhile.the general conclusions fro e excavationmth s wil e incorporateb l e th n di wider framewor expanden a f ko d versio 1988-8e th f no 9 Rhind Lectures (Alcock 1988b), whics hi no activwn i e preparation.

A: Excavation & Other Fieldwork at Forteviot, 1981

INTRODUCTION originae Th l programm f researceo Earln ho y Historic site Scotlann i s concentrated dha d exclusivel thosn yo e with artificial fortification r strono s g natural defences (illu . Wor1) s t Clydka e Rock, Dundurn Dunollied an , , however broughd ha , t another relationshi r attentionou o pt : these defended l beeplaceal nd seatha s f kingshipo s t seemeI . d reasonable, therefore exteno t , r dou programme to include royal seats which apparently had not been fortified, if indeed such places coul identifiede db particulaA . r reward that migh expectee b t d recoverwoule th e db f planyo f so large timber buildings, suc s wera h e known from aerial photograph d excavatioan y n i n Northumbri t Yeaverinaa Milfield gan d (Hope-Taylor 1977) more .th This e importanswa t because traceo n f internaso l building beed sha n discovere sitee th st d a mentione d above. The initial choice of Forteviot (illus 1:5) as a place worthy of examination was determined by a long tradition that it had been a royal seat, initially of the , and subsequently of the Scots after Kennet f Alpio n nhso took ove Pictise rth h kingdom. Part thif so s tradition were supportey db chronicl eved ean n charter evidence e occurrencth y s welb a , s a lf Pictis eo Scotto-Pictisd han h carved stones. Although nothin s visiblgrounde th gwa n eo , tradition pointed strongl placa o yt e known as 'Haly Hill', on the north-west outskirts of the modern village, as the palace site. Moreover, immediately east of the village, aerial photographs gave tantalizing glimpses of a possible Early Christian cemeter Pictisd yan h burial enclosures. Furthe e soutth ho t r were clear cropmarks of monuments of the third and second millennia BC, which suggested a long time- dimensio ceremoniae th areae o nth t thought-provokinf a : ritua o d e an l us l g backgroun seae th t o dt of barbarian kings in the later first millennium AD. In 1981, a small-scale excavation was carried out at the traditional palace site of Haly Hill, with negative results. An interim report on this was published in an ephemeral format (Alcock ALCOC ALCOCKK& : RECONNAISSANCE EXCAVATION SCOTLANDN SI , 1974-84 219

1982a) permanena ; t record appears belowsame th t e A .time occasioe th , conferenca f no e th n eo early church in western Britain and Ireland was used to explore very widely both the secular and ecclesiastical aspect f Fortevioo s t (Alcock 1982b) e maiTh . n conclusion f thao s t exploratioe nar summarize presene th n di t paper. Finally opportunite th , takes yi datbrin o o t nt aeriae ep th g u l photographic recor f Forteviotdo interpretatioe th d an , r LesleD n y originallb y t Macinneou t yse s in Alcock 1982a transcriptio replacew .w Thine no a s si y d b interpretatio d nan Marilyy nb n Brown of the Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland.

TOPOGRAPHY, TRADITIO HISTORN& Y Forteviot lies in lower , about 1 km south of the and a little east of the confluence of the Water of May with the Earn (illus 2 & 12). It was thus possibly in the ancient kingdo f Fortrimo u (Anderson 1973 p 126) n ; o 1980 . p Earne Nort th e lanma , f th ,ho d rises immediately to the east/west running Cask ridge, at a height of up to 150 m. To the south, the rise Ochie th o lt Hills, with summit t firsa s ti squit, abovm e0 gentlee50 thao s , t Fortevioe t th lie n i s middle of a wide tract between 10 m and 15 m above sea level. This terrace bears some of the finest agricultural land in Scotland: in terms of modern capability for agriculture, it falls in

EAR& Y NTA VALLEYE TH S

AD 600-1000

ILLUS 2 The wider setting of Forteviot. Forts and royal centres in the Tay and Earn valleys. For , see Stevenson 1985; for Clatchard Craig, Close-Brooks 1986; for King's Seat, Dunkeld, Feachem 1966, 73-5 other fo ; r sites, Alcock 1981 220 I SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 1992

FORTEVIOT 1981

\ Main area i of crop-marks

ILLUS 3 Forteviot, showing Haly Hill with the 1981 excavations, the main area of cropmarks, and the present and former courses of the Water of May

categories 2 and 3.1, capable of producing high yields of cereals and grass (Walker et al 1982). e combineTh d potentia f arablo l e farmin lowee th n ro g ground year-round an , d grazin t highega r levels attractes ha , d human activity ove spara f somno e five millennia. The Water of May, rising as it does in the Ochils, is at times a very active stream; and in particular t approachei s a , sw Forteviotno s i s carve steea y ha t t i ,Ma p d ou easte e scarth Th .n po canalized, but an old channel can still be seen beneath the scarp (illus 3 & 12). Viewed from north- west of Forteviot, the scarp appears as a distinct hillock; and it is evident from late 18th- and early 19th-century accounts that this had been an altogether more marked feature before much of it was carried away by erosion. This is Haly Hill, which appears on early editions of the Ordnance Survey 6-inch map as 'Supposed Site of Residence of several of the Pictish & Scottish Kings'. The belief that a principal residence, palace or castle had been erected at Forteviot by Malcol I CanmormII e (1058-93) thad ruins an ,it t s wer eseene stilb o t ,l goes bac t leaska 163o t 8 (details and references in Alcock 1982b, 217). Accounts of the state of preservation of the ruins, however mutualle ar , y contradictory 177n I . ministee 2th f Fortevioo r t describe remaine dth a s sa heap of rubbish; yet other observers claimed that about the same time there were walls still standing m15-20 )6. high o t (4.0t f 5m . There was, however, agreement thabeins site th tewa g ALCOCK & ALCOCK: RECONNAISSANCE EXCAVATIONS IN SCOTLAND, 1974-84 | 221

erodeWatee th y 1832 f b Mayy o rpalacde b d th , an ; e beesitd eha n almost entirely swept away (Skene 1857,278). Modern scholarship enables us to penetrate behind traditional beliefs to the historical significance of Forteviot. The earliest documents which demonstrate a royal presence there are charters of Malcolm IV (Barrow 1960 no 256) and (Barrow & Scott 1971 no 17), dated at Forteviot respectively in 1162 x 1164 and 1165 x 1171. Since the witness list for the first of these includes Countess Ada, the king's mother, and William his brother, a royal residence may inferrede b implo t .t Thi familys no thahi s skini e d th ty g an were there permanently, rather than ni the course of a royal progress. Grants of the church in Forteviot were also made by Malcolm IV in 1164 (Barrow 196Williay b 257 o 0d n )an m117 n i 3117x 7 (Barro Scotw& t 197 116)o 1n . It is not possible to establish a documented history of Forteviot back before the time of Malcol , simplmIV y becaus scarcite th f e o f writ yo charterd san s from earlier reigns theid an , r total absence from thos Malcolf eo I Canmorm II predecessors hi d ean s (Duncan 1975, 171). This means that it is impossible to check Skene's claim, based on 'the constant tradition of the country' (1857, 276), that Malcolm Canmor erected eha palacda Forteviott ea madprincipad s hi an , t ei l residence. Indeed, given the interest of Malcolm III and his queen, St Margaret, in Dunfermline and its church (Cruden 1986, 21-5), Skene's claims for Forteviot seem unlikely. Befor establishmene eth Canmore th f o t e dynasty referenceo tw , evento st t Forteviosa e th n i t ninth century are to be found in a source conveniently designated the 'Scottish Chronicle' (text in Anderson, 1973; 1980, 249-53; discussion, ibid, passim, and Cowan 1981). In summary, this has been describe f Gaeli o s 'a da t king-lisse c a annal d . splice . an t . s d togethe . possibl . . r t ya Brechin, shortly before 995' (Cowan 1981, 18) t coverI . perioa s f aboudo centura t hala d f yan before that date. Though some perhapd an , s even manyannal-basee th f o , d entrie havy sma e been written down contemporaneously (though not in the Scottish Chronicle itself), it is not possible to tess reliabilitit t detailn yi s noteworthi t I . y that twics shorit n ei t spa e Chronicle'nth s compiler found it necesary to give alternative accounts of a particular event, marked by the phrase alii autem dicunt. The Scottish Chronicle relates that Kenneth son of Alpin was the first Scottish king to rule ove Pictse th thard an ;t afte reiga r f 1no 6 years (tha , ove is combinete th r d kingdo Scote th f mso anPicts)e dth palace diee th h , n t Forteviotdi ea palacion i , Fothiurtabaicht. kno e Thisw ws a , from other sources, was in AD 858. Kenneth was succeeded by his brother Donald, in whose reign the Scots (Goedeli) 'made rights and laws . . . with their king at Forteviot'. This was obviously a major lega politicad an l lalss i lase event t oi th t t mentiobu , f Forteviono Scottise th n i t h Chronicle. Donald himself died not at Forteviot but in palacio Cinnbelathoir, a place which remains unidentified. A yet earlier reference, to the last of the Pictish kings, is to be found in the Regnal Lists D and F, which relate how Drust son of Ferat, having reigned three years, 'was killed by the Scots at Forteviot or, according to some, at Scone; occisus est apud Fertheviot secundum quosdam Sconam a Scottis (Anderson 1973; 1980, 266, 273). The phrase a Scottis is a reference to the story that the Pictish nobility had been massacred treacherously by the Scots. This is a common form of dynastic origin-legend; another Insular example, this time involving the massacre of British nobles by the Saxons relates i , Historian di Brittonum chapte (Morri6 r4 s 1980 ; 73)double 32 ,Th . e referenco et Forteviot and Scone suggests that Forteviot had been the actual location; but that by the time the even s committewa t writingo dt , probabl e llt r th 12t ho n yi h century e maith , n royal centrd eha been transferre Sconeo dt . Non lesse eth , ther evidentls ewa stronya g tradition asserting that Drust had been slai t Forteviotna therefor y ma e W .e accept that thibeed s ha Pictisn a h royal centre which was adopted by the Scots in the early stage of their take-over. 222 | SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 1992

A reference to Forteviot in yet earlier times may be found in the foundation legend of St Andrews. This relates how, when St Regulus, or Rule, brought the relics of St Andrew to Pictland, he met the three sons of the Pictish king Hungus (that is, Oengus: though it is not certain whether Oengus I or Oengus II is to be inferred) at Forteviot (urbs Fortevieth). Oengus himself, it was said, subsequently founded a church (basilica) there. (For the legend, Skene 1867, 183-93; for discussion, Henderson 1967, 86; Anderson 1974a, 1974b.) In M O Anderson's view, 'it is difficult to find anything in the legends that can be treated as history, apart perhaps from the name of the founde incidentad an r l information abou writerse th t timesn ow ' ' (1974a majos It . r7) , relevanco et the present paper is that a king and his three sons may be the theme of a carved stone arch from Forteviot, which will shortl discussede yb . It is interesting to speculate on the character and layout of the ninth-century Scottish, and probably also Pictish, royal centre at Forteviot in the days of Drust, Kenneth and Donald. Cowan has commented that 'palacium can mean "palace" but in this context it is more likely to represent a timber hall or perhaps "pale" or "palisade" ' (1981, 9). The second and third of these equations are dubious: the first is true, but hardly significant. The architecturally elaborate courts of the Carolingian and Ottonian emperors (accessible eg in Conant 1959; 1979) are hardly relevant in the present context. Among lesser stone buildings noty e relativelma eth e w , y simple hallf o s Moravian and Polish princes (eg Poulik 1975; Jazdzewski 1975; Vdna 1983); and also, at present unique in Britain, the equally simple royal hall at Northampton (Williams et al 1985). Elsewhere, it would be difficult to find the Early Medieval kings of barbarian Europe living in anything other than timber halls: often, indeed, of considerable size and magnificence. For excavated and published Insular examples we may cite, in Anglian Northumbria, the seventh-century halls at Yeavering (Hope-Taylor 1977); and, in a West Saxon context, the Late Saxon ones at Cheddar (Rahtz 1979). Whether we are dealing with Prankish emperors, Polish princes, or English kings, two buildings are regularly present at the court of a Christian ruler: a large hall, whether of stone or timber feastingr fo , , audience othed san r court ceremonials churcha d an ; , eithe chapel-royara a r o l more public building. The expectation of an archaeologist engaged in Pfalzenforschung is to recover such buildings, whether, rarely, as standing remains, or as the below-ground plans of vanished structures remaindee Th . thif ro s paper explores this them t Forteviotea .

THE EVIDENCE OF CARVED STONES (Illus 4-6) Carved stones and, above all, a remarkable sculptured arch, bear witness to Early Medieval activit t Forteviotya t thebu ;y also presen depressina t g pictur extene th f whico eo t h evidencs eha been lost. By 1903, Romilly Alien was able to record only five sculptured stones, none of them complete, in the vicinity of Forteviot and Milton of Forteviot (Alien & Anderson 1903, 321-7). Unfortunately, examinatio stonee th f no s still preserve churce th n dt i Fortevioha t make t cleasi r that his drawings are neither complete nor wholly accurate; it is not, however, the purpose of the present pape provido rt corpue a Fortevio e th f so t stones. preservee Oth f d stones, Fortevio lowee th (illu1 s i r o -slab) a haltn s 4 f o f , bearinn go figurae th l fac horneea d beast, bitin nece serpenta gth f ko , whic turn hi n seize beast'e sth s hornt i ; would be natural to interpret the beast as an ox, but its jaw is that of a carnivore. The serpent itself paia f guardiaf ro o extension e a on s tai i e f nth o l beastf no s suc flans h a figurae kth l fac f someo e Pictish cross-slabs othee th bird'a tai e f rn o th ;i lappear sd head en designe otheo e st Th .th n rso face and the two sides are principally of . The style is essentially Pictish, and a date in the eight r earlieho r ninth century seems appropriate. ALCOCK & ALCOCK: RECONNAISSANCE EXCAVATIONS IN SCOTLAND, 1974-84 I 223

ILLUS 4 Front, side and rear views of cross-slab, Forteviot no 1. Height 0.6 m. Photos: courtesy of T E Gray

Forteviot no 3 (illus 5) is a fragment from the arm of a free-standing , and is therefor f Irisho e , Scottish (lonan) r (unlikelyo , ) Anglo-Scandinavian inspiration, rather than Pictish. Alie quadrante nth notef connectine o th e t f ds 'parso on no tha ha f d t o ti t di g e ring'h t bu , illustrate thisoutee Th . rquadrane edgth square-sectionef a e o s tha d rib, decorated wit hsquarea - key pattern (Alien & Anderson 1903, no 887). Although it is quite dissimilar in detail, the fact that this fragment comes fro mfree-standina g cros crose s th relatet Dupplin a so t t i s , acros Eare th s n from Forteviot, whic discusses hi d further below. Give apparene nth t Iris r Scottisho h influencea , latee datth rn ei nint h century migh appropriatee tb . Forteviot nos 4 & 5 are mere fragments, the first with a spearman on horseback, the other with rather confused interlace SpearmaM r D . s alsnha o brough r attentioou o t t n other fragments which have only recently been deposited in Forteviot church, including at least one which appears architecturan a e b o t l fragment rather than crospara f cross-slabr o tso . mose Fortevioth s ti remarkable2 o tn mose th td controversialan , Fortevioe th f o , t stonesn a : arch-shaped slab of sandstone (illus 6). This, as Skene stated in 1832, 'was discovered . . . lying in e [Wateth ] Mayf o of r d , immediatelbe e th y unde Hale th r y Hill' reasonabls i t I . believo t e e that originall buildinge formed th f ha o t yi Hale n do s on pary f o Hilt l which had, agai Skene'n ni s words, 'been almost entirely swept awa encroachmente y th ..y b . Maye th f ' so (Skene 1857, 278; paper delivered 1832). The description of the arch given here is based in part on accounts by previous writers (Skene 1857; Stuart 1867; Alien & Anderson 1903; Richardson 1964), but more especially on a detailed examination and discussion, face to face with the stone, between the authors and Dr Michael Spearman. On the whole, a common interpretation prevailed; in what follows, dissenting opinion identifiee sar initialsy db . e slas beeTh bha n shape doubla o t d e curve. Despite some slight irregularity bese th , t available measurements make it clear that the intention was to carve an arc of a true circle, with an inner diameter of at least 4 ft (c 1.2 m), and an outer diameter of about 7 ft (c 2.14 m). The imperial measurements are preferred here to metric ones, because they are likely to 224 SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 1992

ILLUS 5 Head of ringed cross, Forteviot no 3: three-quarter view of extant fragment (not to scale) and outline reconstruction

giv betteea originare ideth f ao l intention e sculptorth f so . Bot hsla e brokene endth b ar f o s , s therefori an t i d e uncertain whethe t originalli r y forme a completd e semicircles a , or ; currently reconstructed in the National Museum, a sector only, rising from sloping jambs. MS defends thi n analogo s y wit e doorwayth h e 11th-centurth n i s y round tower t Abernetha s y and Brechin, and on general Irish parallels; but the authors consider that the parallels are not sufficiently clos timn ei r placeo justifo et y departing fro msymmetricaa l reconstructioa s na semicircle. slae th reae s verb i f Th o ry rough, suggestin gbees thaha nt i t split fro mthickea r pieces it ; present maximum (0.3 n thicknesi . 1 1t m) f 1 s si face Th e bears sculptured figure falsn i s e relief backgroune : th tha , is t bees dha n lowered, e bufigureth t s themselve e flatar s , consistent wit e planth h e surface slabth f . o eDetails , especially of the drapery, have been achieved by drilling holes at intervals, and then linking these with less deeply inscribed lines e carveTh . d detai s remarkabli l y sharp, thougt no h necessarily mor thao es n tha othen o t r monuments whic knowe har havo nt e opee stooth nn di for some hundred f yearsso overale Th . l desig botto d frames ni an p groovey mb dto s which form a feeble roll moulding. The centre piece of the arch is a badly damaged cross. The broad shaft of this sweeps boldly ALCOCK & ALCOCK: RECONNAISSANCE EXCAVATIONS IN SCOTLAND, 1974-84 225

ILLU S6 Fortevio carvee th , 2 do arcn t h (Copyright: Trustees National e oth f Museums f Scotland)o

inward transoa o t s m whicwideo n s hi r tha e shaftnth . Vertical wav ye shafy lineth ma tn o s represent the grain of a wooden cross, or carved interlace on a cross-slab or free-standing cross. uppee Th crose r largels parth f sha o t y flaked away accepe W . suggestioe th t thaS M t thiy nb s si probabl e resulyth f 16th-centuro t y iconoclasm, wit e interestinth h g implication thae arcth t h might still have been standin t tha ga thes t wa ntime d deliberatelan , y thrown down int Watee oth r of May. To the spectator's right is an animal - lamb or ox - set in an awkward upright posture. To the righ cloakeo t agaitw cowled e dnan ar d figures, with heavy moustaches bearind an , g staffs. Most previous commentators have seen here three figures; but Stuart's illustration (1867, pi CXIII) mistreat e draper right-hane th s th f yo d figure separated an , risine th s g thighe fro th rese f mth o t bod orden yi creato rt thirea d cowled person slae bTh lin.a breakn eo fro f buttoce smof e th th o kt upper calf of the second figure. Below this, if the arch is restored as a full semicircle, there is room not only for the lower leg and foot, but also for a third figure, truncated after the manner of the existing left-hand one. To the left of the cross is a single larger figure. He is not cowled, thus allowing us to see that hs eitheei r wearing some sor f head-dresso t r moro , e likel s elaboratelyha y curled hair, which continues dow necs curlea nape hi s n th ka f eo d queu r pig-taileo , rather thanormaa s na l Pictish scroll mora alse s H .eo ha magnificent moustache tha s companionsnhi clutchese H . , double- handed stafa , f simila theirso t r r leso ; s probably larga , e swor a scabbar n di d which narrows towards the tip (LA). As a further mark of high status, the hem of his cloak has a band of embroidered key-fret. Beneath his feet is a horned beast, and below this again there is room for one or more further figures, whether animal or human. Any discussion of the function and iconography of the arch must start from its central 226 SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 1992

feature: the cross. This surely implies that it comes from a church, or perhaps a palace-chapel. The animal must therefor paschal-lamba e b e , symbo f Chriso l t himself. Stevenson lono gag suggested that the 'curled hair [of the principal figure] . . . and the long moustaches . . . perhaps indicat warrioea r chief (1955; 1980, 127). This interpretatio reasonably nma strengthenee yb d to claim that the figures depicted are a king and three companions. This in turn reminds us that MacGibbon and Ross (1896-7, 623) suggested that the king was Hungus, magnus rex Pictorum, that is, Oengus I or Oengus II, with his three sons Eoganan, Nechtan and Finguine. According to the St Andrews foundation-legend, the sons met St Regulus (St Rule) at Forteviot; and subsequently, Oengus founde basilicaa d ther honoun ei t AndrewS f o re soundnes Th . f thio s s iconographical identificatio s independeni n e historicath f o t le legend trutth f ho t mereli ; y requires the legend to have been known at the time when the arch was carved. Discussion of the chronology mus e deferredb t , however, unti e architecturath l e arcls bee th rolh ha f neo more firmly established. It is not easy to find close parallels for a non-voussoired, double-curved arch of the dimensions of that from Forteviot. Megalithic lintels with a pseudo-arch cut in the lower face are known over both doors and windows in Anglo-Saxon churches; in the porch-tower at Restenneth, and at the round towers at Abernethy and Brechin; and very widely among early stone churches in Ireland. This, however, is not the form which we have at Forteviot. Some nine or ten true double-arched window heads are recorded in Anglo-Saxon churches; but their spans rang t (0.1maximume f e th 2 from6 t 5o 0. a ) t m mer a mo n t doubi o n e6 . e Therb t n eca that our example was the head, not of a window, but of a door. In this case, as Mr G Stell kindly informs us, only one parallel can be offered: the west door of the tower at Earls Barton in Northamptonshire (Taylo Taylo& r r 1965, 222-6, (1.witn i 99)g ) 3 0fi hm t .f This3 t a , wide s rathei , r narrower than that implie t Forteviotda difference greao o th t s t t s a tbu no ; s i e rule out the comparison. The Earls Barton tower is assigned by the Taylors to their period Cl, tha , Ais tD 950-1000. e EarlTh s Barton example make t cleai s r thae dimensionth t e Fortevioth f o s t doorway would be acceptable for an external door through a tower-porch. Indeed, the Taylors' chart of doorway sizes shows tha t a favourearoun s t (1.f wa d) 4 2d m dimensio r Anglo-Saxofo n n doorways, whether leading throug toweha r porco r r directlho y intnave oth e (Taylo Taylo& r r 1978, fig 664). It would also be suitable for access to a lateral porticus or side chapel. It might be thought to be unusually narrow for a chancel arch (see the Taylors' chart of sizes of major arches (1978, fig 654). On the other hand, the chancel arch at Bradford-on-Avon was only 3 ft 6 in (1.07 m) wide (Taylor & Taylor 1965, 89). Professor Fernie has stressed that 'Bradford-on-Avon shows that the Forteviot stone could be from a chancel arch; the loss of things Anglo-Saxon is so great that even one survival has to be taken as significant.' Certainly, interpretation as a chancel arc internan a h- tha , is t l doo - rwoul unweatheree d th wel t fi l d conditioe th f o n Forteviot arch. Whateve e actuath r l position whic Fortevioe hth e buildinth n ti arcd g hplanha t clearli , y demonstrate e existenceth s Haln o , y Hillchurca f o , f somho e decorative r moro , e correctly iconographic, pretension. It is also reasonable to assert, on structural grounds, that the fabric which held the arch was not that of a timber-and-thatch church, more Scottorum in Bede's words (HE iii mortared an t cu df o masonry e on 25)t bu ,, more Romanorum. muse W t then askearlw ,ho y might suc hchurca h have been buil southern i t n Pictland? This question may be answered in terms of the second or third decade of the eighth century, after Ceolfrith, abbo f Monkwearmouth-Jarrowo t send ha ,t builder regioe requese th th t o t sna f o t King Nechtan (HE v 21). As a definite example of such a church, the porch-tower at Restenneth ALCOCK & ALCOCK: RECONNAISSANCE EXCAVATIONS IN SCOTLAND, 1974-84 | 227

s beeha n cited especialld an ; high-qualite yth y masonr e loweth f towere ryo th par f o t, wits hit narrow south doorway spanne megalithia y db c lintel wit pseudo-archa h (Simpson 1963). Recently, however s beeha nt i , argued that 'ther s littlei e doubt thastructure th t t Restenneth[a e ] belongs to the late llth century or the early 12th'. Furthermore, five other monuments, which had been regarde s exemplifyinda e earliesth g t masonry buildings know Scotlandn i n , have recently been ascribed to the four decades between c 1090 and c 1130: the round towers at Abernethy and Brechin churched an ; r chapelo s t Egilsaya s , Edinburgh t AndrewCastlS d ean t Rule (S s ) (Fernie 1986). e saidb o ,t howevers ha t I , that whil internae th e l logi f Fernie'co s paper appears beyond question necessarils wa t i , y writte tigha o nt t agenda whice on : indees hi narroo dhelpfue to b wo t l presene inth t case. Inevitabl t leaveyi s four questions unasked thereford an , e unanswered. Where remaine churcheth e e th f ar so s built more Romanorum Kinr fo g Nechtan? churcheWhere th e ear s implied by Barrow's map (1983, fig 1) of egles place-names: some 15 between the Forth and the Dee? Wher majoe those th ar e t a er ecclesiastical centres implie clustery db f o s Early Christian and cross-slabs: apart from , St Andrews and St Vigeans, there are a furthesame f theso th 0 en ei 1 r region ? Finally ,remain e wherlateth e th e rf ear so 9th- 10thd an - century churches referred to or implied in the Scottish Chronicle (text: Anderson 1973; 1980, 249-53): Brechin, Dunblane, Dunkeld , e unidentifieSconeth d an , d civitase sensth f n eo (i monastery) Nrurim/uturiml s difficulIi t believo t t e that non f theseo e churche beed sha n buil f dresseo t mortared dan d stone. Indeed, Professor Fernie has kindly commented in a letter to the authors that 'since [his] arguments applie specifix si o dt c buildings doee t denh , possibilite sno yth earlief yo r lost masonry churches' broan I . d terms failure th , discoveo t e r remain f suco s h buildings pose d majosa an - r largely unacknowledged - problem for ecclesiastical historians and archaeologists. The immediate relevance to Forteviot is that there are no compelling grounds for holding the Haly Hill church to the end of the llth century or later. It becomes necessary to take account of stylistic arguments derived fro figure mth e sculptur arce th h f eitselfo . Stylistic parallels point coherently to Class III of the scheme devised by Alien & Anderson (1903). For these, a date in the century after the Scottish take-over of Pictland would be generally acceptable (Stevenson 1955; 1980, espec 126-7; Henderson 1978, 56-7). Characteristic featuree disappearancth e ar s f Pictiso e h symbol-designse th e los f th o s d an , horsed livelinesan n s whic me noticeabl o f s so s hi e amon Clase gth I figuressI Fortevioe Th . t arch presents the following detailed parallels. The heavy moustaches can be seen on the (illus 14) and the Benvie cross-slab (Alien & Anderson 1903, 260b). The supposedly royal hair-style also appears at Benvie. The folds of the cloaks occur at (ibid 266b) key-free t Dupplin a th horne,e th m d he t dan Fortevioe , beasth n o t o n t 1 cross-slab. Moreover e doublth , e outlinbelle jointd th an y f f thao eo s t beas s seea i t n i n modifie de paschal-lamb th for n mo . This itsel a Pictis s i f h trait, admittedl e whicon y s hi exceptionally rar Clasn eo I cross-slabsI s neverthelesy ma t I . s hin t soma t e Pictish influence on the Forteviot arch, and correspondingly a date shortly after Kenneth's take-over of Pictland foerections it r . In summary, then: if we may allow the building of a mortared stone church in eastern Scotland aroun e middle nintdth th f h o e s secon centuryit n i dr o ,half , e the e stylth th nf o e figures, both human and animal, on the Forteviot arch, is exactly what we might expect in such a church. Beyond this, it is a reasonable conjecture that it was deliberately erected by Kenneth, or his brother Donald, on or close to the site of a palace of their Pictish predecessors. | SOCIET 8 22 Y OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 1992

EVIDENCE TH EXCAVATIOF EO N The early accounts of Forteviot, together with the discovery in the Water of May of the carved stone arch, emphasize the primary significance of Haly Hill for any programme of archaeological research problee Th . m whic investigatee firsb d o hha t t thiss anythind dwa di : g still remaisupposee th f no d palace-buildings, which were still visible in .the 18th century thed ha y r o ; been, in Skene's words 'entirely swept away ... by the encroachments of the May' (1857, 277). It s witwa h thi minn si d that limited excavations were carried out, wit studentsn hteaa te f mo , from 3 to 24 July 1981. Haly Hill, and its scarp towards the May, is covered by a conifer plantation, which drastically restricts the ground available for excavation. Two 4 m squares were originally laid out southere westere ath t th d nan n accessibledgee th f so e area botd an ,h were extende wore th ks da developed (illus 3). No evidence for buildings earlier than the late 18th century was recovered, and Skene's account can therefore be taken as accurate and definitive. A concise account of the excavations follows.

CUTTIN (Illu0 10 ) s7 T GF e earliesTh t recognized feature, lying immediatel naturan yo l gravelfina s e metallewa , d road, FT 120, about 2.5 m (8 ft) wide. This had two well-developed wheel-ruts at 1.4 m (4 ft 6 in) centres (FT 121A, 121B), and a slight central depression caused by horses' hooves (FT 121C). Its alignment reveals that this is the road shown on Storrie's map of Perthshire, running north from Forteviot to Milltown (sic), and then on to the crossing of the Earn. It may therefore be dated before 1783. The road was overlaid by a clean compact clay, which was the floor of a building of which only the west wall was located. This appeared initially at the base of the 19th-century plough soil as a ghost feature, FT 110, ranging from 100 mm to 200 mm wide, and running straight for at least 3 m. This overlay the inner edge of a dry-stone cill wall, FT 113, about 600 mm (2 ft) wide, made up of split boulders and rounded cobbles, the largest only about 200 mm long. To the west of the wall, scattered grave smald an l l cobbles marke externan da l yard t seemI . s likely thad cile th ha tl supported a turf wall, with an inner cladding of staves, planks or wattling. Two projections of the ghost feature beyond the face of the dry-stone wall may mark upright posts 1.4 m apart, but if so, t bee t intpostno e nse d th o post-holessha . This interesting fragmen ruraa f o tl buildin s overlaig wa blaca y nb k soil, containing much 19th-century pottery, glas othed san r debris 102/105/106T F , tilth.a This , swa enriched , according locao t l tradition nighy b , t soil from e tilth base th Perth th f , eo t ploug A . h furrows coule db detected sanda cuttin f o yp gcla to inte y oth whic h represente collapse dth ture th f f walleo e Th . ploughing itself stoppe wese th tn do abou metra t e shorvera f yo t poor cobbled surface 103T F , . This seems to be the track shown as running from Forteviot, across Haly Hill, to Milltown of Forteviot, on the 1859 edition of the Ordnance Survey 6-inch map. Above this, and across the whole excavated continuou a area s wa , s laye blacf ro k plough-soil.

CUTTIN 200/30T GF 0 (Illu) 8 s This cutting, whic locates hwa d abov north-wese eth t corneplantatione th f ro , produceo dn man-made structures. Natural gravel, FT 215, lay at a depth of 1.2-1.5 m below the modern turf. Irregular depression surfac e gravee th th n i sf eo l appeare maro dt k root hole r animaso l burrows. ALCOCK & ALCOCK: RECONNAISSANCE EXCAVATIONS IN SCOTLAND, 1974-89 22 | 4

FORTEVIOT 1981 HAL0 Y 10 HIL T F L

wheel ruts of road ..1ST pre 1783 120

wall robbed or destroyed

110 timber-stain L "** -••• _ - • C3» V"., 113 't- , '- fta• °i• ° <^ •'. '; timber faced 9 Q •i4 « ^ »."«>>. °j>.. deep r. c. o- r-- =« o wall - .°<^sij C^i_ rC,, <°* cutting * Of V I•,« O O *j °^ . •. £ o "•'

' - nCS) '.<6°

X^^? -».o r • ..«..*« i859|f^p^^§:^|s; —103

ILLU S7 Fortevio t 1981, Cuttin 100T gF , plan 230 | SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 1992 f greAbovo r brow yo m e grave m th es som n0 wa lloam 70 e y soil, containin stonesw gfe , presumabl naturaya l deposit e loweTh . r par f s almosthio t wa s t sterile e 214T th F , ,n i 213 t bu , upper third, FT 212, there were many coal and shale fragments together with recent pot, glass and iron fragments. This seemed to mark a zone of 19th-century cultivation, similar in character to the plough-soil of Cutting FT 100, but with less rubbish. Above the coaly level, finds were less frequent, and the fill changed to a homogeneous brown loam 211T F , , 209. Thiinterleaves swa d wit wedgha e characterize orangy db e streaksT F , 210, which suggeste irregulan da r moun browclayef e do th f no y loamp turvesto 208T e s F , Th ha ., been ploughed. All the material above the coaly layer, FT 212, has been introduced artificially durin lase gth t century, probabl pars y a f som o t e agricultural operation. A one-metre wide extension through to the scarp above the Water of May, designated Cutting FT 300, showed that the stratification of Cutting FT 200 extended to the edge of the scarp, becoming progressively more degrade erosiony db especialld an , y becaus rabbbif eo t burrowse Th . following equation proposed e layere b y th n si sma : 302/30 3209= , 211; 304/30 2125= , = 213 6 30 ; 214; 307 = 215. In proposing these equations, however, it should be noticed that the pronounced coaly t clearllayerno 212T s F y, wa ,distinguishabl Cuttinn ei 300T gF . Moreover, both modern and medieval pottery continued down int 304/305T oF , perhap resula s sa animaf o t l intrusions. Whateve explanatioe rth deposite th f no s overlying natural gravel certais i t i , n that therd eha never been masonry buildings within Cutting FT 200/300; nor, given the absence of masonry debris, mortar spreads or other such indicators, even within close proximity to it.

THE EVIDENC AERIAF EO L PHOTOGRAPHY To offset the disappointing results from this excavation, we may turn to the evidence of aerial photography. Trace f earlo s y structures, detectabl s dara r ke ai fromark e m th ripeninn i s g

FORTEVIOT 1981 TRENCH 300 301

307 Limi f excavation-o t 1

Animal burrows 2m

ILLUS 8 Forteviot, Trench FT 300, section

ALCOC ALCOCKK& : RECONNAISSANCE EXCAVATIONS IN SCOTLAND, 1974-8 | 423 1

crops, had been noticed on the terrace to the south of Forteviot village as long ago as 1975 (St Joseph 1976, 56-7, with pi Vila). These included palisaded enclosures, and circular ditches both larg smalld ean generan I . l terms, they suggested burials and, more importantly, ritual monuments 'henge-monumente th f o ' class. They thus reveale dhiga h degre f ceremoniaeo rituad an l l activity thire iearld nth dan y second millennia t JosepBC(S h 1978a, 47-50). In subsequent years, other cropmarks were note photographedd dan , further nortd han immediatel e preseny th eas f o t t village. These included evidenc f squareeo penannulard an - - ditched burials, comparable with those recently recorde s standinda g monument t sitea s s sucs ha Garbeg in Inverness-shire (Stevenson 1984). Since the latter could reasonably be attributed to the Picts, probably in the fifth to eighth centuries AD, the relevance of these cropmarks to the Pictish phase at Forteviot was immediately apparent. A plot of all the cropmarks recorded to the east of the village was therefore prepared by Dr Lesley Macinnes. This, together with a detailed descriptio interpretationd nan publishes wa , interie th n di m e 198reporth n 1o t fieldwor k (Alcock 1982a) Since then, Forteviot has been observed annually, and especially clear cropmarks were photographed in 1989 (illus 9: colour). The latest observations of the cropmarks east of the village have been incorporate transcriptiow ne MacLeoa H n di K y nb d 11)(illu& 0 , 1 stogethe r witha revised interpretative description by Marilyn Brown both of whom are on the staff of the Royal Commissio Anciene th n Historicad no an t l Monument f Scotlandso .

CROPMARKS EAS FORTEVIOF TO T VILLAGE: INTERPRETATIVE DESCRIPTION

M Brown The accompanying plan (illus 11) was prepared from aerial photographs taken between 1975 and 1989. One set of photographs, dating from August 1989, supplied the majority of the informatio whicn o n e computerizehth d transcriptio s basednwa , with three other photographs from different years supplying most of the additional features; further details have been added after consideratio othee th l r al photographs f no mose Th . t prominent cropmark features visibln eo the photographs are those arising from recent agricultural activity and from geological and soil formations; these have been omitted from the plan. In some areas of the site, such cropmarking has obscured or confused archaeological features, making it difficult to establish their forms with any certainty. This applie particulan i s e cropmarkth o t r f appareno s t pits, whic e scatterear h d widely e normallacrosar e sited th s an , y only identifie s beina d g man-made when formina g recognizable pattern or in association with other features. The individual cropmarks are described from wes easo t t t (1-12), wit pite hth s lettered separately (A-E numbero t ) (foy lettersd ke r san , see illus 10).

subcirculaA 1 r enclosure, measuring abou diametemn 5 i 1 t r withi narrona w ditch ease breaA .th tn ko mary positioe ma kth entrancen c a marke ploughine ar f nth th o t f so bu , g patter fiele th dn ni preven t any positive conclusion cropmarA . f amorphouo k s appearance, o whicindefinitto s i h r fo e transcription, may also be seen in the interior. 2 A broad, slightly curving linear cropmark is visible for some 90 m, running from the ENE towards the modern boundary of the manse garden. rectangulaA 3 r enclosure, aligned approximately ENE/WSW, measure withim 8 s2 a n abou x 2 3 t single ditch whose cours s partlei y obscure geologicay db l cropmarking thao s , t thercleao n s ei r indication of an entrance. Within the north-east angle there appears to be an arc of ditch, and there are pits and other cropmarks, mostly too indefinite to plan, scattered across the rest of the interior. 232 I SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 1992

ILLU 0 Transcriptio1 S f aeriao n l photograph f cropmarko s s easd soutan tf Fortevioo h t villagy b e MacLeoKH d (Crown Copyright: RCAHMS) ALCOC ALCOCKK& : RECONNAISSANCE EXCAVATIONS IN SCOTLAND, 1974-83 23 | 4

ILLUS 11 Transcriptio f aeriano l photograph f cropmarkso s immediately south-eas f Fortevioo t t villagy eb MacleodKH r key illue Fo . ,se s 10 (Crown Copyright: RCAHMS)

4 What appears to be a circular ditched barrow measuring about 5 m in diameter with a central elongated pit aligned approximately east/west. Three other pits lie immediately to the north-west. 5 The cropmarks of three ditched square barrows: (a), the least definite example, lies close to the south- east angle of the rectangular enclosure (2); (b), two others sharing a common side and aligned approximately east/west. The larger measures about 10 m square within ditches that are interrupted at the corners. Ther e tracet leasa ar e f o ts three pits withi e morth n e westerly exampl e linketh f o de barrows and one east/west aligned example inside its companion. Within the more northerly barrow, which measures abou acrossm 6 t , ther similarla s ei y aligned pit. 6 Immediately to the north of the linked square barrows are a series of short linear features about 2 m in length, apparently arranged in rows and all aligned roughly ENE/WSW. They probably mark the position of interments in a cemetery; a similar group of cropmarks can be seen some 30 m to the north-east; individual markings of comparable appearance can be seen scattered across the site. 7 A penannular ditched feature, open on the north, measuring about 10 m in diameter with a central, slightly elongate south-ease d ditce th pit othelino e th n f ho th ;tw e o n r o pit t e arcsli . e thre8Th e ditche dsquara sidee b f whaey o s barrointeriore ma t th n wi ditchese t witth ; pi ha , which dojiot cornerse meeth t a t , indicate dimension f abouso t 1east/west0m . 9 What is probably a second square barrow, measuring some 5 m across within a relatively broad ditch. Within the interior, aligned roughly east/west, there is an elongated feature, possibly a grave pit. A linear cropmar s visiblki e extendinnorth-easte th o t r aboum gfo 5 . 2 tFain t a trace e b f whay so ma t second square barrow lie on the north-west side, with another possible example on a different alignment about 3 m to the south-east. 4 23 SOCIET ANTIQUARIEF YO SCOTLANDF SO , 1992 indistince Th 0 1 t cropmar f whako eastere t th ma e yb n curvilineapara f o t r enclosure wit hdiametea f o r presumes it an i t t leas pi mare dma 7 t centrTh f . ko e suggests tha t mighi t interpretee b t barrowa s da . 1circulaA 1 r ditched enclosure diameter n i abou m 7 t northere ,th wit n cropmare i ht th npi para f f o tko the interior, should probably be identified as a barrow. aren 1 A f amorphou2ao s cropmarking, possibly incorporatin lineaga r feature. A A possible alignment of at least five small pits, running from north to south for about 25 m. largo Tw Bnumbeea pitd an sf smalleo r r examples, whic fory mhma pit-alignmenta curvinA . g linear feature, about 10 m in length, lies immediately adjacent. Geological cropmarking makes identification of archaeological features difficult in this area, serieA c f largo s e pits formin irregulan a g r alignmene pitth s lengthf n i eitheo t o m leasa t tw r5 ; 4 t underlie or cut the ditch of (7). The pits may be linked with others further to the east. t leaslina A D f eo t five small pits, aligned nort southd han extendind an , t leasa r minimuA tgfo . 18m m additionao otw f l pite situate alignmente ar s th ease f th o dt o t som m . e2 Geologica l cropmarkinn gi this area makes it difficult to trace further pits with any certainty. E A possible alignment of at least five pits aligned NE/SW and extending for about 20 m in an area of predominantly natural cropmarking.

COMMENTAR CROPMARE TH N YO K INDICATIONS

Leslie Alcock & Elizabeth Alcock In chronological terms, the key site among those east of Forteviot village is 5(b), two conjoined square-ditched barrows with the ditches interrupted at the corners. Similar monuments are seen as standing remains at Garbeg, Inverness-shire: for instance the pairs 2/3, 10/11, and 20/21 (Stevenson 1984, fig 9.1). Comparable features may be seen in square-kerbed cairns at Ackergill, , also attribute Picte th so d t (Close-Brook s 1984 5.5)g ,fi . While Forteviot 5(b) clearese isth t example, especially becaus sharine ditche th th f eo f g,o Fortevioe ar 9 t d 5(a)an ,8 probably in the same category. Moreover, the existence at both Garbeg and Whitebridge of penannular square-ditched an - d barrow same th en si cemetery (Stevenson 1984) leadregaro t s su d some of the penannular ditches with central black marks, suggestive of burials, as also being Pictish: certainly Fortevio probabld an 1well s d , 1a t4 an y.7 e appearancTh , thenPictisa eis f o , h cemetery wit ratheha r scattered arra f squaryo d ean circular grave mounds. The parallels just cited suggest a date range from the sixth through perhaps earle th yo t eighth century AD additionn I ther.6 compac a o s n ei t a , t cluste f fleck-liko r e marks oriented east/west, and apparently about 2 m long. In both size and orientation, these suggest a cemeter f Earlyo y Christia gravesg ndu thesd Ha . e been recorde distanca t da e fro knowe mth n burial mounds suggestioe th , n would have carried little weight, especially because random flecks and blob f unknowo s n significanc e commo ar e Fortevio th n no t aerial photographse th n I . observed circumstances, however s veri t i y, reasonabl believo t e e thahave w t e her mixeea d cemetery of simple dug graves alongside two classes of mound burials. Despit advancee eth Pictisn i s h studies registere e conferenceth t da Glasgon i s w (Friel& l Watson 1984 Dunded )an e (Maxwel t lpossibl 1987)no s i t poino i e,t anotheo t t r Pictish cemetery of such mixed composition e certair eveb no :o nt n tha te correc sucth s hi t interpretatioe th f no Forteviot cropmarks. It is none the less of interest to turn briefly to analogies among other nations. Amon Britone gth f Waleso s mixea , d cemeter f unencloseyo d Early Christian graves, together with other burials set within square-ditched enclosures, has been excavated at Tandderwen, Denbighshire (Brassi Owe& l n 1988). Again t Plaa , s Gogerdda Cardiganshiren ni ratheo tw , r elaborate oblong-ditched burial enclosures accompanie dnumbea f simplo r gravesg areen du a an i , already sanctifie alignmenn a y b d f standino t g stones, annular ditches wit appareno hn t burial function, and both Bronze and Iron Age burials (Murphy 1986; 1987). ALCOC ALCOCKK& : RECONNAISSANCE EXCAVATIONS IN SCOTLAND, 1974-85 23 | 4

Among the Angles, at Spong Hill, Norfolk, is a cemetery which consists chiefly of some hundreds of cremations. In addition, there are a few inhumations set within ring ditches, (and therefore presumably covere rouny db d barrows), together wit hlargea r numbe f simplo r g edu rine th g f gravesditcheo o Tw .s enclosed burial wooden si n chambers (Hill Pens& n 1981, 3-4, with fig 1); and of one of these it has been said that it 'clearly contained a person of some local importance' (Hills 1977, 176). ContinentOe nth mixtur,a f largeo e round barrow buriald an s s covere subdw onllo -y yb rectangular mound havsy (sucma e s beeha n presen graveg t du ove e t Forteviotsa r th seens )i r fo , instance, amon Alamanne gth t Fridingea i n (accessibl Christlein ei n 1979wit0 34)b 6 ; hAb .,57 There is a marked physical segregation of the two types of burial, with the low mounds e cemeteryth f o d .clusterin en Sinc e e barrowon th e t e a gsee ar s snobla n e graves (Adelsbegrabnisse) ther s evidentlei y considerable social significanc e differenth n i e t typef so grave monument; but there may be a chronological element as well. Both of these factors may also apply at Forteviot. In making such interpretation termn si sociaa f so l hierarchy, whethe t Forteviotra , Sponr go Fridingen, a recent paper by E James on burial and status in the early medieval west is particularly relevant (James 1989). He draws attention to the possibility that 'the grave itself can indicate privilege, if it is exceptionally large, made with a wooden chamber, placed under a barrow . . . ' (James 1989, 29). On the whole, however, the conclusions of his paper are cautious, even perhaps pessimistic, abou possibilitiee th t f establishinso g either socia r legao l l basie statuth buriaf sn o so l practice gravd san e goods (James 1989, espec. 38-9). Turning bac Fortevioto kt t musi , saie tb d tha tothe e nonth f reo cropmark villagse easth f o te s sucha h clear chronological indicator s thossa e already discussed e east/wesTh . t layoue th f o t rectangular enclosure, no 3, may suggest that it had surrounded a church; but nothing of the kind r beefa no s recognize s ha e cropmarksth n di e slightlTh . y wavy , ditchthoug2 o n , h obviouslya strong feature, is quite enigmatic in both date and purpose. Finally, in earlier accounts (Macinnes in Alcock 1982a, fi; Alcocg2 k 1982b, fig 14.6) muc beed hha n madapparenn a f eo t alignmenf o t large pits, suggestin gdoubla e palisade, roughl t righa y l thaw tAl no t angle. ditce 2 th o hn o st survive pit-alignmene f thith o s s si t certaintbu ; D t f interpretatioyo thin ni s are mads ai e difficult by geological cropmarking. t thiA s point southerle th , y cropmarks deserve further consideration transcriptiow ne A . f no these, showing also their relationship wit northerle hth y group, appears her illun . eAmoni 10 s g them is an apparent pair of small square ditches which appear to contain burials (18). These were compared originally wit pre-Romae hth n seriesIroe nAg , well seen instancer fo , t Carnaba , e th n yi former East Ridin f Yorkshirgo t Josep(S e h 1978b)e otheth n r O hand. Pictisa , h attributior nfo similar square-ditched burials elswhere in eastern Scotland is argued by Maxwell (1987, espec. northerle th n hers i i r 5(a 9 t i eyfo d (b)s )group& a an , ,8 balance7) n O .fig & 3 s , therefore8 1 , should probably also be considered as Pictish. There are also burials within a penannular ditch (20), comparable with some in the northern Forteviot group. Howeve Late data th e, n ei Neolithi be r y thama t r Earlco y Bronzclearls i e eyAg indicated for most of the southern group. These include at least one penannular ditched monument (16), and another with two opposed entrances (13), both readily attributable to the henge-monument class. (The latest survee classth f ,o y which unaccountably ignore e Fortevioth s t groupn i s i , Wainwright 1989.) In terms of size, the largest of the presumed early monuments appears to be a roughly oval palisaded enclosur diametermn 5 i 26 eo t (F), p ,u whic s approachehi d froe mth NNE alon timbega r avenue e paralleTh . l wit e Neolithihth c palisaded enclosur t Meldoa e n Bridge in the Tweed Valley (Burgess 1976) was suggested by Dr St Joseph in publishing the 6 23 SOCIET ANTIQUARIEF YO SCOTLANDF SO , 1992

Forteviot exampl t Josepe(S h 1978a) transcriptiow ;ne thouge th rathes n i h o t ni r less clear than it was in 1978. The possible significance of these prehistoric monuments for our understanding of Forteviot in the Early Historic period will be considered in the final section of this report.

SUMMARY WIDEA : R PERSPECTIV FORTEVIOR EFO T It was said earlier that the expectation of an archaeologist engaged in palace-research in an Early Medieval context wouluncoveo t e db rmajo o tracetw f r so buildings , whethe f stono r r eo timber: a large feasting and audience hall, and a church. It will be evident from the two preceding sections that nothing of the nature of a royal hall has been discovered, whether by excavation or by aerial photography, at Forteviot. None the less, the carved stone arch from the Water of May on the west, and the cropmarks of a Christian-Pictish cemetery east of the modern village, bracket between the unexploren ma d area som r mor0 mo 20 e e long wher othehala d e an l r secular buildings may lie concealed. This is especially likely given the known dispersed layout of the palace complexe f barbariao s n kings: Milfield (Gate O'Brie& s n 1988 Yeaverind an ) g (Hope- Taylor t example1977ap e )ar s here. Certainl identify ma e thin i yyw s are objectivn aa r futurefo e research. Moreover, the discussion of the carved arch has defined its iconography, structural function, and chronology more precisely than seemed possible 10 years ago (Alcock 1982b). Despite the total disappearance of the building itself, the arch is sufficient evidence for the erection of a masonry church above the May in the early decades of the Picto-Scottish kingdom: that is the middle or later decades of the ninth century. Its construction may be attributed most likel o Kennett y r Donaldho , son f Alpinthan i o s td sensan ; e doubo thern s e i et ar thae w t dealing with a royal foundation. This raises the further possibility that the arch may have come fro mchapel-royala thad an ;t therhavy ema e been another church ,locatede stilb o t l , furtheo t r the east. Finally, the prominence of the cross and paschal-lamb on the arch suggests that the church may particulaa hav d eha r connection with Easter: tha t mayi t , indeed, have been wher kine eth g was accustome celebrato dt e majoeth r festivae Christiath f o l n year. This, however tako t s ei , speculation to its furthest limit. Turning now to the cemetery of dug graves and square- and penannular-ditched barrows: this is likely to have been distinctly earlier than the time of Kenneth son of Alpin. Though the chronolog f sucyo h burial-form r frofa ms i s established e sixt seventd th , han h centuries seee mth most likely tim r theiefo r flourishing, probably runnin int n eighte go oth h century (Ashmore 1980; Barclay 1983; Close-Brooks 1984)possible th f I . y associated rectangular enclosure th see n no aerial photographs (illus 10, no 3) is a church enclosure, then it may mark the site of the eastern church suggested above. Furthermore, if the church founded on Haly Hill by the Alpin dynasty was more than a chapel-royal, then we may be seeing evidence for a westward shift in the religious focus of Forteviot between the eighth and the mid-ninth centuries. Certainly, if we take religious and ceremonial monuments in the widest sense, then we may presene th see n o , t cropmark indications, evidenc overaln a r efo l northward shif focun i t s away fro southere mth n group. This consists principall f pre-Christiayo n monument secone th d f so dan third millennia BC, with only a minor scatter of round- and square-ditched barrows, possibly attributabl sixte th eighto ht o et h centuries AD. Despite the difference in date and the shift in focus, it is relevant to consider the possible significanc e earlieth f o er monument r Earlfo s y Historic Forteviot Fortevioe th . f Beforo y t an e ALCOC ALCOCKK& : RECONNAISSANCE EXCAVATIONS IN SCOTLAND, 1974-87 23 | 4

cropmarks had been recorded, M O Anderson presciently posed the question whether Pictish (and presumably Scottish) places of inauguration had 'ancient associations that made them sacred, going Bronze bacth o kt e age' (1973, 203-4) 1982n I . questioe ,th answeres nwa emphaticallo dto y (Alcock 1982b, 232-3). Attentio draws nwa 'tho nt e known association hengf so e monumentd san Early Christian cemeteries' evend an ,t Llandegaia , square-ditchea , d enclosure like Fortevio5 s no t (Houlde8 & r . 19861) g ,fi Other examples of probable Christian burials within were cited at (Barclay 1983, 145, 188), wher eradiocarboa n age-estimat f Aeo D 760±60 unca obtaines wa l d from a cemetery of 13 oriented graves; and at Cairnpapple, where four oriented dug graves are more likely to be Early Christian than earlier (Piggott 1948). It was recognized that we cannot know whether the buriers of the dead regarded the henges as places of ancient sanctity, or merely as convenient enclosures, like certain derelict defended sites, suc s Cama h p Hill, Trohoughton (Simpson & Scott-Elliot 1964; for a wider review, Thomas 1971, 50-90). In truth, these examples are irrelevant to what we know of practices at Forteviot, because none of the henges there is know encloso nt e burials. Another series of parallels was sought in Ireland, where associations may be cited between passage graves and Early Historic royal sites, for instance at Tara, Cruachan, and Knowth. More recent studieroyae th f lo s site f Earlo s y Historic Ireland Wailey b , s (1982 Warned an ) r (1988) suggest that the relationships are rather complex and subtle, and that we should be hesitant about too readily seeking parallels between Ireland and Scotland. At present, the best analogies for Forteviot are provided by the two Bernician palace-sites of Ad Ge/rin/Yeavering and Mae/mm/Milfield. Bede regarded these as successive locations of a Northumbrian villa I 14)I t recenregiaE bu , (H t wor t Milfielka d suggests that thers wa e considerable chronological overlap between the two sites (Gates & O'Brien 1988). At both, there were one or more henges in the vicinity, and at Yeavering there were also ring ditches and a stone f circlprehistorio l eal c date (Hope-Taylor 1977; Harding 1981) t MilfieldA . Earle th , y Medieval period is known principally from aerial photography; but at Yeavering extensive excavations have demonstrated that there may have been almost continuous usage, over several millennia, of a gravel terrace simila thao rt t Forteviot a t . factn I , litera r occupatioo l e continuitus specifia e f th no n i yc are s irrelevantai , provided that the early monuments themselves remained visible. Given the substantial size of the encircling earthworks of a henge, this is extremely likely, especially at Forteviot, where there is no evidence of cultivation or occupation in the millennia between the building of the henges and the beginning Pictise oth f h t necessar i cemetery s wa r y No .tha t later centuries should have know r surmiseno d thaearliee th t r monument beed sha n sacred places enougs wa t I . h that they shoul perceivee db s da the great works of ancestors: ancestors who, from our own historical perspective, appear as wholly mythological. Richard Bradley (1987) has recently re-examined, in the light of interpretations derived from social anthropology, the kind of associations across a long time-gap which we see at Yeavering, Milfield and Forteviot, and again in Ireland. He dismisses explanations in terms of 'ritual continuity' across the gap. Instead, he sees new social elites actively using physically impressive monuments of the past - a past about which they could have known nothing which we would regard as historical - in order to promote or protect their emerging interests in the present. He considers this to be 'one of the major strategies by which groups in a traditional society could impose their versio f realityno presumabl- ' y socia politicad an l l reality 'osame nth t otherea d san time protect it'. All this is relevant to the establishment of a Pictish royal centre at Forteviot, in the seventh 238 SOCIET ANTIQUARIEF YO SCOTLANDF SO , 1992

or eighth century AD. The new political and social realities would be marked by an emergent and strengthening kingship relationshia n i , p simultaneousl f allianc yo f competitio o d an e n witn a h emergent and strengthening Christian church. But we must recognize that the Scottish take-over of the Pictish kingdom created a special crisi r royaltfo s eastern yi n Scotland takiny b t parn I .g me t overs thi goina s parwa s a ,f o t g concern pre-existina , g Pictish power centre Berniciae , justh s a t n Angles see havmo t e taken over pre-existing British centres at Bamburgh, Doon Hill, Dunbar, Lindisfarne and Yeavering (Hope- Taylor 1977; Alcock 1988a). Moreover, if the church with its sculptured arch was founded by one or other of the sons of Alpin, then that too could be construed as an affirmation of the new royal power. But a more public monumental statement was also needed; and that was made by the erectio carvea f no d high cros t Dupplisa ; Alie14 n Anderso n& (illu& 3 1 s n 1903, 319-24 with figs 334 A-D, which are very incomplete and inaccurate; Walker & Ritchie 1987, 133-4); and also possibl t Invermaya y (illus 12). Dupplie Th n cross stand t Bankheasa d (NC 050189)O n RN o , heigha t OD a , f abouo m t 5 8 t e slopth e leadin frop rivege u mth rGase Earth ko nt Ridge. From her t lookei s south acrose sth river towards Forteviot t intse o massiva s i t I . e plintIrish/Scottisn a whict n ho cu s hi h ogam inscription. Unfortunately thi s unintelligiblsi literaa n ei l s symbolisenseit t bu ; c reference th o t e comin Scote th plainf s si g o cros e Th .free-standina s s i itsel ) 14 f (illu& 3 g1 s ringless , carved fro msingla e bloc f sandstoneko littla , ehigh m cross-fore ove 5 Th .regardee 2. rb y mma d s probabla y Northumbria inspirationn ni s richlt bot it crose bu ;d h th y an s carved ornamene ar t highly eclecticdecoratioe th d an , n includes much f Celtic/Ultimato tha s i t a TeneL e derivation. Regrettably, the Dupplin cross has never received the full study which it deserves. The present accoun confines i t thoso dt e figural panels which seem relevan royae r studth ou f ly o o t centr t t ea Forteviot. (For recent epigraphic work, see the Postscript.) All the figural - as opposed to the decorative - panels are statements about kingship. Two of them are scenes from what has been called the 'David Cycle', which is especially prominent in Pictish (Henderson 1986) t DuppliA . have w n ea ful l panel with Davi e harpisdth t enthroned a slightl d an ; y damage daniman a pane f o whic n li s rendinl i w whic e ja h e s hi gth usually interpreted as a rather poor lion, but which would make a more realistic bear. Either would possible b Davidiaa n ei n contex I Samue( t l XVII 34-7)beaa d r an ;woul t leasda t have beena familiar anima locaa o t ll sculptos viewershi d t thesan r Bu . e shoulregardee b t dno s realistida c images, of a subduer of dangerous beasts, or of a musician capable of refreshing a king troubled in mind (I Samuel XVI 16, 23). They may indeed be icons of David as ancestor and pre-figurer of Christ (Bailey 1978, espec. 4-5). In the context of the Dupplin cross, however, they are more likely to be icons of a divinely sanctioned king. It has been well demonstrated that Bede saw the warrior kings of Juda Israed (McClur y han s model Englise a lda th n r fo sow h e s king1983hi f o s , espec. 87-8). Eddius Stephanu revealina s sha g commen Ecgfritn o t f Northumbriho a sallying forth againse th t Picts 'trusting in God like Judas Maccabaeus' (VW chap 19). David was annointed king of Judah and of Israel; his whole career, from simple shepherd to triumphant king, shows him to have been 'a mighty valianf waro I Samuen ( ' tI ma 18) mana XV l;d f o ,'an an Lore d dth dGo host s witwa sh him I Samue(I ' 10)V lDavie Th . d theme, then, divine referth o t se sanctiof no royal power. Three other panels stres s materiait s l sanction naken i , d armed mightSenchuse th f I .r fe nAlban bees ha n interpreted correctly, theScot e arme th n th f syo mustered every able-bodied adult male in Dalriada (Alcock 1988b). At Dupplin we see the over-king, heavily moustached like the Fortevioe kinth n go t arch, arme ridind d an horses battleo gt hi r frot fa , mBu . trotting realistically ALCOC ALCOCKK& : RECONNAISSANCE EXCAVATIONS IN SCOTLAND, 1974-89 23 | 4

ILLUS 12 Location of the Dupplin and crosses in relation to Forteviot. D, Dupplin cross; I, site f Invermao y cross , HalH ; y Hill , scarS ; f formepo r coursWatee th f f Mayeo o r . Hatching marks area f cropmarksso r details1 1 fo ; illue & 0 se , 1 s 240 SOCIET ANTIQUARIEF YO SCOTLANDF SO , 1992

ILLU 3 Duppli1 S n cross: David scenes: left, west face t basea , , e lio r bear)Davith n(o d d;an right, north face, David enthroned and playing the harp (Copyright: National Museums of Scotland)

like thos Pictisn o e h Clas I a naturalistil stonesfouI s t al e ground rs no th feeha s ,n i o t i :c image, but a symbol of royal permanence. Another panel shows two moustached foot soldiers, perhaps under-kings or leaders of septs. Finally there is the mass of foot soldiers, young clean- shaven warriors. On these three panels is presented the military sanction of kingship, reinforcing its spiritual and ecclesiastical justification. Equally - and not necessarily alternatively - these martial scenes at Dupplin may depict Kenneth son of Alpin's victory parade, after the remote model of Roman Imperial triumphs, and the more immediate example of Prankish kings (for this large topic, see McCormick 1986; predictably, 'Picts' and 'Scots' do t appea index)e no th n i r . The Dupplin cross, it seems, did not stand alone. Dr M Spearman has kindly reminded us of the observation of Alien & Anderson (1903, 328 with fig 341) that from Invermay came sandstone fragments with a band of square key-pattern, and more importantly a panel of 'diagonal key- pattern, double-beade crose th t Dupplin)sn a o s d(a ' (illus 15). These fragment froe sadle ar sm th y vandalize dispersed dan d Invermay cross, which formerl 166059O N yR stoo, NG overlookin t da g ALCOCK & ALCOCK: RECONNAISSANCE EXCAVATIONS IN SCOTLAND, 1974-84 241

ILLU Duppli4 1 S n cross: easd soutan t h faces with martial arrays. Heigh f crosso t 5 m2. , (Copyright, left, Trustees of the National Museums of Scotland; right, authors}

Fortevioe th t palace-site fro soute mth h jus Dupplis a t n overlook t fros i nort e mth h (illus 12)e Th . striking similarity betwee ndecorativa e panel from Inverma e froon m d Dupplian y o n s ni guarantee that the two crosses bore closely comparable figural and iconographic programmes; but e probabilitth s higyi h that they did t shoul.(I e notedb d that Stuart suggested (1856,17; 1867, 59-60) that our Forteviot no 1, illus 4 above, had probably formed part of the Invermay cross. The suggestio dismissee b n grounde nca th n do s plainlthas i t i t y fro mcross-slaba free-standina t no , g cross.) These two crosses, with their permanent and monumental statements about kingship, were set up in locations which overlooked the royal centre of the sons of Alpin and of their Pictish precursors. In both their sculpture and their siting, they provided the symbolic basi r Kennetfo s c Alpin'ma h year6 1 s f felicitouo s s rule over Pictland: rexit feliciter istam annis i Pictaviamxv (Anderson 1973; 1980 e wide, 249th r r ;fo historical background, Anderson 1982). They are, indeed, major document foundine th e r th fo sf o g kingdom of the Scots. I SOCIET 2 24 ANTIQUARIEF YO SCOTLANDF SO , 1992

ILLUS 15 Diagonal key-patterns : left, from the Invermay cross; right, from the Dupplin cross (after Alien & Anderson 1903)

B: Excavations at Urquhart Castle, 1983

HISTORY, IDENTIFICATIO SETTINN& G originae Inth l polic discussiod yan n documen r progammou r fo t f researceo h (Alcock 1981, 159-61) vie e strongls th , wwa y promoted thamedievae th t l masonry castl f Urquhareo t (illus 1:3), beside , overlay the fort of Bridei son of Maelchon, king of the Picts north of the . Adomnan, in his Life of Columba, had related how the saint had visited (perhaps more than once), Brudei munitio, the fort of Brude (recte Bridei), in his mission to the northern Picts (VC 40a; 79b-82b). The date implied lies between AD 562, when Columba went to lona, and 586/587, when Bridei died, but it cannot be defined more closely (discussion in Anderson 1973; 1980, 116-18; Anderson 1991, espec. xxxiii-xxxv). If our location of Bridei's fort at Urquhart should have proved correct, then a site of outstanding importance in early medieval Scotland would have been identifie r archaeologicafo d l examination. Especial interest attacheo t d Adomnan's references to the king's house (domus) and hall (aula regia). While the historicity of Columba's visits to the fort of Bridei cannot be seriously doubted, it is quite another matter to establish its location. It is no matter for surprise that Adomnan displays no exact knowledge of either Loch Ness or the River Ness; nor indeed of the geographical details omissioa f n whic taked hha n plac ecentura y befor wrote h e Life.e particularn eth I s uncleai t i , r whether Adomnan thought that Bridei's besids for wa rivete eth r besid o r formere loche th eth f I . , then the most likely location might be on the Castle Hill of modern Inverness (illus 16) (Henderson belowe 1975se d latter265)e p , an ;th f I ., then there were three possible pointer Urquharto st . First s 1906a lon s a o , g,ag M'Hard shor e found th yha n e d o belo castle wth e 'several pieces f water-woro n vitrification whic formed hha d fora par f to t which must have been removed when e castl s builtth ewa ' (1906, 149). M'Hardy's inferenc s reinforcewa e d when clearancd an e consolidatio e masonr th e Offic f th no f Work y e 1910o eyb th n d 1920i ss an s yielded vitrified ALCOC ALCOCKK& : RECONNAISSANCE EXCAVATION SCOTLANDN SI , 1974-84

lOKm

%83-A Better land

ILLU 6 Locatio1 S f Craino g Phadraig, Invernes Urquhard an s relation i t e Greath o nt tbetteo t Gle d rnan land e circlesTh . mile5 , radiusn si ) (aboukm , 8 defint aren a e a readily cultivable from each centre (after Small 1987) rubble on the north-east slopes of the citadel (Simpson 1929, 3 & fig 15; illus 17 B here): powerful evidence for the former existence of a prehistoric or early medieval fortification on the site. Secondly, Urquhart Castl claimes e find-spoewa th s terminaa da f o t l fro msilvea r pennanular brooch of the St 's Isle type, attributed to Pictish workmanship, and datable to the late 4 24 SOCIET ANTIQUARIEF YO SCOTLANDF SO , 1992

ILLUS 17 Urquhart Castle. A: general plan, after a survey by Simpson & Calder, 1928-9; B: Simpson's plan of the citadel (so-called Motte), with the 1983 cuttings superimposed ALCOCK & ALCOCK: RECONNAISSANCE EXCAVATIONS IN SCOTLAND, 1974-84 245

ILLUS 18 View of Urquhart Castle from the west, showing the high rock boss of the citadel to the right, wit groune hth d droppin f Strono gd towardeen Poine th lefe o sth t t

eighth century (Wilson 1973, 90). Finally, the masonry castle of Urquhart is set on a craggy promontory, wit ha highe r roc ke landwar bosth t 18)& a s d (illu:A den 7 topograph 1 s y very suitabl citadea r efo l with lower, subordinate, enclosures fore th m f o ,regarde characteristis da f co early medieval royal fortifications (Alcock, Alcoc Driscolk& l 1989, 206-14). A further literary reference suggested tha Columba'n i t Urquhary sda beed residence ha tn th e of persons, if not of royal, then at least of noble status. Adomnan relates that, in the course of his missio northere th o nt n Picts, Columba cam placa o et e referre s agruma o t d qui Airchartdan nuncupatur, 'the estate whic calles hi d Airchartdan'. Her baptizee eh Picda t named Emchatd han Virolen hi so stota m ccu domu, 'with (his) whole household 115a)C (V ' . (The translation given here differs fro mAndersone th tha f o t g Anderso(e s n 1991, 201-3 r reasonfo ) s whice har discussed below 261.p e implicatio, Th ) s thani t Emchat landownea s hwa householded an r f o r some rank kine f th perso, do have nw e elsewhere calle potentatda sucd an hperso a e; n would probably have lived in an enclosed or defended place. The recorded form Airchartdan is equated with Urquhar Watsoy b t n Anderso d (1926an ) 95 ,Anderso n& n (1961, 157-8) t seemei o ;s d likely that excavatio apparenn a f no t vitrified fort might reveal ther e strongholeth e noblth f edo Emchath, even if not the munitio of King Bridei. So far as the High and Later Medieval history of Urquhart is concerned, there appears to be no evidence to support the speculation that there had been a royal castle there in the reign of Willia Lioe mth n (1165-1214). Indeed firse th , t reliable documentatio castle th r en fo come s with capturs it Edwary eb likelys 1296n i i dt I I . , however, that ther beed e ha ncastle a t Urquhara t from about 1229, when the lordship was granted to the powerful Durward family (Simpson 1929, 4). At this point, both the local and the wider topography should be outlined (illus 17 A & 19). Urquhart Castle stands on a slight promontory, Strone Point (a tautology from Gaelic sron, promontory, spur) protruding north-east into Loch Ness, wit supposee hth d citadel boss, risint ga its landward end about 27 m (85 ft) above the original level of the loch. In the angle between the I SOCIET 6 24 ANTIQUARIEF YO SCOTLANDF SO , 1992

ILLUS 19 The environs of Urquhart Castle: B, Borlum; D, Drumbuie; G, Garbeg; N, St Ninian's; U, Urquhart Castle. Contours at 152 m and 305 m

promontory and the main coastline there is a slight embayment, capable of providing anchorage for small ships. Slightly further north, Urquhar extentn i m k t , Bay5 provide0. x , aboum sk acces1 t s into the lands north-west of Loch Ness by the rivers Enrick in Glen Urquhart, and Coiltie in the gle f thano t name. Inland from aren Urquhar a f goo ao s i dy landBa t , capabl f producineo g crop f barleso d yan oats as well as grass, which extends up Glen Urquhart for some 13 km (illus 16; for details see below, pp 261-2). This may have provided the agricultural base for the actual ager, estate or territory f Urquhart focuo a , s f Pictiso swa y .h ba Tha activite th t suggestes yi occurrencee th y db , on the uplands to the north, within 4 km of the castle, of Class I Pictish inscribed stones, and a cemetery with characteristic square circular-ditched an - d grave-mounds (Close-Brooks 1984; Stevenson 1984; Wedderbur Grimn& e norte 1984)th hn O .sid Urquharf eo t Bay Ninian'st S t ,a n a , Early Christian presence is demonstrated in the eighth/ninth centuries by a cross-incised slab (Simpson 1951, fig 66; but rejecting here any association with the saint himself). ALCOC ALCOCKK& : RECONNAISSANCE EXCAVATION SCOTLANDN SI , 1974-84 247

Simpson a chronologicall n i , y wide-ranging paper (1951) s exploreha , e linedth f o s communicatio whico t n h Urquhar openy la t . ChieGreae th f thes o s f t Glewa e n itself, cutting through Drumalban, dorsum Brittannlae, e ridgth r spineo f Britaineo route .th f This o e wa s Columba's mission northere th o t s n Picts s wel a ,thas a l t which encouraged interchange between the animal art of the Picts and that of the Irish manuscripts; or between the eastern and western strongholds of Craig Phadraig above the Beauly Firth, and Castle Tioram in - the former yieldin gmoula hangina r dfo g bowl escutcheon comparable, thoug t exactlhno y similar thoso t , e on a bowl found at the latter site (Stevenson 1976, fig 2). Apart from the main SW/NE route, Simpson also maps somewhat circuitous east/west routes (1951 64)g fi t ,curiousl ,bu y ignoree sth more direct line along Glen Urquhart and Glen Affric, and so by Glen Licht to the western sea at Loch Duich. This, then, is the background to the limited excavations carried out at Urquhart Castle in 1983.

EXCAVATION RESULT S20-5 & (illuB )7 s1

Excavations were carried out from 3 to 24 September 1983 by a team of 10-12 diggers. The layoucuttinge th f determines o t swa majoo tw y r db considerations f Emchati : beed hha n powerful enough to possess a fortification at Urquhart, then the rocky boss at the inner end of the castle promontory was the most likely site for it; Simpson's report of the recovery of vitrified stones in quantity alon e north-easgth t sloperoce th kf o sbos s also existence argueth r dfo e thera f eo fortification earlier than the masonry castle. orden I tesexistenco e rt th t supposee th f eo d vitrified fort substantiva , e trench lonm y 7 g,b 3 m wide, was laid out across the masonry curtain wall and down the eastern exterior slope (Cutting 100). This was extended for a distance of 7.5 m into the interior (Cutting 200) in the hope of locating trace f buildingso s orden I . gaio t r n more information abou e interiorth t , especially rampartadjacene th reae squar m f th 300 o rR 3 alss o t a t,e(U o)wa opened agains masonre th t y curtaiweste th n .no

CUTTING 100 (Illus 20) Immediately layea slope unde s th f rubbltur e o ren wa th r o f e with much intermixed mortar (UR 102). This appeared to have been mortar-slop from the Office of Works consolidation of the castle wall, together with loose rubble pulled out in the process. Below this was the main collapse fro curtaie mth n wall: large tilted block mortara n si y soil, often with mortar still adherine th o gt stone 103)R (U s . Belo wf eartho thap ti yt a agairubbl s nwa e without mortar t witbu , h fragments and flecks of charcoal, UR 104. Both 103 and 104 lay in places against the surface of the rock scarp; but elsewhere bedrock was overlain either by chippy, fragmented rock, presumably the result of natural weathering (UR 105); or by a brown loam, free of both stones and mortar, which represents the ground surface at the time when the wall collapsed (UR 106). In these terms it is possible to give a reasonable account of two events: the collapse of the curtain wall, and the consolidation work by the Office of Works. Two interlinked anomalies remain, however. Firstly, statements by Simpson (eg 1929, 3; and plan, fig 15; extract reproduced expectatioe th o t d le nd thaha her ) illus tB e a vitrifie 7 1 s d stones woul foune db quantitn di e th n yo slope secondlyd an ; f thai , t evidenc beed eha n interpreted correctly, the e furthen th ther s rewa expectation that underlyin e collaps gth e masonr th f eo y wall there woul e furthedb r vitrified material from the pre-masonry fort. In particular, looking at the profile of the scarp slope, vitrified I SOCIET 8 24 ANTIQUARIEF YO SCOTLANDF SO , 1992

0 Metres

ILLUS 20 Urquhart Castle, Cutting UR 100, section

rocks should hav ledgee bedrocke th th lai n f nso o factn I . , both these expectations provee b o dt incorrect. No vitrified material at all was recovered from Cutting 100, despite the fact that the digger smuse werW t. eit conclud lookinr fo t gou e tha l sucal t h materia beed ha ln cleared away, perhaps as a result of cutting back the scarp in order to steepen it when the masonry castle was built.

CUTTING 200 (Illus 21-2) same th en o linThi lais t Cuttins ea dou swa g 100 fro, continuinm innee m5 th 7. r r walfo t gli face into the interior up to the centre line of the castle. Beneath the level and immaculate greenswar e Guardianshith f do p monument s founwa t di , thae bedroc th teasterl n a n ki f felyof l direction at an angle of about 10°. This had led to the formation of an elongated wedge of deposits, almost 1.5 m deep against the wall face. Because of the depth and complexity of levels producing medieval pottery, and in order to complete one longitudinal section down to bedrock, the northern 1 m wide strip of the trench was pushed forward as a trial trench, at some sacrifice of early features. ALCOC ALCOCKK& : RECONNAISSANCE EXCAVATIONS IN SCOTLAND, 1974-89 24 | 4

o o CN

c00

U

a U

3 O1 250 I SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 1992

c ra "E.

Qi 3 cm

U

O

CM

c/i D E1 iE 3 ALCOCK & ALCOCK: RECONNAISSANCE EXCAVATIONS IN SCOTLAND, 1974-84 251

Ove trence rth whola s hdeposita e eth s coul dividee db d intmajoo otw r phases: Phas , thae2 t of the masonry castle, with much pottery ranging from the early 13th to the early 16th centuries; and Phas , pre-masonre1 pre-ceramid yan shortn i c- prehistori a , earln a r yco medieval phasf eo direct relevance to our research programme. In more detail, Phas s representei e2 d ove r cuttine layere mosth th f y o tsgb d dowan o nt including UR 213 = 259. UR 213 = 259 contains much powdery mortar, and also a few lightly vitrified stones. Undoubtedly it marks the building level of the masonry curtain wall. Against the wall itself ther cleae ear r trace constructioa f so n trenc dowt hcu n into earlier levels 258R a t :U .A higher level latea , t alscu ro paralle wale th l o 206/208/215t lfacR (U e ) marks eithe r indee(o r d both) the find-a-wall-and-follow-it technique of the Office of Works excavations, and the need to gain access to the wall in order to consolidate it. The terminus of Phase 1 is marked by a layer of burning, containing plentiful charcoal, which runs over much of the cutting: UR 211, 214, 222, and possibly, but more doubtfully, 221, wells a 5 . 26 (Not f thesd o l an ee al 262 4 thalayert 26 no ,t s appearecordee th n o r d sections.) This interpretes i deliberata s da e destruction layer. Belocobblea s i wt i d floor, with built hearthd san areas of paving: a deliberate levelling-off above the slope of the bedrock, retained at its outer end by a revetment of large cubical boulders (UR 268). These, the only known structures of Phase 1, are described and discussed more fully below. Pending the full analysis of the pottery of Phase 2, an outline chronology for the sequence as a whole is provided by a series of seven radiocarbon age-estimates. These have been very kindly calibrate r GordoD y db n Scottise Cooth f ko h Universities Researc Reactoh& r Centrbasie th sn eo Stuivee oth f Pearso& r n (1986) calibration sak e curve th f simplicity eo r Fo . , the quotee yar d here usin Intercepe gth t method. The results are cited in date order:

Date Cal AD GU Lab no Site ref Comments 450-660 1768 UR221 charcoal, incl Betul. asp 670-948 1769 UR262 charcoal, unspecified 650-1010 1837 UR263 charcoal, unspecified

690-1160 1836 UR 214/1) charcoal, split 970-1160 1835 UR 214/2} sample

1030-1270 1924 UR 259/1 } split sample, 1030-1270 192 259/R U 5 2} animal bones, 1066-1280 1926 UR 259/3} domestic, unspec.

It is recognized that the charcoal provides no more than an indication of the felling date of the relevant timbers. However, no large pieces of charcoal, derived from substantial beams (which were such a feature of the timber-reinforced rampart at Clyde Rock: Alcock & Alcock 1990) were recognize t necessar t Urquhartno da s i t i applo yt o e 'old-woods , yth ' correction suggestey db Warner (forthcoming); these dates may indeed be very close to the actual felling date. Moreover, apparene th t absenc f largeo e timbers fro overale mth l burning laye211R (U r, 214, 222) suggests thae charcoath t l doe t comno s e fro e woodemth n frame f buildingso s r frono ,mtimber-lacea d rampart, but rather from brushwood and branches gathered with the intention of destroying the site firethisy n furthee b (O se ., r below 259.p , f thi)I s chai f argumenno s souni t d the datee nth U sG 1835 and 1836, from the split sample UR 214, probably date the destruction of the early fort. 252 I SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 1992

Centimetres 20

ILLUS 23 Urquhart Castle, Cutting UR 200, fragment of micaschist rotary quern, SF 058 (see illus 22)

Despit overlape eth , levelespeciall0 2 e , th betwee t ya datee 1924/25/2nth U sG U G d 6an 1835/36, the two dating brackets are clearly distinct. The later series probably represents the reoccupatio buildine th firse sitee d th th t f an ,f g masonro no centurieo ytw r castleo e s afteon , e th r destructio earle th yf n o fort . Going back before that destruction earliese th , t date 1768U G , , evet na the 1 o level (cal AD 550-640), allows the rocky boss at Urquhart to have been in occupation before the missions of Columba to Bridei son of Maelchon in the later sixth century. The other dates span succeeding centuries, but lack the precision for any historical correlations to be made. None the less, the date for UR 263, charcoal immediately overlying the cobbled floor, marks a major occupation phasl ADca t e650-1010a . ALCOCK & ALCOCK: RECONNAISSANCE EXCAVATIONS IN SCOTLAND, 1974-84 253

We may now turn to the structural features in the interior of the early fort, as they were uncovere Cuttinn di ove0 aregn 20 a rwidm5 m a 4. allowine lon2 e(i sacrifice y gb th r gfo f eo the northern 1 m strip to the major objective of completing the section down to bedrock (illus 22)) e overalTh . l feature vera 272 R s U y, wa ,compac t laye f roughlo r y fist-sized angular cobbles sectioe th ; n show 216sR thisU , s producdeepenino a ,t s a ease o th fairlea s t o gt y horizontal surface easters it t A . nvera edges y ha roug t i , h revetmen f largo t e 0 boulder50 o t p su mm in maximum dimension, UR 268. This may also have served as the rear foundation for a defensive wall. theio t Restin cobblese n i r th t surfacen le go r o , , were large fla t 270d slaban ,9 s suc26 s ha and areas of paving such as 220, or the rather rougher area of un-numbered paving east of the slab 269; this incorporate interpretee db whay uppee ma t th s par da f ro t ston mica-schisa f eo t rotary quern, SF 058 (illus 23), in a very battered condition. This interpretation is based partly on the roughly concentric inner and outer curves, but more particularly on the fact that mica-schist is a rock foreign to the geology of Urquhart, whereas it was very commonly used for querns. The original would hav thicke m noteworth s diametei been m i t I .0 n m 5 onl e m d abou th y0 ran s ya 50 t artefact to have been found stratified in a Phase 1 context. Its only chronological relevance is to demonstratcenturd 2n r afte o e yn th ri Bcobblee 2 C th datea 27 (Armir R efo sU t 1990, 64); indeed, in conditioe vieth querne f wo th f no , long afte rwer0 tha27 ed t botdate an e slab h9 Th .ver s26 y badly heat-shattered, and it is reasonable to believe that they had been used as hearth-stones over a long period. surface cobbleIe nth th f o e d floor wer enumbea f gapso r , whic havy hma e been post-pits, though only UR 279 had a suggestion of a post-pipe, and only 278, apparently a double pit, had a possible packin ge actua slabth n I l. circumstance wer8 27 ed f excavationseeo san n ni 6 27 R U , section, but not in plan; and none of the others was examined in section. The recorded dimensions deep0 350 x 0 277 26 R 0 12 , ,U ; ? 300, 40 x deepare0 275 x m R 0 276i23 R ,nU :m 0 45 ,U ; 30 , deep0 20 , ,? deep doubl x 278 R 0 U ; ,e54 hole with dividing slab400 x 279deep0 R 0 U ;27 , ,50 , with sign post-pipef so 100x 0 . 15 , f theso l eal An pitr o y s could have held timber uprights more substantial than that suggested by the apparent post-pipe in UR 279. On the assumption that posts were set into a pre-existing deep layer of cobbles, UR 216 = 272, then this would have provided a sufficiently firm packing. UR 279 - 277 - 275 constitute a line roughly at right angles to the revetment 268 R l thiU Al .s suggest possibilite th s roofea f yo d building, wit cobbleha d floo build an r t hearths within it, against the rear of the supposed rampart of the early fort. Only considerable lateral expansion of Cutting 200 could verify the truth of this, and tell us more about its structure. A remarkable characteristi buildine s flooth s theiit f wa d co rr gan cleanness a singl t No e. fragmen f boneo t , sher potteryf do r otheo , r artefac make-ufoune s th cobblewa e tn di th n f o p o r so their surface, with the exception of the quern SF 058, which was in any case part of the make-up of the rough paving beside the hearth-slab UR 269. This cleanliness was in striking contrast with the layer f Phasso , whice2 h contained many potsherds extraordinard an , y quantitie f animaso l bones. The lowest occurrence of the latter was 'very few bone fragments', recorded in the site book in UR 265, whic almosd hha t certainly been disturbed durin destructioe gth n event absence Th . f boneo e fragment more th s e surprisinwa s g becaus rouge eth h surfac cobblee th f eo s would have provided an ideal lodgement for them. The cobbles, however, were covered overall by a thin layer of charcoal 222=263R U , , whic assumes hwa derivee b o 270d t t dan I . fro 9 hearthe m26 th R U s canno e ruleb t d out, however, that this really derives fro e burninmth g which brought aboue th t destructio Phase th f buildingne1 o . 254 | SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 1992

CUTTIN) 25 (Illu0 & G 30 4 s2 Ideally, Cutting 300 should have continued the line of Cutting 200 up to the west wall of the castle. However, in order to assist visitor circulation, it was displaced 6 m to the north, and laid out m3 a squar s a e butting agains innee th t walle r th fac f . o eAfte s e remova turfe th wa r th t i ,f o l immediately apparent that the metre strip against the wall was different in character from the rest squaree oth f . That difference persisted bedrockdowe th o nt . At the base of the stratification was a rather irregular rock surface. In the eastern 2 m, this ran level at the north side of the cutting, but towards the south side it dropped at an average angle f abouo degrees7 t westere th n I . n strip, however t feli , l mor r leseo s sharplye th n i ,m losinm 0 g35 horizontal distanc t clea metrea no f rs i eo whethe t I . naturaa r s thiwa s l drop r whetheo , d ha t i r been quarrie mako dt foundatioea n masonre trencth r hfo y curtain wall eithen i ; r cas e walleth - foundation certainld sha y been bedded down int. oit There was no trace of a soil layer or old ground surface on the more or less level bedrock, UR 308. Instead, directl roce th kn ywero e patche f burnso t clafire-reddened yan d bedrockR U , 309. Flat slab f rock so 310 R U , , were als apparenrocke o on th lai n n i ,d o roce t patternth kn i t Cu . was an oblong hole, 200 x 230 mm (depth not measured), UR 311, filled with soot, and with an upright slab, suggestin post-packerga cornere on n i , . Thiconfidently sma interpretee yb posa s da t hole. There were also two well-defined circular soot-filled pockets, respectively 80 mm (UR 312) 313R diameter(U n ) i m m 0 an,d12 apparentl y small post r stake-holes-o . The overall appearance of this early phase in Cutting 300 was that a wooden structure had been buil t e wesclosth to roce t scar th kf po boss . Withit , no firebeed nit s i ha s n t i litt bu ; possible to say whether these had been domestic or industrial. bedroce Th kfeaturee itselfth d an ,s just described, were overlai sooty-lookina y db g soilR U , 304, whichbees ha ns a ,seen , penetrated into feature 313d s an t seem311.I 2 31 , s unlikely thae th t sooty laye s derivewa r d solely fro e hearthm th e bedrock th r fire o sn o s : more likely t resultei , d from a destructive conflagration which ended the early phase in Cutting 300. The main evidence for this conflagration was a bank of heat-affected stones, UR 303, up to 250 mm deep and 2 m wide, which ran across the cutting parallel to the wall. The stones were in a sooty matrix, which at the base was distinguished as UR 304. On excavation, the stones were found to consist of a dense pack of angular fist-sized cobbles of coarse sandstone. Many of them had been heavily heat-affected, to the extent that cracks had opened up in their surfaces, their shapes had become distorted, occasionally separate stones had fused together, and some surfaces bore blob popplinr so glassa f go y appearance. l evidenceThesal e ear higa f sho degre heatingf eo , leading in some cases to vitrification. They recall MacKie's observation at Finavon and Dun Lagaidh 'that vast quantitie f heatedso t fused no rubbl,y dr ,collapseoccupatiod e th eha o t n do n layer within the fort' (1976, 209). They provide the best excavational evidence of the former existence of a stone-built fort on the rock boss at Urquhart: a fort destroyed by that same conflagratio f whicno h clear traces were recovere Cuttinn di g 200. Subsequently t back looscu d s an , t eseemsi wa , cobble 3 wese 30 th , tR sedg U wer f eo e cleared away mako t , constructioea n curtaie trencth r hn fo provid o t wall d an , firea m beddinr gfo its foundations. These, UR 307, consisted of massive blocks, with some mortar, but also many air- spaces, among them, as well as some vitrified cobbles. Between the wall and its foundations, to the west, and the edge of the bank of heat-affected cobbles (UR 303), to the east, was an infill of brown soil (UR 306) and mortary soil with soft lumps of mortar (UR 305). These had been cut by an ill-defined intrusion (UR 302), which probably marks the activities of the Office of Works, since it correlates with the extent of modern mortar in the wall face. In contrast with Cutting 200, pottery occurred topsoile onlth 301n yi R U , . § 71

Total wall height = 3.80m

O

>

O TO

O I O p > D

^ f

ILLU Urquhar4 S2 t Castle, Cuttin 300R gU , sections I SOCIET 6 25 ANTIQUARIEF YO SCOTLANDF SO , 1992

11LLL

308

312

309

313

E' Metres

ILLU 5 UrquharS2 t Castle, Cuttin 300R gU , bedrock plan

CUTTIN ) (Illu0 B G 40 7 1 s This was a 1 m wide cutting in the small room at the north end of the so-called 'Motte'. It was laid out on a roughly north/south line in the hope of picking up traces of the expected vitrified walling runnin e citadeg th roun f o e nort l d th boss en ho suc N . h traces were uncovered. ALCOCK & ALCOCK: RECONNAISSANCE EXCAVATIONS IN SCOTLAND, 1974-84 257

INTERPRETATIONS: EARLY MEDIEVAL URQUHART & ITS COMMUNITY

HYPOTHETICA1:A L RECONSTRUCTIO EARLE TH YF N O FOR URQUHART TA ) T28 (lllu& 6 s2 t cannoI doubtee b t rockye d th tha n o t, citadel-lik Urquhare erooe th bos f th to t sa t peninsula, there had been a pre-ceramic, pre-masonry, occupation, datable by radiocarbon between the fifth and llth centurie l ADsca . Ther alss ei o good reaso believo nt e that this early occupation, wits hit cobbled floor, hearths post-build an , t structures t withise s fortificationa wa , roce th kn bosso ns i t I . indeed likely that it extended over two or more lower platforms to the north-east tip of the promontor y28) & (illuA . Obviousl17 s bosse yth , wit craggs hit y sides rising abou m7 2 t above eth level of Loch Ness, would have been very suitable for a citadel. Seen from its southern tip, it is visuall impressives ya instancer fo , roce whicth n ko s Daa ,e hth l Riata stronghol f Dunollido s ewa built. It is true that no evidence for such a fortification was found in position in our excavation. Given that it was not permissible to link up Cuttings 100 and 200 by removing a section of the masonry curtain wall, it is reasonable to surmise that the crucial evidence still lies buried in that unexcavated zone some 2 m wide. While this is clearly insufficient for the width of a substantial defence, it is commonly observed on vitrified forts that the solid remains of vitrifaction may be restricte fusea o dt d cor wideo en r than this core th ; e itsel s likelembeddee i fb o yt widea n di r spread of stones, which may or may not be heat-affected, but which are certainly not fused into a

5m

Roofed domestic range

Roofed domestic range

Dry-stone wall ? timber-laced

Dry-stone wall URQUHART CASTLE 1983 ? timber-laced Tentative reconstructio f pre-masonrno y fort

ILLUS 26 Tentative reconstruction of the pre-masonry fort, suggesting internal ranges of buildings | SOCIET 8 25 ANTIQUARIEF YO SCOTLANDF SO , 1992

3 U QS

c/3 .- P o S oi o

T3 O "S «u S3 oea D tl oo ^_r 2.5

el 3 cr

^S2 O°N°

IS

oo

different types of rock for the rampart make-up. It would be especially important, in the light of some of M'Hardy's 1906 results, to monitor the development of internal heat at numerous points in rampare th t ove perio rhoursf a dayf o o t t r eveso d no bu , n weeks. Al removelr thifa s si d froe mth small-scale field and laboratory tests which have been conducted so far. In general, avoithene w logica e f di ,th l fallacundistributee th f yo d concludmiddley ma e w , e that some vitrified forts had indeed been timber-framed; but the readily observed evidence cannot amoun prooo t t f originao f l timber-lacin l casesspecifie al th n gn i I . c exampl f Urquharteo , even taking account of the qualifications that were entered above, the absence of large burned timbers may lead us to doubt whether this had been a timber-framed fort at all. We must recogniz t thiea s discussioe pointh n i t n tha contributora t y facto vitrification i r n may also be found in the burning of ranges of timber buildings set against the rear face of a rampart, perhaps with som theif eo r timber stoneworke s th keye o t n di . This migh regardee tb a s da specia lapplicatioe casth f eo externan a f no l sourc f heateo r alternativelyo ; r RalstoD s a , n points out, a special case of timber-framing, if the horizontal beams penetrated the wall to any distance. This could certainly have t Urquhartbeea o ns , give evidence nth r woodeefo n post-built structures immediately inside the presumed rampart on both east and west. The hearths or fires in these buildings may in themselves have created a fire-hazard. Despite this, the comprehensive destructio earle th yf n o for t appears more likel havo yt e been deliberate, rather than accidental. On present evidence, nothinsaie b dn abougca structurae th t l feature internae th f o s l buildings r abou no e activitie, th t s whic taked hha n place there. Consequently, onl a very y schematic reconstructio proposee b appearanc e n th nca r e earldfo th yf eo medieva l citadel (illus 26). Nor have we any information about possible activities upon the lower platforms or terraces of the Urquhart promontory. So far as defences around those terraces are concerned, we may note that at the lip of the ditch on the north-west there is a clear line of stones which seems to mark the rear collapsea fac f o e d drystone wall .t show Thino Simpson'n s i sno s 192 9subsequenn o plan r no , t versions r resourceou d an ;t alloexcavations 198n sit i no f wd o 3 di . Non lesse eth , wit citadele hth - boss standin promontorye rooth e f th o tt ga reasonabls i t i , suggeso et t thasubordinate th t e terraces were included in the area of occupation and in the overall defensive scheme. In that case, Urquhart belong e clas th f hierarchicall o so t s y organized forts whic e havw h e discusse earlien i d r Proceedings (Alcock, Alcoc Driscolk& l 1989, 206-14).

2: ACER QUIAIRCHARTDAN NUNCUPATUR: AN EARLY MEDIEVAL COMMUNITY (Illus 19 & 27) Limited thoug r accoun earle hou th yf o tfortificatio t Urquhara n s necessarilha t y beens i t i , possible to comment usefully on its wider setting. This is made possible by two factors. First, Glen Urquhart is a well-defined geographical feature, with the castle at one end; moreover, it is separated from other cultivable areas by the steep hillsides which plunge into it. Second, in the valle immediateld yan y abovhave w , e eit evidenc t onl r naturaeno yfo l resourcesa r fo t bu , fortification with contemporary burials and other monuments in the vicinity. It is difficult to match this rang f evidenceo similarly an n ei y well-define dScottise areth n ao h mainland. t musI recognizede b t , however, attemptha y thie an tus s o variet t d evidenc composo et ea holistic account of the early medieval community of Urquhart must necessarily be diachronic. Its validity depends, therefore, on the principle of the inertia of history. In the present case, this is based, at its simplest, on the fact that, over the period involved, there is no geological movement; no great chang climate e knowo th n n ed i nan ; chang farminn ei g practices thao meane s , th t f so production mord an , e importantly potentiae th , l leve f productioo l n remained constant t morA . e intangible levels, the period saw the introduction of Christianity, and the replacement of a Pictish ALCOC ALCOCKK& : RECONNAISSANCE EXCAVATIONS IN SCOTLAND, 1974-8 | 426 1

dynasty by an Irish one, which presumably involved some social changes. These, however, are likely to have been minor; and, in any case, the major focus of this account must be on the Pictish period. Our discussion must necessarily start from Adomnan' wordn 114bC ow s (V s , 115a). Columba, travelling beside Loch Ness inspires Hole wa , th yy db Spiri baptizo t s pagaewa a o nwh on the point of death. He therefore hastened ahead of his companions donee in ilium devenit agrum qui Airchartdan nuncupatur. There he found an old man called Emchath, to whom he preached the Word of God. Emchath believed and was baptized, as was his son Virolec cum tola domu. The critica l presene wordth r fo st discussio e agrumnar (nominative ager) domud an (nominative domus). earliese th f o te translationOn f thiso s passag Historiansn i s ei of Scotland, (Sken6 e 1874): 'he cam districa o et t called A-'Andersonse Th . , however, translate d'farmlane th thi s sa d thas i t called A-' (1961, 492-3; 1991, 200-3) e OxfordTh . Latin Dictionary, summaryn i , givee th s following meanings for ager. 1, territory, country, region; 2, a piece of land privately owned; 3, a landed estate; 4, land in relation to cultivation. From this it would appear that 'farmland', with a specifically agricultural connotation, is very much a subsidiary meaning. In Bede's Ecclesiastical History it is sometimes used in contexts where 'lands', in the sense of landed properties or estates, seems appropriate (for instance, HE v 19). The primary meaning of domus is house or home, especially in terms of a building, but this s extendei embraco dt humae eth n occupants househole th : r dependentdo e heae th th f do f so housepresene th n I . t context, where Emchat Viroled han e plainlcar y successive e headth f o s house, 'household e appropriatth s i ' e translation. Bede use t specificalli s a focu f r o yfo s evangelization, with the high-status head of the house as the first person to be converted. For instance citreeve e Lincolf th yth ,o f eo convertes nwa di 16) i primum E . domu(H m a cu su lighe I nth f thi o t s discussion t seemi , t inappropriatsno thino et f Emchatko Viroled han s ca two generations of a potentate family, and proprietors of the estate called Urquhart. They were, as their names show, Brythonic speakers, and therefore, in the context of the , Picts. othee On made rb poiny e ma about t this passage. Apart fro implicatioe mth n that Emchath (and subsequently his son Virolec) was head of a household, Adomnan merely describes him as senex, mand ol mor.e Thith s esi disappointin vien gi f othewo r occasions whe rane nth r statu ko s of a named person is clearly stated: for instance, the old man on Skye described as the leader of Geon's warband, Geonae primarius cohortis (VC 34b; discussion, Dumville 1981); or the subject- king of the Orcades, Orcadum regulo (VC 95a; Andersen's translation). Bridei son of Maelchon is regularly designate Adomnany b x dre r the(o , )a whil mos s Bedo ewa t t powerfue eh le kinth f go Picts, rege potentissimo. We shall return later to the possible status of Emchath and his household. Meanwhile, we must consider the territory or estate which was called Urquhart. e thin on postulato gt s I i t existence eth f suc eo e basi estatbrien a hth a f o sn f eo written mention s quiti t i ; e anothe o establist r s physicahit l exten defauln i t f eitheo t r man-made boundaries or documentary evidence, such as that of contemporary charters or estate plans. As s 195a lon o attemp5n ga ag mads wa tequato et territore eSaxoth e th f yno villag lated ean r manor f Withingtoo Cotswolde th n ni s with precedinthaa f o t g Romano-British villa estate, largele th n yo basis of natural features (Finberg 1955). The watersheds of the valley of the River Coin are insignificant, however, compared with those which delimit the possible territory of Urquhart. Loch Ness to the east, and steep hillsides to north and south, clearly define Glen Urquhart itself. This is further distinguished fro mwida e trac boto t t h nort superioe soutd th han y hb r qualit lane th df yo alon glene gth . e soiTh l Macaulae mapth f o s y Institute's Soil Survey, , heashowe Sheet5 th f do t & a , 4 s 262 | SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 1992

Urquhart Bay aren , a f alluviaao l soil (Soi wit) 1 l hvegetatioa f arableno , permanent pasturd ean broadleaved woodland. Beyond thisoile sth s (Soi ) consis20 l f 'humus-iroo t n podzols, with some brown forest soils, noncalcareous gleys and peaty gleys'. The vegetation is arable and permanent pastures Boreay dr , l heather moor acid an d, bent-fescue moorland. This extends alon Rivee gth r Enrick (that is, in Glen Urquhart itself) for a distance of some 13 km, interrupted only by a narrow gorge towardglene th f .uppee o Thi sth d sren soil lie svallee botth n hi y bottom itself alsd p an o,u the lower hillsides, where it would have been cultivable by caschrom (foot plough). Similar soils foune b o t d e alon ar Rivee vallee th gth t f higheryo A Coilti. distanca rkm r levelsefo 3 f eo , however, the vegetation is principally of heather moorland and bog (Soils 28; 29), emphasizing the richnes lowee th f ro s land, especiall termn yi f arablso e farming (Bibb l alye 1982; Walke t ale r 1982). The soil maps merely suggest the farming potential of Glen Urquhart. In the present case it t beehano s n considered helpfu cito Macaulae t l eth y Institute's Land Capabilit r Agriculturyfo e map (Sheet 5), because this is based on modern agricultural techniques, and is therefore largely inappropriat perioa o et d befor introductioe th e f moderno n drainage, improved stoc cropsd kan , and mechanized equipment t bacge ko morT . e closel farmine th o yt g possibilitie Glef so n Urquhart time i nth f Emchat resultinep o ma citVirolecy d e heth an gma froe w ,m William Roy's Military Survey in 1747-55 (illus 27: colour). The plotting of arable fields and settlements on this shows the climax of pre-Improvement farming; in other words, the maximum capability of Glen Urquhart antributare dth y valleCoiltiee th f yo . This climax probably exceede extene dth f cultivatioo t d nan settlement which had been attained in the late sixth century. None the less, it demonstrates the potential thes thawa nt available t alsI . o serve emphasizo st starknese eth physicae th f so l bounds of the arable land in the glen. Other evidence may be cited in order to fill out the picture. Traditionally, in medieval times the valley was divided into ten davochs (Mackay 1914, 440). This is obviously not the place to enter into the debate about the term davoch, its derivation, and the size of land-unit which it implied in different regions of Scotland (on which, see especially Barrow 1973, chap. 9). It is at least davochclean te e r thath f Urquhar o sf i t agerd an t qui Airchartdan nuncupatury an n i e ar sense equivalents, the nvera y large uni implie s estati te th Emchathf r eo d fo . Oe south-wesnth soi o f t typ o l 0 e2 f Urquhar o t standy Ba tfare th sm called Borlum (illus chartea 19)n I . f 150o r 9 this appeare s 'Bordlandda f Urquharteo ' (Mackay 1914, 78). Simpson drew attentio referenca thio nt s sa 'tho et e "board-land" terrae , th tha , is tmensalis, demesne th e land that supplie househole dth castlee th n di ' (Simpson 1951, 325)s heri e e H .describin g late medieval economic arrangements, and we do not know how early their origins are, nor how relevant they might be to the early medieval fort at Urquhart. On the other hand, the character and productivity of the soil cannot have changed significantly between the earlier and later similaa ; r relationship betwee fore n- th whict h stand poore n arable so th d re soilanan t - ld a bace th Urquharreasonablf y ko ma y tBa inferrede yb . In addition to the arable potential of Glen Urquhart, the wide, rolling uplands, to a height of som botm0 o t e50 h nort southd han , would have provided summer grazin r cattlegfo , sheed pan goats s wela ,s unquantifiabla l e resource e othee forth th f dee mo d rn i swilan r d mammals recorded r instancefo , Boecy b , 1526n ei : wild horses, together with beavers, foxes, martend an s weasels (ermine?), all sources of valuable furs (Mackay 1914, 444 n2). Beaver, marten and ermine are specifically mentioned in relation to the tribute due to medieval Welsh kings, 'since the ornamentation king'e th f so clothin made gar e from their skins' (Jenkins 1986t no ,s i 188)t i d ,an unreasonable to suppose that this was also true for Pictish kings. The uplands, despite their poorer soils, had also, at some earlier time, been cleared for ALCOCK & ALCOCK: RECONNAISSANCE EXCAVATIONS IN SCOTLAND, 1974-84 I 263

agriculture and intensively occupied. This was demonstrated by Feachem (1973). Historical records, non lesse eth , suggest that considerable forests, with their varied resources, still remained intMiddle oth e Ages. Another important doubharveso n s t wa that f Loco t h Ness itself, whics hi still noted for salmon, sea trout, brown trout, eels and lamphreys (Weir 1970, 181). But it has been emphasized elsewhere that the mapping of locally available resources is an inadequate guide to the full range availabl famila o et ysociae higth n hi l hierarch developea f yo d Celtic society, sucs ha postulaty ma case e th Emchatf ew o n domus es i hi d han (Alcock 1987a, 83). Earle th Turninyo t Medievaw gno l archaeolog f Gleyo n Urquhar surroundingss it d an t e th , most important monumen s undoubtedli t Garbee yth g cemetery 5132H .N Thin R o , s NG lie t a s rolling uplands, at about 300 m in altitude, and some 1.5 km back from the steep northern slopes of the glen. Neither the floor of the valley nor Loch Ness and Urquhart Castle are visible from this position (Stevenson 1984; Wedderbur Grimn& e 1984) surveyes A . Royae th y dlb Commission no Anciene th Historicad an t l Monument f Scotlandso cemetere th , y comprised 21 ditched mounds s(a outlier)e welon s a lf these o ; , nin roughle ear y circular , square 1 1t leasar a r eo t rectilineare on d an , is more ambiguous. The area within the ditch ranges from as little as 3 m to as much as 8 m across. Rarely, two or more of the low mounds share a length of ditch, which may suggest consecutive building, perhaps ove periora timef d o perhapd an ,singl a y sb e family. Four of the mounds, two circular and two rectilinear, have been partly excavated by Wedderburn & Grime (1984). Each contained a single central grave, with an inhumation burial, to judge from 'a very badly decayed skul whad an lhumae t shafe appeareon th f no te b femur o dt ' from orientatioe cairTh . gravee n3 th f no roughls pitwa s y SW/NE t evidencthero n bu , s ei o et show at which end the head lay. The only relevant find was the fragment of a Class I caire inth n materia possible 1o Th .n f o l e chronological significanc f thieo discusse s si d below. Square-ditche square-kerbed dan d cairn barrowsd an s apparentld an , y cognate circular ditched barrows, are now widely known in assumed Pictish contexts, and have been much discusse Ashmorg (e d e 1980, Close-Brooks 1984, Maxwell 1987 discussiod ,an n abovf o e Forteviot 234-5)p p , speciae Th . l feature Garbee th f o sg cemeter numbee th e f gravesyar o r d an ; possibilite th relatinf y o definita o t t gi e community. absence Inth f preserveeo d skeletons impossibls i t i , anythiny sa o et g abou demographe th t y of the cemetery: for instance about the age and sex of the burials. It would have been particularly interestin knodistinctioe o gt th wf i n between squar circulad ean r barrow gender-relateds swa t Bu . even without this skeletal evidence s reasonabli t i , suggeso et t tha cluste a tburial 1 2 f o r s represent singla s e family, burying ove generationsx r si fou o t r e relativTh . e elaboratioe th f no burials (as compared with unenclosed dug-graves or cists: above pp 234-5) would also suggest a family of some wealth; and the albeit crude east/west orientation would indicate a Christian group. e onlTh y relevan t comparabla dat r efo e Pictish burial comes from Dunrobin, Sutherlanda : radiocarbo weightee n th dat r efo d averag sampleo tw f eo s fro skeletoe mth n there gav brackeea t f cao l AD 653-78 standaro tw t 2a d deviations (Close-Brooks 1980). Thi fulls si y consistent witha Christian burial. Fragments of three Class I Pictish stones, and a simple incised cross-slab, have been found at various times above the north shore of Urquhart Bay. The most reliably reported example was a fragmen a sla f bo t wit crescena h V-rod an t d design, discoveree th n 197di f o 4cairn 1 i o n Garbeg cemetery (Wedderburn & Grime 1984, 160 with fig 10.7). Two other fragments had been awayr founfa t 1864n i , dno t Drumbuia , e (possibly Upper Drumbuie 5131H N , , rather than Lower Drumbuie). One bears a serpent and Z-rod and a double-disc design, the other a fish (salmon?), mirro combd seconda an d r an , , unusually elaborate, mirror (Alie Anderso& n n 1903, 98-100). The Drumbuie stones were uncovered while ploughing around an old grain kiln, as capping to a | SOCIET 4 26 Y OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 1992

'cist-like construction' fule lTh . account make t cleasi r that soms thiswa e for f kilm o r flue nd o an , no buriaa t l cist. Possible relationships between Clas sI Pictis h stone buriald san s have been much discussed (eg by Ashmore 1980; Close-Brooks 1984). The present fragmentary examples can add nothing to the discussion: given their shattered condition, all three are in secondary, if not indeed tertiary, positions. Non lesse s reasonabli eth t i , supposo et e that they were originally groua par f o f t po Clas uplande I sstone th n o s s above Urquhart Bay, wit hdate-ranga e perhaps fro sixte mth h into the eighth century AD. There is nothing explicitly or necessarily Christian about the Class I stones, but the fact that their symbols continue usee b Clas n do o dt I cross-slabsI reasonabls sha y been take implo nt y that ther s nothinewa g incompatible with Christianity abou t casey theme shoulan w ,n I . d remember that there is nothing expressly Christian about the large number of so-called Early Christian monument f Grouso Walen i pI s whic inscribee har d wit religiousle hth y neutral formuln a so 'oA f ofB'. In contrast Christiae th , n significanc Glee th nf o eUrquhar t cross-sla unambiguouss bi . This bear unringen a s d outline incised broae crosth f do s typ f Henderson'eo s Clas (1987)V I s e Th . crose armth f sso expand slightllowee th d r yan shaf t taper roundea o st d foot (Simpson 1951g fi , 66). Broadly, thougevern i t yhno detail t resemblei , cross-incisesa , frob d m 3 slab5 lonao n , A . date in the eighth century or later is suggested (RCAHMS 1982a, 16, 183, 187-8). The Urquhart slarecoveres bwa d 'froTemplee ruine Th mth f o s ' some time before 191 r perhap4(o s before f Mackao n 1893ed yt hav e 1s 1914t see w ; e eno n th , 385). Simpso s madnha e muc f thiho s ston relation i e supposea o nt d 'Ninianic church sitt ea Temple' (1951, 320-1 and elsewhere). Modern opinion would dismiss the dedication evidence suggested by Kill Saint Ninian and its variants as indicating an historical visit by that saint. That the name Temple derives from Irish teampull is no indicator of date. Mackay refers to an early 17th-century accoun a 'litl f o te Chappell' called Kil Saint Ninian which, wit s holhit y wells wa , still a place of resort at that time; but by 1763 this had been reduced to 'the ruins of a church' (Mackay 1914, 321, nl). None of this is evidence for the date at which such a church or oratory might have been founded. The cross-slab itself remains as firm evidence for a Christian presence beside Urquhart Bay in the eighth or ninth century. Apart from the monumental remains just described, only one artefact of possible relevance has been recorded from Glen Urquhart. This is a terminal fragment from a silver penannular brooch of the St Ninian's Isle type (Small et al 1973, 90, 95, 98; pi xliv b). These are silver brooches, intermediate in size and in the elaboration of their decoration between the richest example s Tare Hunterstod sucth aan s ha n brooche simpld an s e penannular f Fowler'o s s typ. eG Presumably they are appropriate to a patron with a middling degree of wealth. A date in the eighth, more particularly the later eighth, century has been argued (Wilson 1973, 147-8). Although Wilson attributed the example under discussion to Urquhart Castle, there is no evidence, other than hearsa t severaya l removes fro originae mth l finder establiso t , h whethe founs wa t dri 'at e r 'io n'th vicinitcastlee th f takee .yo b Non indicatn o nlesst e ca e th t i , degreea f wealt eUrquharo e th n hi t area in the eighth century. Finally in this review, there is the fort itself (illus 17, 26 & 28) to provide a military, political and social focus, as the good land of Glen Urquhart forms an economic one. As we have seen, ther s gooei d evidenc stone-wallea r efo d fort, standin citadea dominane s th g a n o l t rock bost sa the southern end of the Urquhart promontory. To the north, the lower terraces of the promontory may have been enclosed with dryston r timbeeo r defences. Indeed, possible ruindrystona f o s e wall may be seen along the north-west edge of the promontory, but it has not been possible to test ALCOC ALCOCKK& : RECONNAISSANCE EXCAVATIONS IN SCOTLAND, 1974-85 26 | 4

thes excavationy eb . Withi citadele nth , timber ranges wer t againsese innee th t r wall-face. Because cleanlinese th f o inhabitantse nothiny th sa f so n gca aboue w , t their activities, crafts r eveo , n eating habits. On the evidence of radiocarbon dates, the occupation began in the sixth century or later, and ended, after a destructive fire, in the ninth century. The size of the fort provides a possible hint about the political and social status of Emchath anhousehols dhi d (illus 28). Assuming thacitadee th t l walalon n roce ra edgle th kgth f eo boss , then it enclosed about 375 sq m. This is the upper limit of area used in the RCAHMS Inventories distinguiso t h what they classif s duna y s from e hav fortsw es A show. n previously (Alcoc Alcock& k 1987, 132-6) Inventories e size th , us e t whollno o d y consistentl criterioa s ya n of status: it is indeed only one of a series of interrelated characteristics; in Argyll it does not provide a satisfactory basis for attributing duns to a particular rank in society. In any case, at Urquhart, we appear not to be dealing with a simple dun, because the terraces below the citadel boss must be taken into account as probable outer enclosures. In that case, the site shoul e classedb dun-with-outworksa s da examplen a ; f ,wha o s formerltha , ha tis t y been calle dnucleaa woule w s rda for, preferor t hierarchicalla , y organized fort (Alcock, Alcock& Driscoll 1989, 206-14) therefors i t I . e usefu comparo t l e Urquhar classio t tw wit e chth example s of such forts: Dunadd and Dundurn (illus 28). e apparenTh Urquhare t th are f ao t citade s certainli l y larger than tha t Dunadda t d an , probably as large as the ill-defined citadel at Dundurn. In terms of overall ground plans, the terraces at Urquhart are markedly more extensive than the lower enclosures at Dunadd, but to the same degree are less extensive than those at Dundurn. It should be noticed, however, that at Dunadd, and especially at Dundurn, a significant area within the enclosures is too steep or too craggy for occupation, whereas at Urquhart the area of the terraces is mostly level enough to build upon. In this respect, Urquhart must be considered as the largest of the three. Dunad s beedha n regarde chiee th Cenee s fd a th sea f o lt nGabrain r eveo , f Dalriadno n ai general (eg Bannerman 1974, 112-13; Anderson 1991, xxxiii with n 70). Essentially its claim to royal status rests on its capture by the Pictish king Oengus son of Fergus in AD 736. A royal interest in Dundurn is reflected in the statement in Regnal Lists D, F and I that Girg son of Dungal died there, probabl 9 (Anderso88 n yi n 1973; , 2671980ff ,4 4 274, , 283) majoA . r differencs i e that, whereas Dunadd is geographically central in Dalriada, Dundurn can never have been anything other than peripheral to southern Pictland (or even, as we have suggested (Alcock, Alcock & Driscoll 1989, 195), to Dalriada or Strathclyde). Another useful royal analog provides yi Dunolliy db , whice2 certainls hi fore yth t buily b t Selbac f Lorho An ni D 714 s shadowIt . y precursor, Dunolli havy ma e , 1 beee e caputnth regionis where Columba encountered sailors from (Alcock & Alcock 1987). Notwithstanding its undoubted royal status, the internal area of Dunollie 2 is only about two-fifths that of Urquhart. Despit royae eth l statu infesy whicma r e fro hrelative w mth e siz f Urquharteo t wouli , e db unreasonable to consider it as the major royal centre of Bridei's realm. Adomnan's account, no doubt traditione baseth n do lonaf so , plainly dissociate locatioe sth Emchatf no Viroled han c from Brudei munitio, the fortress of Bridei son of Maelchon. Bridei appears in the pages of Adomnan as eminently regal; and Bede knew of him as rex potentissimus (HE iii 4). Having given further consideration to the Castle Hill of Inverness, we now believe that its large size, dominating aspect rising abouabovm river5 e 2 tcommane th d an , strategie th f do c lowest fording Nesse placth n ,eo all combin mako et t eminentlei y suitabl havo et e bee principae nth l stronghol importann a f do t king (contra Alcock 1981, 160) t woulI . e inappropriatdb expeco t e secona t d major seaf o t kingship within a day's march (ie 25 km/15 miles: illus 16). Another useful analogfounde b y ,y ma however Berniciae th n i , n provinc f Northumbriaeo . 266 | SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 1992

Ther principae eth l fortified royal t Bamburghcentra s ewa , which Bede describes alternativels ya civitas and urbs regia (HE iii 6, 12 & 16). Campbell suggests that Bede 'is using civitas here for a particularly important kind of urbs , the main royal fortress' (Campbell 1979, 37). In the vicinity of Bamburgh, there appears to have been another major royal centre, referred to by Eddius Stephanus as urbs regis Inbronlnls (VW cap 36). This has been reasonably identified by G R J Jones (1990) with Holy Island, Lindisfarnee specificallb y ma d yan , locate t Beblowda e Hill, late e sitf th reo Lindisfarne Castle. If this identification is correct, then it is on a tidal island within sight of Bamburgh, but something like 25 km/ 15 miles distant by dry land. A second Bernician stronghold classed by Stephanus as urbs regis was at Dynbaer, that is, Dunbar (VW cap 38). Barrow has suggested that urbs regis in these and other similar cases has the meaning of a royal centre as well as the administrative district around it. As used by Stephanus and Bede it thus prefigures the later term 'shire'. For instance, Dunbar 'was almost certainly a shire- centre in the eleventh and twelfth centuries' (Barrow 1973, 66-7). According to Stephanus, both of these fortified places were in the charge of a praefectus, a title sometimes translate s 'reeve'da eacn I . h case, however contexe th , t demonstrates that they were powerful royal officials. We may reasonably infer that the praefectus was in effect a royal official in permanent charge of a royal centre which was visited periodically by the king in the course of his circuits or progresses. In later centuries, such an official might have been designated 'thane'. e relevanc Th e royath f lo e administrative arrangement f Angliao s n Northumbrie th o at Pictish real f Bridemo i must seem obscure bases indeedi t i morn dt o bu ,e than vague assumptions about parallels betwee organizatioe nth e severath f no l Insular barbarian kingdoms e threTh . e places, Bamburgh, (In)Broninis and Dunbar, all originally had British names and, in two cases, these include elemene dth implyinn di t gfortifiea d place. This othed an , r evidence bees ha , n taken implo t y tha Bernician i t e incominth , g Angles took ove Britisa r h syste f administrationmo , including a number of fortified royal centres, as a going concern. A further step in the present discussion then argues thatBrythonic-speakina s a , g people Picte e th likel, ar s a hav o t yd ha e socia politicad an l l system which closely resemble Britonde thath f o t s (Dumville 1981), especially those across the Firth of Forth in Bernicia. (For an expanded treatment of matters summarily dealt lase witth t n threhi e paragraphs e Barrose , w 1973; Alcock 1988a; and, especiall circuitsn yo , Charles-Edwards 1989, 28-33.) Moreover e Anglo-Saxoth , n titl eequatee b thane y ma d wit Celtie hth c title toisech, which occurs among the Gaelic notes of mid-12th-century date in the Book of Deer. Here the term appears to be used for a royal official, as well as for the leader of a noble kindred or of a petty kingdom s customarwa s a , Irelandn i y . Thisuggesy ma s t thae toisechth t s officiaa a s wa l characteristic element of Pictish social organization (Jackson 1972, 110-14). It must be stressed that, when it appears thus in a 12th-century Scottish source, it has behind lona t i g history t firsI . t appear Britain si Irish/Britis n a n ni h contex bilinguaa n o t l memorial stone at Clochaeno Denbighshiren gi . This readsBritish/Latie th n i , n versio goon i d d nan Roma n script, SIMILINI TOVISACI; and in the Irish/Ogam version, likewise Similini (or possibly Subilini) Tovisaci: '[of] Similinus/Similinos Toisech' (Macalister 1945 399o n , ; Nash-Williams 1950 o 176)n , . Jackson (1953, 186-7) dates memoriae th late th e fifto t l h century derived an , genitive sth e tovisaci from the Common Celtic inferred word, in the nominative *touissacos, 'prince'. In Early Welsh it might also mean chieftain or leader, especially in a military sense; and we have seen how in Pictlan t camdi acquiro et e als e meaninoth f royago l official. This might already have become appropriate, by the late sixth century, for the person in charge of a subordinate royal fortress such Urquharts a . ALCOC ALCOCKK& : RECONNAISSANCE EXCAVATION SCOTLANDN SI , 1974-84 267

To summarize this necessarily speculative discussion. The fort at Urquhart, some 25 km/ 15 miles from the major royal centre at Inverness, would seem appropriate for an urbs regis in Bernician terms, and probably therefore in British terms as well. In that case, it may be that Emchath was a royal official, the equivalent of a praefectus. If we could infer that Virolec succeeded him as head of the household, then it may be that the family also held the position of praefectus hereditara n o y basis. This woul characteristie db barbariaa f co n nobilit f servicyo d ean of birth mighe W . Urquhare t lorth e thin f th d o f ko t for Welsn i t P-Celtice h(i ) term s tywysogsa n i Iris toisech,s ha Scottisn i r o h Gaeli toiseach.s ca 'The estate called Urquhart havy ma e' provide economie dth cearle basith yr fo smedieva l for Stronn o t e Point fore tTh . itselhavy ma fe bee politicae nth administrativd an l e centr larga f eo e area, perhaps extendinglatee th rd parishdi s a , , into Glen Moristo s welna s Gle a l n Urquhart. Brudei munitio, located probabl t Invernessa y , would have bee chiee nth f political centrf eo Bridei's kingdom. It would have exploited as demesne the high-quality land around Inverness (illus t wouli 16) t ,bu d have been equally dependen twicen o t r thrice-yearlo - y circuitr o s progresses, to receive tribute and taxes in kind at dependent centres, among which Urquhart may have been included same th en I .way lore ,f Urquharth do t would have progressed n arounow s dhi lands. It must be recognized, however, that there is nothing explicit in the description of Emchath and his household to justify such equations, other than the apparent territorial implication of the term ager qui Airchartdan nuncupatur, and its probable association with the Urquhart fort. Inevitably, therefore, this attempt to write a holistic account of early medieval Urquhart and its community is based on increasingly speculative inferences. The excuse for this - if excuse be needed - is, first, that the unusual range of evidence available at Urquhart and in its vicinity immediately prompts a holistic approach. Second, it is only by occasionally pushing inferences to their limit begin sca thadiscoveo ne t w t e strengthth r e weaknesse s th wela ss a r l ou f o s knowledge, as a basis and inspiration for future explorations.

Excavation: c Dunnottart sa , 1984

HISTORY & TOPOGRAPHY Attention was drawn to Dunnottar (illus 1:6) as a probable fortified site of the Early Historic referenceo periotw Annale y db th n si Ulstef so r (MacAir MacNiocail& t l 1983): (fo0 AD68 r 681) Obsessio Duin Foither AD 693 (for 694) Obsesio Duin Father These entries may be regarded as deriving from annals originally compiled contemporaneousl lonn yo a (Bannerma ntherefory 1974)ma d e accordean b e, dhiga h degref eo reliability contrastn I . accounn a , Scottise th n i t h Chronicl destructioe th f eo f Opidumno Pothery b the during the reign of Donald son of Constantine (AD 889-900) (Anderson 1973; 1980, 251) cannot be a contemporary entry in the form in which we have it. It may none the less be derive f originao d t frose ma l Gaelic annals hencd an , t coulei d well refegenuina o t r e historical event. (Fo e Scottisrth h Chronicle e Cowase , n 1981 alsd e discussioan o;th relation i n o nt Forteviot, abov 221.ep ) The fortified place known as Pother was identified by Watson (1926, 510-11) as Dunnottar, coase onth littla t e sout f Stonehaveho n (NG 8883O RN : illus 29). Professor William Gillies sha kindly confirmed for us the linguistic basis of this equation. If a strategic purpose is sought for the siting hereabout fortificatioa f so n significant enoug mentionee b o h t lon e th an di Annals t musi , t 268 SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 1992

f DunnottaSketco p hMa r Coastline

e Dunnottar/BowdunILLUTh 9 S2 s /coastline: vertical aerial photograph (Copyright: Archaeological Services); sketcd p an ma h showing principal features ALCOC ALCOCKK& : RECONNAISSANCE EXCAVATION SCOTLANDN SI , 1974-84 269

be that it lies in the gap where the Grampian mountains approach most closely to the east coast. In fact, hills up to 152 m (500 ft) OD rise within 3.5 km of the sea. Conforming in broad terms to the relief, the exceptionally good lands of Strathmore and the Mearns (Land Use Classes 3 and even 2: Walke t alre 1982) narro towardwn i Stonehavee sth n gap thed ,an n wide t northwardnou s through Garrioche MarTh , Buchand an , . This narrow corridor between the Mounth and the sea linked the two major regions of Pictland. Moreover AndersoO M , suggestes nha d (1973; 1980, 174-5) thasiege th tf Pothe eo n i r attempn a s Kiny wa b t 1 g f BrudeBile68 o f Fortrin o , so , e south-wesu(i t Pictland assero t ) s hi t authority over the kingdom of Circhenn along the east coast north of the River Tay. Such an interpretation reinforce e importancth s f Dunnottaeo e controth r f southerfo o rl n Pictlana s da whole. Today, Dunnottar refers most obviously to the impressive remains of a masonry castle of the 14th-17th centurie 31)(illu& D A s0 .3 s Thi s peripheraha s l earthworks, some f b whiceo y hma earlier, while other contemporare sar y wit masonre hth y castle (Simpson 1941; Alcock 1981, figs 40) & castle 9 .Th : esummia 38 h occupie promontora 5 f 3. o t e eponymoue sth th d f yo Re d Ol s conglomerates of the Dunnottar group: a headland made formidable by its 49 m high cliffs, often vertica t actuallno f i l y overhanging. This headland form e soutth s h sid f Castleo e Haveny ba a , about 450 m across by 400 m deep, with its north side defined by the promontory of Bowduns

ILLUS 30 Dunnottar Castle from the air, showing the character of the Dunnottar headland, and the cliffs and shingle beaches at the back of the adjacent bays; also the fertile coastal plateau. e BowlinTh g Greee leveth s lni squarright-hane th n eo dcastlee th sid f eo ; s Cuttinwa 0 10 g r right-hanfa s siteit t da d corner e clifTh .f castle 200O D , s indicatei , marginay b d l arrows (Copyright: Aberdeen Archaeological Services) 270 I SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 1992 ALCOCK & ALCOCK: RECONNAISSANCE EXCAVATIONS IN SCOTLAND, 1974-84 | 271

(NGR NO 8884). Sheltered especially from the north and north-east by these headlands, boats of shallow draught migh shingla drawe n b to p enu beac bace rockya th f kt t gentlo h a bu , y shelving, shore (illus 29 & 30). e basiTh c assumptio excavatioe th f no thats nwa , despit unscalable eth e charactee th f o r cliffs earln a , y medieva r oppidumo n du l would nevertheless have been enclosed withi walna r o l bank; and that any such defensive work would have been encapsulated in the later earthworks, rather than having been destroyed in their construction. In more detail, it was expected, from observations both at Dunnottar itself and of the neighbouring headlands, that the conglomerate bedrock would be overlaid by a metre or more of till; that on this, defences of Pictish date might have been raised; and that traces of such defences, however denuded, might therefore be recovered beneat e visiblhth e earthen e north-wesbanksth n O . tcastlee fronth f o t, immediately facine gth mainland bane th , k presente ddauntina g would-b a tas r kfo e excavatornorte th t ha cornet bu ; t i r declined sufficientl suggeso t s a y t thanaturae th t l alluvium mighmoro n e eb t tha mn2 beloe wth highest part of the bank. A major cutting was therefore laid out here. In addition to the excavation on the actual Dunnottar headland, preliminary fieldwork had led to the discovery of a minor enclosure on the edge of the mainland cliffs to the WNW of the castle (NGR NO 879839). Here a short length of ditch combined with natural gullies and cliffs to form a trapeziform enclosure roughly 25 m wide by 50 m long: in effect, a small cliff castle (illus 31)& 0 . 3 Since such enclosure knowe ar s havo nt e been occupied eved an ,n Earle builtth yn i , Historic period (Shepherd 1983, 329-31), it was decided to examine this in Cutting DO 200, with e intentioth f establishinno s datpossibld git ean e relationship wit occupatioe hth castlee th f no - promontory itself.

EXCAVATION RESULTS Excavations were carried out with a team of 12-15 diggers, from 2 to 23 September 1984, on both the castle itself (Cutting DO 100) and the possible cliff castle (DO 200). In addition, before excavatione e starth th f o t , lan Ralsto Harved nan y Ross e Geograph, th the f no y Department, Aberdeen University, mad resistivitea y surve 10a f ymo squarinterioe clife th th n efi f castleo r , with a Martin-Clark IV resistivity meter. No clear anomalies were detected, no doubt because of the very mixed character of the alluvium. The area surveyed, however, is marked on the site plan (illus 33), and the plot of the survey has been placed in the site archive.

CUTTING DO 100 (Illus 32) This cutting was located at the north angle of the peripheral earthworks, at a point where the ban s standinkwa g less thametre non e abov levee eth l interio castlee aree th th af n o ri know, s na Bowline th g Green true th e s widedepta .m t Initialllon3 m hbu ;y 8 gb trencs e a ylaith s t dhou wa of bedrock appreciatecame b o et d- abou beloban e becamm t cres i e th 4 t kw- f th o t e necessary to extend the cutting to a total of 16 m in length. It was also necessary to reduce the width of the trench as actually excavated to 1 m, along the east section. At the same time, the west side of the trench was dug so as to form a flight of access steps. Even with these restrictions on the floor area of the trench (and the consequent reduction of the volume excavated), excavation resources were insufficient to allow bedrock to be reached throughout the trench. Enough was exposed, however, to mak possiblt ei projeco et slopes it t t shoulI . d als notee ob d thatrencoutermose e th th t f ho d en t terminated some 4 m short of the cliff edge. resulte Th f threso e week f strenuouso s excavation were surprising eved an ,n perplexingo N . 272 I SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 1992

Post-Medieval Defence —| ? Revetment

SF092

ILLUS 32 Dunnottar, Cutting DO 100, detailed section, with interpretation

finds or structures of early medieval date, or indeed earlier than the late 12th century, were discovered. No trace of a Pictish defence had been encapsulated in the later bank; and even the expected metr r moreo f alluviueo absents mwa . Instead seriea , f fillso s consistin f variego d mixes browd an d n re clays f o , dark loam r humus-likyo e soils stonesd an , , mostly smal angulard an l y la , directly on the conglomerate bedrock. These deposits (layers DO 109 and below) were reasonably clea bulkn i r , though they tende mergo dt t theiea r interfaces. They also contained localized deposits, suc concentrations ha f stonesso . The accumulated yha d mor r lese o conformit n si y with the angl bedroce f slopeo th heighf a e o o kt f som o abovt m e2 s projecte eit d level e scantTh . y ..__.._..__....._......

- . p^SlS^v^^^? :'. -7^107 -• ".-'•-

* ***."" •*' " " •••: " • ~ ~^*' *ij""*~« C" —" " F s

° .-:----""""° "' <^)., A-.-•'"jS "' * -

SF013

109, I • °l "

Metres

evidenc f stratifieeo dt below findsou t se ,, suggests that these deposit beed sha n accumulating from 12te th hf o century d en e ,th throug 13te hth 16to ht h centuries. At the height of 2 m, the surface of the aggrading deposits had been levelled off, and their character changed significantly. Upon a base of hard-tamped red clay (DO 106) and densely packed cobbles (DO 105) was raised a bank (DO 103). The rear of this consisted of layers, or at least horizontally laid patches f pino , k matriclaa n yi f loamxo , which also incorporated some stones, roofing slates, and mortary concentrations. The appearance was that of a bank which had utilized any available material in its construction, but which had also been deliberately stiffened at 274 | SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 1992

reae th r with lacing layer f turfe summi o s bank e fronn th I .th f o f sucto , o tn ther hs cleaewa r stratification. Durin e excavatiogth s considerewa t ni d that s perhapthiwa s e resulth s f o t weathering causedecae frona th f y yo db t revetmen f timbero t betteo n ; r explanatio s suggesteni d on mature reflection banke reae th f th layea ,ro o f cobbleT .o r 107O s(D ) appear maro st firse kth t laying out of a level cobbled area in this part of the castle interior. Given that Cutting DO 100 was sited immediately adjacen Norte th o ht t Batter castlee th f t yseemo i , s reasonabl interpreo et t this bank as an artillery defence associated with that battery. On the other side (ie west) of the cutting, peripherae th l earthwor castlee th f ko rises steepl maximus it o yt m height, most probabl orden yi r to protect the palatial but vulnerable domestic ranges in the interior of the castle against artillery bombardment from the mainland cliff-top. chronologe Th f thiyo s sequenc s baseei smala n do l quantit f potteryyo , supplementey db two coins and two fragments of artillery. The pottery was kindly examined by Mr Charles Murray on a visit to the excavations. Predominantly it is local medieval coarse ware of the 13th-15th centuries. This was found from the bottom (DO 112) almost to the top of the section (DO 105). There was also a probable French import of 13th-century date from DO 112. A 17th-century date s indicatei e artillerth r dfo y defenc green-glazey b e d pottere medieval/post-medievath f yo l transition mord an , e significantl Germaa y yb n impor thaf o t t period, fro103O mD .

Dr Donal Bateson has reported on the two coins:

Unstratifie0 10 11F O S 7D froe 1 d(i m backfilling) England Edward I silver penny London class uncertain (minted 1280-1302) wt 23. 0(1.4r g 9 gm axie ° )di s0 corroded, degree of wear uncertain lost first hal f 14to f h century

2 SF 104 DO 117 Cannon Clay Scotland James IV billon penny Edinburgh first issue (with heavy groats) 1489-96 mos f legendo t s illegibl t saltir quarteh ebu 4t en i befor rR eBV axie cf(0.4r ° di .g s 0 ) Burn0 5(Ib7. 4 gm t s65 )w corrode appeart dbu havo st e little wear probably lost about 1500

Of these two coins, no 1, although unstratified, usefully confirms activity at Dunnottar in the early 14th century. No 2, from DO 117, provides a chronological marker in the build-up of medieval deposits, and is especially relevant to the date of the earlier of the two artillery pieces. r ColiD n Marti kindls nha y commente thesen do earliere Th . 092F S , , fro same mth e layes a r the James IV billon penny, is a wrought-iron breech block in a badly corroded but none the less intact state. 'Such pieces coul e knockeb d d togethe competeny an y b r t blacksmith'd an , consequently 'they have a wide date range spanning the fourteeth to seventeenth centuries'/Given e stratificatioth Jamee th pennyd V I s an npresene th , t example shoul dlate datth e o 15th/earlet y 16th centuries. othee Th r piece 013F S , , come 106sO fro D surfactai e e 107;f O mo thath o t th lD t s ,i f a t eo say, at the very base of the artillery defence. In appearance it is a jagged lump of rusted iron, and onl face yth t tha t exhibiti t s concentric inne outed an r r curved surfaces shows s frothai e t mi tth ALCOC ALCOCKK& : RECONNAISSANCE EXCAVATION SCOTLANDN SI , 1974-84 275

barreexploden a f o l d cannon facn i : t 'a presumably fragmented muzzle-loade earle th yf ro moder n period (probably post-1600)'. This conforms well wit pottere hth y evidence. We musreturmose w th no tto n t perplexin sequence0 10 thers g i O problemy eD wh :e th f so no alluvial layer on the conglomerate bedrock; where has it gone; what was the function of all the layers belo materia 106e O wherd wth D an ;d ethedi n i l m originate t possiblno s i answet o ?eI t r these questions within the limits of Cutting DO 100; though it is possible to speculate that any deposits earlier tha Anc D 1200, whether natura r artificialo l havy ema , been scrape provido t p du e materia motte th r e fo lwhic h Simpso postulates nha d (1941, convincino 88)n n ,o g evidencee th s a , earliest element in the defences of Dunnottar. It should be stressed, however, that the absence from this limited cutting of any diagnostically Tictish' or early medieval artefacts is no obstacle to a belief in an occupation of that date. It has become increasingly clear as our reserach programme has developed that the trade which brought pottery and glass vessels from Gaul into Britain and Ireland in the seventh and eighth centurie featura s s A Df westerwa e o n waters whicn i , Norte hth playea hSe paro dn t (Alcock Alcoc& k 1990). Consequently, sites suc Crais ha g Phadraig, Dundurn Clatchard an , d Craig have nothing like the richness of Dunollie, Dunadd, Dumbarton, and the Mote of Mark. Dunnottar, if it had been occupie earle th yn d i medieval period, would obviously have belongedseconde th n i t , no , richly supplied group t rathefirse bu ,th t n categoryri , with imports w onlfe ya . e evidencth s A e stand t presenta s , however, alternativthern a s i e e explanatioe th r fo n absence of early medieval artefacts and structures from Dunnottar; and this leads to a possible alternative identification for the Dun Pother of the Annals. These interpretations will be discussed afte evidence th r e fro cliff-castlee mth 200 O bees D ,ha , n presented.

CUTTING DO 200 (Illus 33 & 34) This was intended to examine the structure and date of the apparent cliff-castle on the mainland opposite Dunnottar Castle. Accordingly it was laid out as a trench 3 m wide by 15 m long, across the visible ditch and the slight internal bank. It rapidly became apparent that the natural alluvium, into which the ditch had been cut, consisted of intermixed sand, gravel and clay, often unstable whicn i , h humanly created features were often extremely har distinguiso dt h from natural deposits. This made both excavating and recording unusually difficult. None the less, the mai establishee n b histor e linesite n th th eca f f so y o d with reasonable confidence. The ditch had originally been cut to a depth of about 2.5 m, probably wih a U-shaped cross section (illus 34). Weathering of the sides had caused this to funnel out to a width of about 7 m, undermining the front of the bank, and thereby destroying any certain evidence of a front revetment e alluviuTh . m into whic d evidentl e ditc ha beed h th t hha ncu y been somewhat impermeable. An attempt, therefore, had been made to drain the ditch by means of a construction f stoneo s covered with re-used roofing slate 225)O s(D . Moreover ditch-bottoe th , filles mwa d with water-logged organic material (DO 218) which had preserved worked timbers. As excavated, the bank was a structureless feature (DO 220) rising only some 600 mm above fossia l 214)O soi witd (D lapparen n an ,ha t widt . Give f aboum h o degre e 5 nth 4. t f erosioneo e w , can be sure that it was originally significantly higher, even if no wider. The vertical height, ditch- bottom to crest of bank, may have been as much as 4 m: a significant barrier for such a small enclosure. Beneat bane hth k there were considerable sign f activityso , including charcoal spreads 252) O rougd D an ,g h(e stone setting247/248)O D g s(e . There were also roughly circular holesp u , to 800 mm diameter and 350 mm deep. Some of these contained numerous stones, but these were never sufficiently close-se suggeso t s a t t post-packing .whicn i Ther t alss pi hsheea oewa a d pha 276 I SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 1992

ILLU 3 DunnottarS3 , Cuttin 200O gD , plan markE ; possible sth e entrance gully

been buried. Within the limits of the excavation, no explanation can be offered for these pre- rampart features, except that they seem more likel indicato yt e domestic rather than agricultural activity. Most importantly, from beneat 21O h4D came sherd f potterso y whic r CharlehM s Murray kindly identified as local splash-glazed wares with a date range from the 14th to the 17th centuries, but definitel t extendinno y g int e 18toth h century. These obviously determin earliese eth t possible banke th dat r ,e fo decisivel earlr o y Iro e e yrulin th nmedieva Ag t gou l periods othen I . r wordse th , cliff-top earthwor constructioa s ki latee th rf no medieva r earlo l y post-medieval periodss It . function, therefore, must be considered in relation to the masonry castle of Dunnottar, more especially because it directly overlooks the main entrance to the castle. Whil datine t sufficientleth no s gi y precis certaintyr efo inevitabls i t i , y temptin relato gt e eth earthwork to the famous siege of 1651-2, when the castle, containing the Regalia of Scotland, was under siege by a Commonwealth army. In such circumstances, a strongpoint overlooking the landward access to the castle would have been invaluable whether to the besiegers or the besieged. Beyond this, speculation canno. go t

DUN POTHER: TOWARDS AN ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFICATION e mosTh t definite evidenc r earlefo y medieval, Pictish, activit Dunnottae th n yi r area s ai grou f fivpo e Clas sPictisI h stones (illus 36). Thes beed eha n earlfoune th yn di 19th centura n yo a stacse k known variousl s Dinnacaiya r Dunnicaero r , which e northerstandth f of s n clifff o s Bowduns, to the north of Castle Haven, at NCR NO 883846 (illus 29 & 35). The best account of e circumstanceth e stacdiscoverye th th f kf o o s itself d s givean ,wa Alexandey , nb r Thomson (1860) in these Proceedings. It appears that the stack had been climbed, 'an undertaking of § o

o >

n I o on I z p VO ILLU 4 DunnottarS3 , Cuttin 200O gD , sections. WL indicate watee sth r leve Septemben i l r 1984 do

to -J 278 I SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 1992

ILLUS 35 The Dunnicaer stack, seen from the northern cliffs of Bowduns

considerable difficulty eved an ,n danger' threy b , four eo r person 1832n si . 'They walfounw lo lda along part of the edge, and amused themselves throwing the stones over into the sea'. One of these, apparentl below4 o immediatels yn wa , y recovered fro e seamth . Four others were recoveren do various occasions before 1856, of which at least no 2 below 'was completely covered with sea- weed'. stonee presenth e l th sf Al o wer t 4 catalogu ed drawan r 3 Thomson ns fo e no wer d ean , illustrated in his paper; but unhappily the full portfolio of drawings has been lost in the Society's library. They als l appeaoal Stuart'n i r s Sculptured Stones (1856, pi xli; 1867, pi xv). Alien& Anderson (1903, 200-1) regarded the stones as having been lost, but it is clear that they had misunderstood their local informant n 191I . 4 Ritchie (1915, 34-7) demonstrated that they were still preserve grounde th n di f Banchorso y House, Aberdeen (NG 915024)J RN indees a , d thee yar today, wit exceptioe hth whic4 Marischan o i n s hi f no l College Museum. Despit failurs e ehi se o et the stones, Alien describe dbasie the th f Stuart'so n m o s drawings. Apart, however, from Ritchie's 1915 paper, the interest and significance of the stones as a group, and their unusual location, has been largely ignored until recently, IngliwheR r nM s examine re-dred dan w them. In the following catalogue, Alien's numbering is used, as it is on illus 36 here, but the descriptione r Inglisth drawing M d y an b , e basee ar sar s recenn do t personal inspectioe th y nb authors. slae remarkabls bTh i . mm 0 y47 x unweathered m 1 m Slab 0 60 , , whethe exposury rb atmospheree th o et , or by wave action after it had been thrown down from Dunnicaer. Presumably on the basis of Stuart's drawing, Alien describe stone th s s bearinea g 'the double-dis Z-shaped can symbod dro l very rudely drawn, and having several unusual flourishes'. As illus 36:1 shows, this description is quite inadequate disco decoratee tw sar e Th . d simply with central dots the d joinee an ,yar d normalnots i s a , , with two parallel or inward-curving lines, but with two strongly outward curving ones. The Z-rod does centralln ru t no y additiobetween discso i elaborats d tw it e an , o nt th e floriation s severaha t i , l linear extensions. ALCOCK & ALCOCK: RECONNAISSANCE EXCAVATIONS IN SCOTLAND, 1974-84 279

ILLUS 36 The incised stone plaques from Dunnicaer, after drawings by R Inglis and J Stuart (no 5)

It is difficult to dismiss this uncanonical design as the work of a bungling craftsman, because it s veri y confidently incise a dee n i dp V-groove. This prompt e questioth s n whethe s beeha nt i r freshened up in recent times. Against this, the starkly defined highlights and shadows of Stuart's depiction suggest that he was attempting to represent a sharply cut groove. We must believe that we have here the work of an exuberant craftsman with original ideas. It seems useless to discuss further the typological question of whether its originality denotes a very early rather than a very late date. Abov desige eth n itsel rectangulaa s i f r slot (not show illun ni s 36), equally sharply incisea o dt square bottom. In form it is reminiscent of a small ingot mould, but there is no reason to believe that functions it s thiswa . Slab, 720 mm x 390 mm. This is very badly weathered, especially towards the top right, and is coated over most of its surface with lichen, so that it is difficult to make out details of the design. This consists of the outline of a fish, most probably a salmon, and an equilateral triangle with central dot. The curious e salmon'shapth f o e s head s depictea , e y Stuartverifieb db n inspectiony ca ,b d s uncertaii t i t bu , n whether it results from an irregularity in the rock or from the deliberate intention of the sculptor. 0 28 SOCIET ANTIQUARIEF YO SCOTLANDF SO , 1992

. Outlinmm 0 e 24 equilatera x m m 3 Slab 0 l triangl41 , e impale outlinn a n o d e crescent, bot t verhcu y regularly wit a verh y thin, sharply incised linee crescenTh . s empti t f decorationo y t no s i s a , uncommonly the case when it forms an element in the normal crescent and V-rod design. The apex of opposite e trianglth th n i s ei e directio V-roe e standarpoine th th th f n di o o tn t d design s temptini t I . g to suggest that we have here a forerunner of that design (though Alien's attempt to promote such an appean Golspie idea th y ab o t l e cross-sla quits bi e unfounded). t leasA . t thremm 0 e phase 40 represented e x ar f carvinm e so 4 m us Slab 0 d g65 an , . (a) A larger slab or , with pecked or drilled, not incised, designs, first recognized by Ritchie , (1915consistin4) g e so-callefi , th f go d flower designc possiblar n a ; y fro mmirrora comba d an ;, identified recently by R Inglis. (b) The stele was then cut down to the present slab, and incised, in a shallow groove unlike the sharp-cut V-groov, wit1 double-disa ho n f o e Z-rod can d symbol e discTh . s have concentric circles and central dots Z-roe th , elaboratelo floriateds ds i t no 1o t .n bu s , ya e slas the(cTh )bwa n usebuildina s da g stone partias showe i th s a ,y nb l pecking 4(be awath f )yo symbol, the drilling of two holes in one edge, and traces of mortar. The recent history of the slab, before its removal to , includes its use as a pig's scratching stone. 5 Small, elongate . Thidmm s triangulabear0 17 ovan sa x l m adjacendesign r m a slab d 0 nan 38 , t circle, both with central dots, incised in sharply cut lines, though not so fine as those of no 3. The upper part e desigth s largelf o ha n y flaked away t enougbu , h remain o vindicatt s e Stuart's drawing. Alien surmised that this was 'perhaps intended for the double-disc symbol', but given that the circle and oval are contiguous, rather than joined by a bridge, this is unlikely. The design may well be regarded, however earln a s ya , developmene stagth n ei canonicae th f o t l double-disc symbol. The first importance of these stones is that their size shows them, like those from Burghead, or the oxen-plaque from East Lomond, to have been plaques rather than stele. This point is emphasize cuttine th y db gfro4 dow o mlargea n f no r slab. They might eve regardee nb panels da s with a height of 380 mm-400 mm in three cases, only no 1 being taller than this. With the exception of the fish (salmon?) of no 2, and the double disc and Z-rod of no 4(b), none of their designs can be described as mainstream or strictly canonical in the Pictish repertory. Indeed no 5 ma regardee yb forerunnea s earldn a a double-dise e yth b f versioy o re th ma f 3 no c o motifn d an , crescent and V-rod. On the other hand, the fact that no 4(b) is secondary to an apparently canonical grou f flowerpo , mirro comd arguy relativela an r r bma efo y late dat r Dunnicaeefo r 4(b) alsd an o, plaqufoe th r e for f othemo r Dunnicaer stone wells sa . As a group, the Dunnicaer plaques constitute one of only two coastal clusters south of the Dornoch Firth, the other being at Burghead; in each case, the term 'coastal' does actually mean 'washe sea'e th .y dMoreoverb , even without allowin unsatisfactore th r gfo y circumstance f theiso r discovery possible th d an ,e los f otheo s r stones s noteworthi t i , y that they for onle mth y cluster Mounte soutth f ho contaio ht n more than three stone AlcocA E s( k 1989). Finally, the stack on which they were found, (and which may originally have held yet more stones), is a most remarkable natural feature (illus 35). Its height has been estimated as about describee b y m-30 plann I 3 ma . liks t 5di a ,m tadpoleea , wit hsubrectangulaa r head abou m0 1 t in diameter at the seaward end, and a tail some 50 m long pointing south-westwards, that is, parallel to the normal rock formation of the area. Thomson drew attention to the existence of a dyke wit e samhth e alignment, protruding fro mainlane mth d cliffs abousouth-wesm 0 3 te th f o t tail of the stack; and argued from this that 'at no very distant period it' - that is, the Dunnicaer stac k- 'forme mainland'e th para d f o t 'ny B o. very distant period' meane h , t 'whee th n sculptured stones were erected' (Thomson 1860, 73-4). On this basis, Stuart speculated that 'the poinprojectina f o t g headlanprobabld ha . . . dy been fortified in the same way as Burghead' (quoted in Thomson 1860, 75). Given the difference in scale, the Burghead analogy is distinctly far-fetched. More recently, Simpson, having imagined a Ninianic missionary church on Dunnottar Rock, and having identified the salmon as the symbol ALCOC ALCOCKK& : RECONNAISSANCE EXCAVATIONS IN SCOTLAND, 1974-8 | 428 1

of Christ, and the triangle which occurs on the same stone as signifying the Trinity, suggested that Dunnicaer may have been a disert or place of retreat for the clergy of Ninian's missionary station weigh(1971attacheo e b N . n 3) ,ca tthes o dt e suggestions. Stuart's speculations abou fortifiea t d headlan reinforcede b n e dimldca h s a y, perceived appean place a th (1867 y o b et l , nam tautologa 9) , s ea y from Pictish *dind r Gaelian o n cdu Pictish caer, havinl al g primar'forta s a ' y- thoug exclusivt no h e- meaning collective Th . e weakness of these speculations is that Thomson's hypothesis, that the stack was part of a peninsula in the fifth and sixth centuries AD, cannot be supported by examination on the ground today. There evidenco n s i masa f ef collapseo so d material fro originan ma l continuous dyke. This suggests that isolatioe th stace th kf n o goe s back some millennia. Moreover present-dae th , y appearance th f eo stack is close to Thomson's own description, especially in relation to the irregular arch through predico s ablt whic walko wa et m whicd e hi th an ,d tha hle t 'ere long, Dinnacair itself will probably disappear' t cannoI . doubtee b t d that s lonDunnicaeha g d beenan , is r, subjecte tidao dt l erosion degree Th . f thaeo t erosion cannot readil measurede yb reasonabls i t i t bu , believo et e that thos incisee originallo th dramati a ewh p n u d o t stoneo yse s c d naturasdi l featurt e whicno s hwa substantially different from what we see today. earliese Th t accoun f Dunnicaeo t r report existenc e walw sth lo l a alon f eo edgge th par ef o t stacke o th fincisee Th . d slabs were discovere procese th n d i f throwin so stonee gth f thio s s wall int seae oth .cleat Wha no whethe s ri s i t r theoriginalld yha y been built int wale y oth sucn i lwa ha that their designs were visiblemereld ha r o y, been muco uses s da h builders' rubbl makes it n ei - up. The latter is surely unlikely, given the effort which would have been involved in hauling them up to the summit in the first place. The observation mentioned above, that three out of the five plaques confor modula mm-40 0 mo t 38 , f wouleo 0mm d certainl idee th at yfi tha t thebeed yha n erected as panels on the inner face of an encircling bank or wall. There are only two recent accounts of visits to the summit of Dunnicaer. The first, by I Ralston (1977), records that 'there wer masonro en y tracesummit's it n so secone Th . d accouns i t by the surveyors of the RCAHMS (1982b, 27), who ascended the stack in 1982. They report (item 20927)p , : 'the summi stace th coveres f ki o t deen di p tussocky turf and, althougw hfe thera e ear loose stones around the edge, no trace of any structure is visible'. Despite this pessimistic account, it seems probable thae 'feth tw loose e e remain19th-centurstones th e walth f th e o lf ar 'o s y account casey e tussockan th ,n I . y turf characteristi f cliffco d stack-top an - s mori s e likelo yt conceal than to reveal archaeological features. Though it is necessarily speculative, it seems a reasonable hypothesis that the five stones known at present, and probably others now lost, had originally been set up in the inner face of a small walle da stac f enclosuro k p whicto beed n eo hha n chosen, perhap s spectaculait r fo s r appearance quitd an , e certainl relativs it r yfo e inaccessibilityearln a thie s yse a s Pictisy ma e h W . cult-focus, more likely pagan than Simpsos a , suggestedd nha , Christian. Turnin fro w e detailemgno th d accoun f Dunnicaeo t s wideit o t rr setting e stacth : k stands within 50 m of the north-west edge of the more or less flat-topped headland (NGR NO 8884), which bounds Castle Haven bay on the north just as the Dunnottar Castle promontory bounds it on soute th h (illus 29)e headland.Th ,suggestive whicth s hha e name 'Bowduns', join mainlane sth d anarroa t w isthmus, where ther e stronear g trace ditcha f lesd o s an s, clear internan signa f o s l rampart. Thi s notei s s 'Ramparda t (Remain e 186sth of)8n o Ordnanc' e Survey 6-inch map, County Series, Kincardineshire sheet XVII (surveyed 1865; published 1868) t thibu ,s designation wat retaineno s subsequenn di t editions headlane Th . arean i r almosa oves di o ,h 6 r t twice eth usabl Dunnottae areth f ao r promontory legitimata s i t I . e speculation tha t Bowduna t have w s e the remains of a promontory fort contemporary with the cult focus on Dunnicaer. | SOCIET 2 28 Y OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 1992

If the steps of this argument have been accepted thus far, then several further suggestions may be advanced: that it is unlikely that there would have been two strongholds in occupation at the sam et eithe a time e ron , sid f Castleo e Haven; that presenn o , t evidence, Bowdun mora s i s e likely site for an Early Historic fortification than Dunnottar Castle itself; and that it is therefore appropriate to identify it as Dun Pother. Acceptance of this entails, of course, acceptance that the place-name has shifted between the seventh and the 12th centuries. This is by no means an unknown phenomenon distance th ; e involve moro n betwees dm ei k tha mutuall5 o n0. n tw y visible sites. Rejection of it requires us to account for the co-existence of two power centres at no great distanc einferree aparton e dth : fro Dunnicaee mth s rPictis it stac d hkan stonee s th wel a ss a l apparently embanked headland of Bowduns; the other based solely on the place-name itself. If the arguments advanced in the last section are accepted, then the hypotheses generated deserv testede b o et , most immediatel economicalld yan transeca y yb t acros ditce band sth hf an k o the isthmus, and into the interior of Bowduns. Whether, in view of the pessimistic accounts given by thos havo ewh e recently ascended Dunnicaer ,valu y therfurthea an n es i ei r examinatios it f no summit mattea s i , r which only thejudgen yca t leastA . , further thought migh e e giveb th t o nt existence and character of the wall which had been recorded in the early accounts. If, however earln a , y medieval occupatio defenced nan s e soughwerb o et t Dunnotta a t r Castle itself obvioue th , s plac searco et h woul beneate db exceptionalle hth y high bank which runs north from the entrance, tailing gently down in the direction of Cutting DO 100. Simpson regarded locatioe mottth thie s th sa f eno whic postulatee hh firse th t s dcastla t Dunnottaea r (1941 wit8 8 , h III & hachuree pi I th ;I s thesn o s e giv misleadina e g impressio e actuath f no l profile th f o e ground). It is conceivable that on this rocky headland, it would have been necessary to scoop up all available spoi - lbot h natural man-madalluviuy n orden an i wi d o - t rmt an i ef o deposit p to n so enough material for the motte. This would readily explain the absence of such deposits from the top of the conglomerate bedrock in DO 100. By the same token, such deposits would be preserved beneath the motte itself. It should be said at once that, if the search for early medieval deposits beneath Simpson's supposed motte were to be carried through to the cliff edge, as would probably be necessary, then a very massive earth-moving exercise woul involvede db reasoe . Thion s i sn why 1984n i , , Cutting places wa 0 d wher10 largO e D eth e ban tailed kha d othee offTh . r reason, which still appliesa s i , large doubt as to whether Simpson's motte had ever existed at all.

POSTSCRIPT Since this paper was completed in November 1991 there has been further work on the Dupplin cross (see importanbelow)o tw d an , t excavation f earlso y medieval cemeterie northern si n Britain have been published. Becaus f theieo r relevance bot secone Fortevioto ht th n i d d casan , e to Garbeg as well, it has been considered worth adding summaries of the excavation results together with publication details. 1 HardingScull& J , 'TwC F , A ,o early medieval cemeterie t Milfieldsa , Northumberland', Durham Archaeol (1990)6 , J , 1-29. Excavation Lato tw e n Neolithic/Earlso y Bronze eAg henge monuments revealed that they were still visibl earle th yn ei medieval period, when they were used as burial grounds. At Milfield North, complete excavation of a small henge uncovere certaie don n grave withi circuie ditce nfouth d th hf an r o t others outside itt Milfiela ; d South, partial excavatio aree th a f nwithio ditce nth h discovere certai5 d4 n r possiblo e graves e NortTh . h cemetery produced Anglo-Saxon object f irod o s an n copper-alloy, whereas only very rare iron objects came fro Soute mth h one. ALCOCK & ALCOCK: RECONNAISSANCE EXCAVATIONS IN SCOTLAND, 1974-84 | 283

2 McCullagh, R J, 'Excavation at Newton, ', Glasgow Archaeol J, 15 (1988-9), 23-51. Rescue excavatio aren a cropmarkf af o n o s revealed three penannular ditches, each witha central elongated grave-pit, oriented east/west. No human remains or grave goods were dryina d ha g t staipi e nfound on suggestiv t bu , extenden a f eo d burial, while anothea d rha small upright stone slab at both the presumed head and foot of the corpse. The ditches appear from cropmarks to be part of an irregular linear cemetery with at least 17 annular r penannulao r ditches fro10o t m4 m diameter. Give locatioe nth e Dalriadan ni b y ma t i , suggested that these are an Irish-Scottish manifestation of a burial monument widely known in Pictland.

A LATIN INSCRIPTION ON THE DUPPLIN CROSS On the front (west) face of the Dupplin cross is a panel about 300 mm square, with traces of carving which are decidedly more weathered than the other panels on the cross. Alien, who omitted much of the interlace in his illustrations of Dupplin, leaves this panel empty (1903, fig 334A); but Stuart's drawing hints at a simple, tight interlace (1856, pi Iviii), perhaps even comparable with tha Fortevion o t (illu1 . Wheno n s4) t , however Royae th , l Museum' casw ne ts was presente e 'Worth t f Angelsda ko ' exhibition sharpnese th , case th t f combineo s d wite hth strong directional lightin reveao gt l suggestions thapanee th t l actually bor inscriptionn ea n I . particular, at top left was what might be read as a letter C (or following Stuart might have been the return of a strand of interlace). Immediately below this it was possible to suggest the reading FILIUS, 'son' t thaA . t tim otheo en r readings coul proposede db indeed an , d further examination of the actual cross at Dupplin failed to confirm those suggested from the cast. Recently, however case bees th ,ha t n intensively studie Katheriny db e Forsyt association hi n with Michael Spearman. From this it appears that the panel bears seven lines of text, of which the first begins CU and ends either N or H. The second reads FILIUSF[..]CU and the third begins S. It is tempting to identify this as a reference to Custantin (i.e. Constantine) son of Fergus (or Wuirgust). He assumed the kingship of Pictland in 789, and that of Dalriada by 811. If we are correc suggestinn i t g thaDupplie th t n cros beed sha n erecte Kennety d b Alpinf sonss o hi n r h,so o , politicaa s a l statement about Kenneth's takeove f Pictlando r , then Constantin f Ferguo n so es would have been a very suitable exemplar to commemorate. mose ar e t gratefuW Katherino t l e Forsyt providinr hfo wits gu h information r fullHe . report wil eagerle b l y awaited.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Many colleagues and friends have assisted us in the writing of these three reports, especially by answering querie commentind an s drafn go t section e mos ar f text o se tf o gratefuW . l al o t l them hopd an , e thahave w t e expresse r indebtednesdou s fullappropriateld an y texte e th Th .n yi initial survey excavationd an s s coul t havdno e been conducted without permission indeed an , d active assistance in the field, from the owners of sites; notably the Hon. John Dewar and the Churc f Scotlanho d General Trustee e cas th f Forteviot eo n i s Hone Pearsoe th A ; th C .d nan t Dunnottarsa thee th n d Ancienan ; t Monuments Branch, SDD t Urquhar,a t Castle. Generous financial support has been provided by the Russell Trust, the Society of Antiquaries of London, the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, and above all, at every stage from the initial fieldwor finae th lo t kreports Huntee th y b ,r Archaeologica lmose Trustar e t gratefuW . r thesfo l e resources e facilitie th d als r an ,ofo s afforde e Universitth y b d f Glasgowyo , both durind gan beyond LA's tenure of the Chair of Archaeology. Finally, while it may seem invidious to single out 284 | SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 1992 particular individuals, mention must be made of the special responsibilities borne in the field by Jean Comrie, Stephen Driscoll and Sally Foster; and, in drawing the majority of the illustrations, by Lorraine McEwan and Sylvia Stevenson.

REFERENCES Alcock, E A 1989 Tictish stones class I: where and how ?', Glasgow ArchaeolJ, 15 (1988-9), 1-21. Alcock, L 1981 'Early Historic fortifications in Scotland', in Guilbert, G (ed), Hillfort studies, Leicester, 150-81. Alcock, L 1982a Survey & excavation at Forteviot, Perthshire, 1981. University of Glasgow. Alcock, L 1982b 'Forteviot: a Pictish and Scottish royal church and palace", in Pearce, S M (ed), The early church westernn i Britain Ireland,d an Oxford, 211-39. Alcock, L 1987a Economy, society and warfare among the Britons and Saxons. Cardiff. Alcock, L 1987b 'Pictish studies: present and future' in Small, A (ed), The Picts: a new look at old problems, Dundee, 80-92. Alcock L ,1988 a Bede, fortsEddius,e th Britons: d e oth fan Jarrow Lecture 1988. Alcock L , 1988b 'An Heroi societd c Agean r northern yi : wa n Britain, AD 450-850', Proc Antiqc So Scot, 118(1988), 327-34. Alcock Alcock& L ,A 198E , 7 'Reconnaisance excavation , Excavation2 : . . . s t Dunollia s e Castle, Oban, Argyll, 1978', Proc Soc Antiq Scot, 117(1987), 119-47, fiche 2: A3-G4. Alcock Alcock& L , A 199E , 0 'Reconnaissance excavation , Excavation4 : . . t . Gluts Al t , a sClyd e Rock, Strathclyde, 1974-75', Proc Antiqc So Scot, (1990)0 12 , 95-149, fich : A1-G14e2 . Alcock, L, Alcock, E A & Driscoll, S T 1989 'Reconnaissance excavations . . .: 3, Excavations at Dundurn, Strathearn, Perthshire, 1976-77', Proc Soc Antiq Scot, 119 (1989), 189-226, fiche 2: A2-3: Ell. Alcock, L, Alcock, EA & Foster, SM 1986 'Reconnaissance excavations . . . : 1, Excavations near St Abb's Head, , 1980', Proc Antiqc So Scot, (1986)6 11 , 255-79, fich D1-G9: 1 e . Alien, J R & Anderson, J 1903 The Early Christian monuments of Scotland. Edinburgh. Anderson Anderson& O (edA O , transsM & , ) 1961 Adomnan's Lifef Columba.o Edinburgh& London AndersonO . M Revise y b n , dOxforded , 1991. Anderson, M O 1973; 1980 Kings and kingship in early Scotland. Edinburgh & London. Anderson, M O 1974a 'St Andrews before Alexander I' in Barrow.G W S (ed), The Scottish tradition, Edinburgh, 1-13. Anderson, M O 1974b 'The Celtic church in Kinrimund', Innes Rev, 25 (1974), 67-76. Anderson O 198M , 2 'Dalriad e creatio kingdoe th th d e Scots f th an ao n f Whitelocn mi o ' , kD McKitterick, R & Dumville, D (eds), Ireland in early medieval Europe, Cambridge, 106-32. Anderson, M O 1991 see Anderson, A O & Anderson, M O, 1961. Armit, I 1990 'Brochs and Beyond in the Western Isles', in Armit, I, Beyond the Brochs, Edinburgh, 41-70. Ashmore, P J 1980 'Low cairns, long cists and symbol stones', Proc Soc Antiq Scot, 110 (1980), 346-55. Bailey, R N 1978 The Durham Cassiodorus: Jarrow Lecture 1978. Bannerman, J 1974 Studies in the history of Dalriada. Edinburgh. Barclay J 198G , 3 e thir'Siteth f d o s millenniu e firsmth tB o t Cmillenniu t Norta d ma h Mains, Strathallan, Perthshire', Proc Antiqc So Scot, (1983)3 11 , 122-281. Barrow, G W S (ed) 1960 The acts of Malcolm IV king of Scots 1153-1165. Edinburgh. Barrow S 197W kingdome G ,3 Th Scots. e th f o London, 1973. Barrow, G W S 1983 The childhood of Scottish Christianity; a note on some place-name evidence', Scott Stud 21 (1983), 1-15. Barrow, G W S & Scott, W W (eds) 1971 Acts of William I king of Scots 1165-1214. Edinburgh. Bibby , HudsonS J ,Henderson & G , J 198D , 2 Soild landan capability r agriculture:fo Western Scotland. Aberdeen. Bradley, R 1987 'Time regained: the creation of continuity', J Brit Archaeol Assoc 140 (1987), 1-17. Brassil, K & Owen, W G 1988 'Tandderwen', Archaeol in Wales 28 (1988), 51. Bruce-Mitford, R 1975 Recent archaeological excavations in Europe. London. Burgess C , 1976 'Meldon Bridge neolithia : c defended promontory complex near Peebles Burgessn i ' , C & Miket, R (eds), Settlement and economy in the third and second millennia BC, Oxford, 151-79. ALCOC ALCOCKK& : RECONNAISSANCE EXCAVATIONS IN SCOTLAND, 1974-85 28 | 4

Campbell J , 1979 'Bede's word r placesfo s Sawyern i ' (ed)H P , , Names, words d graves:an early medieval settlement, Leeds, 34-54. Charles-Edwards, T 1989 'Early medieval kingships in the British Isles' in Bassett, S (ed), The origins of Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, Leicester, 28-39. Childe, V G 1935 'Excavation of the vitrified fort of Finavon, Angus', Proc Soc Antiq Scot, 69 (1934-5), 49-80. Childe, V G 1936 'Supplementary excavations at the vitrified fort of Finavon, Angus', Proc Soc Antiq Scot, 70(1935-6), 347-52. ChildeThorneycroft& G V , W ,193 8 'The experimental productio phenomene th f no a distinctivf eo vitrified forts', Proc Antiqc So Scot, (1937-8)2 7 , 44-55. Christlein, R 1979 Die Alamannen. Stuttgart & Aalen. Close-Brooks J , 1980 'Excavation Daire th n yi s Park, Dunrobin, , 1977', Proc Antiqc So Scot, 110(1980), 328-45. Close-Brooks J , 1984 'Pictis othed han r burials' Watson& Frielln i P (eds), G G W J , , Pictish Studies, Oxford, 87-114. Close-Brooks, J 1986 'Excavations at Clatchard Craig, ', Proc Soc Antiq Scot, 116 (1986), 117-84. Conant, K J 1959, 1979 Carolingian and Romanesque architecture 800-1200. Harmondsworth. Cowan, E J 1981 'The Scottish Chronicle in the Poppleton manuscript', Innes Rev, 32 (1981), 3-21. Cruden, S 1986 Scottish medieval churches. Edinburgh. DBG Julius Caesar helloe D , gallico, trans) Edwards& d (e , J Caesar, H , Gallice th war, London, 1917. Dumville, D N 1981 '"Primarius cohortis" in Adomnan's Life of Columba', Scott Gaelic Stud, 13 (1978-81), 130-1. Duncan, A A M 1975 Scotland, the making of the kingdom. Edinburgh. Feachem e W 196hill-fort R Th , 6 f northero s n Britain northern n i Rivet(ed)n F i Iron'e e L ,Th Ag A , Britain, Edinburgh, 59-87. Feachem, R W 1973 'Ancient agriculture in the highlands of Britain', Proc Prehist Soc, 39 (1973), 332-53. Fernie, E 1986 'Early church architecture in Scotland', Proc Soc Antiq Scot, 116 (1986), 393-411. Finberg R 195P H , 5 'Roman d Saxonan Withington, studya continuity.n i Leicester. Reprinten i d Finberg, Lucerna, London, 1964, 21-65. Friell, J G P & Watson, W G (eds) 1984 Pictish studies: settlement, burial and art in Dark Age northern Britain. Oxford, 1984. Gates O'Brien& T , C ,198 8 'Cropmark t Milfield'sa , Archaeol Aeliana, ser5 (1988) 6 1 , , 1-9. Harding, A F 1981 'Excavations in the prehistoric ritual complex near Milfield, Northumberland', Proc Prehist Soc, (1981)7 4 , 87-135. HE Colgrave, B & Mynors, R A B, (eds & trans), 1969 Bede's ecclesiatical history of the English people. Oxford, 1969. Cited by book and chapter of the original. Henderson I , 196 Picts.e 7Th London. Henderson, I 1975 'Inverness, a Pictish capital' in Maclean, L (ed), The hub of the Highlands, Inverness, 91-107. Henderson I , 1978 'Sculpture e Fortnortth f ho h afte e take-oveth re Scotsth y Langn i b r' J (ed), , Anglo-Saxon Vikingd an sculpture, Oxford, 47-73. Henderson, I 1986 'The "David cycle" in Pictish art' in Higgitt, J (ed), Early Medieval sculpture in Britain Ireland,d an Oxford, 87-123. Henderson I , 1987 'Early Christian monument f Scotlanso d displaying crosse otheo n t r sbu ornament ' in Small, A (ed), The Picts, Dundee, 45-58. Hills, C 1977 'Chamber grave from Spong Hill, North Elmham, Norfolk', Medieval Archaeol, 21 (1977), 167-76. Hills, C & Penn, K 1981 The Anglo-Saxon cemetery at Spong Hill, North Elmham, Part II. Norfolk Archaeological Unit, Dereham. Hope-Taylor, B 1977 Yeavering, an Anglo-British centre of early Northumbria. London. Houlder, C 1968 The henge monuments at Llandegai', Antiquity, 42 (1968), 216-21. Jackson, K H 1953 Language & history in early Britain. Edinburgh. Jackson H 197 K Gaelic,e Th 2 Booknotese th n i of Deer. Cambridge. James E , 1989 'Buria earlstatue d th an l yn s i medieval West', Trans Histy Ro Soc, serh (1989)9 5t ,3 , 23-40. Jazdzewski K , 1975 'Ostrow Lednicki earln a : y Polish prince's seat Bruce-Mitfordn i ' (ed)R , , Recent archaeological excavations in Europe, London, 302-35. | SOCIET 6 28 Y OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 1992

Jenkins, D (ed & trans) 1986 The Law ofHywel Dda. Llandysul. Jones, G R J 1990 'Broninis', Bull Board Celtic Stud, 37 (1990), 126-32. MacAirt, S & MacNiocaill, G (eds & trans) 1983 The Annals of Ulster to AD 1131. Dublin. Macalister S 194A R ,5 Corpus inscriptionum insularum Celticarum, vol 1. Dublin. McCormick, M 1986 Eternal victory. Cambridge. Mackay, W 1914 Urquhan and : olden times in a parish. 2nd edn, Inverness, 1914. MacKie W 197 E , 6 'The vitrified fort f Scotland'o s Hardingn i , (ed)W ,D , Hillforts: later prehistoric earthworks in Britain and Ireland, London, 205-35. McClure, J 1983 'Bede's Old Testament kings' in Wormald, P, Bullough, D & Collins, R (eds), Ideal and reality Prankishn i Anglo-Saxond an society, Oxford, 76-98. MacGibbon Ross& D , T , 1896- ecclesiasticale Th 7 architecture of Scotland from earlieste th timeso t the seventeenth century. vols3 , Edinburgh. Maxwell S 198G , 7 'Settlemen southern i t n overviewPictlanw ne a d- Smalln i ' Picts: e (ed)A , Th , a ne wproblems,d lookol t a Dundee, 31^14. M'Hardy B 190A , 6 'On vitrified forts, with result f experimento s , ' Proc Antiqc . . So . s Scot,0 4 (1905-6), 136-50. Morris, J (ed & trans) 1980 Nennius: British History and the Welsh annals. London & Chichester. Murphy K ,198 6 'Plas Gogerddan', Archaeol Wales,n i 26 (1986), 29-31. Murphy, K 1987 'Plas Gogerddan', Archaeol in Wales, 27 (1987), 36. Nash-Williams, V E 1950 The Early Christian monuments of Wales. Cardiff. Piggott S , 194 e excavationTh 8 t Cairnpapplsa e Hill, West , 1947-48', Proc Antiqc So Scot,2 8 (1947-8), 68-123. Poulik J , 1975 'Milkulcice: capitalorde th f Grea f o s o l t Moravia' Bruce-Mitfordn i , (ed)R , , Recent archaeological excavations in Europe, London, 1—31. Rahtz, P 1979 The Saxon and medieval palaces at Cheddar. Oxford. Ralston, I 1977 'Dunnicaer', Discovery & excavation in Scotland 1977, 19. Ralston I , 1986 'The Yorkshire Television vitrified wall experimen t Easa t t Tullos, Cit f Aberdeeyo n District', Proc Soc Antiq Scot, 116 (1986), 17-40. RCAHMS 1982a Argyll, an Inventory of the Monuments, 4 lona. Edinburgh. RCAHMS 1982b Archaeological sites and monuments of Scotland, 15: South Kincardine. Edinburgh. RCAHMS 1988 Argyll, an Inventory of the Monuments, 6, Mid Argyll & , prehistoric and early historic monuments. Edinburgh. Richardson, J S 1964 The mediaeval stone carver in Scotland. Edinburgh. Ritchie J , 1915 'Note somn so e Aberdeenshire sculptured stone crosses'd san , Proc Antiqc So Scot,9 4 (1914-15), 33-49. St Joseph, J K S 1976 'Aerial reconnaissance: recent results 40', Antiquity, 50 (1976), 55-7. St Joseph, J K S 1978a 'Aerial reconnaissance: recent results 44', Antiquity, 52 (1978), 47-50. St Joseph, J K S 1978b 'Aerial reconnaissance: recent results 45', Antiquity, 52 (1978), 137^0. I, II Samuel: reference is to the First & Second Books of Samuel in the King James VI version. Shepherd G 198A I , 3 'Pictish Settlemen Nortn i t h East Scotland' Chapmann i , Mytumd an C C J ,H , (eds), Settlement in North Britain, 1000 BC-AD 1000, Oxford, 327-56. Simpson, D D A & Scott-Elliot, J 1964 'Excavations at Camp Hill, Trohoughton, Dumfries', Trans Dumfries Natur Hist Antiq Soc, 41 (1964), 125-34. Simpson D 192 W , 9 Urquhan Castle. Privately printed. Simpson D 194 W , 1 'The developmen Dunnottaf o t r Castle', Archaeol (1941)8 9 , J , 87-98. Simpson D 195W , 1 'Glen Urquhar s castleit d a stud:an t environmentn yi Grimesn i ' (ed)F ,W , Aspects of archaeology in Britain and beyond, London, 316-31. Simpson, W D 1963 'The early romanesque tower at Restenneth Priory, Angus', Antiq J, 43 (1963), 269-83. Simpson, W D 1971 Dunnottar Castle historical and descriptive. Aberdeen. Skene F 185W , 7 'Observation Forteviotn so anciene th site f th e,o t capita f Scotland'o l , Archaeologia Scotica, (1857)4 , 271-9 (paper rea Jan3 d2 . 1832). Skene, W F (ed) 1867 Chronicles of the Picts, chronicles of the Scots, and other early memorials of Scottish history. Edinburgh. Skene F 187W , 4 Historians of Scotland, VI: Life of Saint Columba Williad e . . . m Reeves. Edinburgh. Small, A (ed) 1987 The Picts: a new look at old problems. Dundee, 1987. ALCOCK & ALCOCK: RECONNAISSANCE EXCAVATIONS IN SCOTLAND, 1974-84 | 287

Small , ThomasA , Wilson& C , M 197 t NinianD ,S 3 s treasure. it 's Isled an vols2 , Aberdeen. Stevenson, J B 1984 'Garbeg and Whitebridge: two square-barrow cemeteries in Inverness-shire', in Friell, J G P & Watson, W G (eds), Pictish Studies, Oxford, 145-50. Stevenson, R B K 1955; 1980 'Pictish art' in Wainwright, F T (ed), The problem of the Picts, Edinburgh, 1955; Perth, 1980, 97-128. Stevenson, R B K 1976 The earlier metalwork of Pictland' in Megaw, J V S (ed), To illustrate the monuments, London, 245-51. Stevenson, R B K 1985 'The Pictish brooch from Aldclune, Blair , Perthshire', Proc Soc Antiq Scot, 115(1985), 233-9. Stuart J , 185 sculptured186e 6& Th 7 , vo , AberdeenI l ; vo , EdinburghII l . Stuiver Pearson& M ,W 198 G , 6 'High precision calibratio e radiocarboth f no n time scaled a , 1950-500 BC', Radiocarbon, (2b8 2 ) (1986), 805-38. Taylor& M J ,H , (1965-78) Anglo-Saxon architecture, vols3 , Cambridge. Thomas, A C 1971 The Early Christian archaeology of north Britain. Glasgow. Thomson, A 1860 'Notice of sculptured stones found at Dinnacair", a rock in the sea, near ', Proc Antiqc So Scot, (1857-60)3 , 69-75. Vana Z , 198 worlde 3Th anciente oth f Slavs. Prague. VC Life ofColumba, Andersoe se Anderson& n 1961; Anderson 1991. Cite originale folioy db th f o s . Colgrave W trans& V d )(e B , 1927; 198 Lifee 5Th of Bishop Wilfrid Eddiusy b Stephanus. Cambridge. Cite chaptey db originale th f ro . Wailes B ,198 e Iris2Th h "royal sites historn "i archaeology'd yan , Cambridge Medieval Celtic Stud,3 (1982), 1-29. Wainwright, G 1989 The henge monuments. London. Walker , CampbellD , Heslop A ,, GauldB F , LaingG E H C ,R ,J , , Shipley WrightD ,& M G 198 B ,G , 2 Soillandd an capability r agriculture:fo Eastern Scotland. Aberdeen. Walker Ritchie& B , G ,198 7 Exploring Scotland's heritage: Tayside. d Fifean Edinburgh. Warner B 198 R ,e archaeolog8Th f Earlyo y Historic Irish kingship Driscolln i ' Nieke& R T S M , (eds), Power and politics in early medieval Britain and Ireland, Edinburgh, 47-68. Warner forthcominB R , g 'A proposed adjustmen old-wooe th r fo t d effect', PAC. T29 Watson, W J 1926 The history of the Celtic place-names of Scotland. Edinburgh. Wedderburn, L M M & Grime D M 1984 The cairn cemetery at Garbeg, ', in Friell, J G Watson& (eds)P G W , , Pictish Studies, Oxford, 151-67. Weir T , 197 Scottishe 0Th lochs 1. London. Williams, J H, Shaw, M & Denham, V 1985 Middle Saxon palaces at Northampton. Northampton. Wilson M 197D , e treasure3Th Smalln i ' , ThomasA , t WilsonNinian'sS & C M , s D it , d Islean treasure. vols2 , Aberdeen, 45-148.

This paper is published with the aid of grants from Historic Scotland and from the Royal Commission on the Ancient Historicaland Monuments of Scotland