Proc Soc Antiq Scot, 132 (2002), 475–497

Highland rural settlement studies: a critical history

Chris Dalglish*

ABSTRACT Historic period rural settlement in the Scottish Highlands has, over the past few decades, become an increasing focus of archaeological concern in academic, governmental, developer-funded-archaeolo- gical, and amateur contexts alike. Despite this, there have been no reviews of the theoretical underpinnings of the subject. Below, I discuss changing theoretical concerns within rural settlement studies from about 1850 to the present and end with a discussion of the active role archaeologists of rural settlement and landscape can take in writing the social history of the Highlands in the recent past.

INTRODUCTION my aim to explore in depth the extensive Rural settlement studies in Scotland have a pre-1960 literature, which has previously been long and varied history, with substantive discussed only in a very cursory manner. beginnings in the mid-19th century. At times, Highland rural settlement studies are dis- and especially in the late 19th century, such cussed here in terms of three distinct studies were prominent in mainstream archae- approaches. The first is referred to as Rural ology and played a key role in theoretical Settlement Studies as Ethnology – work under- discussion within the subject. Despite this, taken largely in the second half of the 19th reviews of the subject have been few and century and characterized by the analysis of limited (eg Morrison 2000). None has discus- Highland rural settlement for the provision of sed the theoretical constructs governing past ethnological analogy. Such studies were inten- analysis. More often the reader is provided ded to provide analogies in writing prehistory with a descriptive list of previously published and to put that discipline on a more scientific works or field projects and the emphasis is footing. The 19th-century Highlands and firmly upon work of the last 40 to 50 years. Islands were seen to be characterized by the Fairhurst’s (1960, 67) statement in 1960 that direct survival of the past into the present in only a small literature existed on the ruins of material and social terms. This, naturally, deserted settlements in Scotland is true. How- characterized the material and social environ- ever, a large corpus of related literature, ethno- ment of the Highlands and Islands, and the graphic in scope or largely written in Western Isles in particular, as static over abstraction from the material remains them- millennia. selves, did exist. It is my aim here to consider The second main approach is referred to the ways in which rural settlement studies have below as Rural Settlement Studies as Folk-life been carried out. That is, to consider the – beginning in the early decades of the 20th various and changing theoretical under- century and continuing to the present. These pinnings of past work in the subject. It is also studies are informed by the theoretical

* c/o Society of Antiquaries of Scotland 476 | SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 2002 structure of the ethnological approach, with reflected by divisions maintained in the prac- the important injection of a degree of histor- tice of rural settlement archaeology (cf Lelong icity. Since the 1920s, documentary sources & Wood 2000). have increasingly been employed in a consid- However, from an analytical perspective eration of rural settlement that allows there to these divisions are necessary to achieve, in have been some degree of change and plays general, clarity in tracing the history of the down the direct links to prehistory. However, subject, and, in particular, in following the this transformation has not been complete and themes of the rise of historicity and the modern such studies still often maintain a view of rural archaeological approach. These themes largely settlement and society as largely static. set the agenda for any current archaeological The third approach discussed is referred to consideration of Highland rural settlement Rural Settlement Studies as Historical and landscape.as Archaeology. This encompasses a tradition The paper concludes with a discussion of prominent from the 1950s to the present. the relationship between history and archae- ‘Historical’ here not only refers to the fact that ology within rural settlement studies and an the material in question is from a period also account of the few recent theoretically covered by documentary sources, but carries informed works. These are discussed in order the added connotation that the view of settle- to set the agenda for future theoretically ment and society as static, or ahistorical, is informed approaches to rural settlement and rejected. Archaeology as a term is used not just landscape. Recent archaeological studies of to suggest the analysis of material culture, rural settlement have largely been empirical, common to all approaches, but the nature of primarily excavation or survey reports or that analysis. It is with this approach that the syntheses of these. Use of documentary empirical aspect of rural settlement studies is sources by archaeologists has been limited to brought in line with mainstream modern consideration of empirical questions. Where archaeological practice (in that it is character- the social aspects of the period in question are ized by scientific, that is methodologically considered, accounts of documentary histor- coherent, survey and excavation, previously ians are pasted into the archaeological report. largely lacking). As such, archaeologists have not played an These divisions are to some extent arbit- active role in constructing the recent history of rary. The first approach to some extent encom- the Highlands. The influence of different docu- passes work undertaken in a chronologically mentary historians outside narrowly defined distinct phase. However, there are clear theor- academic circles is a subject for discussion, etical links between the ethnological and folk- which is to say that the extent to which their life approaches. The folk-life and historical histories are accepted by others is undefined. archaeology approaches have run in parallel However, my point is that archaeologists have, over the last 50 or so years. Their mutual on the whole, uncritically accepted narratives interest and, to some extent, compatibility, is created and defined in another disciplinary underlined by the fact that papers relating to context without reference to the relevant both schools occur in the same journals, Folk archaeological material they apparently wish Life for example, and the works of one are to elucidate. referenced in those of the other. The collabora- As we shall see, this has begun to change tion of professional and amateur archaeolo- and there is a minority of archaeological gists and the staff of the Highland Folk Park studies that attempts to write new histories of in Newtonmore on a recent project further the Highlands. However, I will suggest below emphasizes the fact that the distinct theoretical that these studies portray Highland society as approaches outlined in this paper are not also normative, which is to say that belief and DALGLISH: HIGHLAND RURAL SETTLEMENT | 477 understanding of the world is portrayed as was stationed in Inverness in the period e w e 7 5 ad 14 .nvraaduniform. I will argue that it is between 1715 and 1745.universaland necessary for us to overcome this problem and These accounts contain, amongst much to explore the dynamic nature of Highland else, descriptions of settlement and landscape society in the recent past and the material in the Highlands and Islands. The journals are environments from and through which not simply descriptive, however, but fre- social relationships were contested. The con- quently pejorative. Thus Pennant’s description f te h u e f Ily cro archaeology with the material world of the houses of Islay:cernof and the possibilities this allows for a considera- tion of routine social practice gives archae- A set of people worn down by poverty: their ology a potentially prominent role in habitations scenes of misery, made of loose considering the diverse and often conflicting stones; without chimneys, without doors, social relationships that may have existed in excepting the faggot opposed to the wind at one the past and the conditions from which society or other of the appertures, permitting the smoke to escape through the other, in order to prevent was contested. the pains of suffocation. The furniture perfectly corresponds: a pothook hangs from the middle RURAL SETTLEMENT STUDIES AS of the roof, with a pot pendant over a grateless ETHNOLOGY fire, filled with fare that may rather be called a permission to exist, than a support of vigorous The first studies of Highland rural settlement life (Pennant, in Simmons 1998b, 217). and landscape of the 18th and 19th centuries are contemporary travellers’ accounts and Such morally loaded descriptions are also other eyewitness descriptions. The earliest sub- found in the works of the later, 19th century stantial account of this type was Martin Mar- ethnological approach to rural settlement. tin’s A Description of the Western Islands of However, earlier accounts like Pennant’s are Scotland published in 1695 (Martin 1994). not analytical in the sense that the later work This was followed in the 18th century by a is. Further, the context of rural settlement as series of similar accounts including, most fam- evidence of the survival of prehistoric social ously, those of Captain Burt, Thomas Pen- and material traits into the present, the major nant, Dr Johnson, and James Boswell (Levi theoretical underpinning of that later work, is 1990; Simmons 1998a; 1998b). This tradition not manifest in the travellers’ accounts. So, continued into the 19th century, with the while the travellers’ accounts may show the publication of the journals of Dorothy Word- beginnings of some important assumptions sworth and Lord Teignmouth, for example that informed later thinking on Highland (Teignmouth 1836; Thin 1981). settlement and society, the conceptual and The accounts were written by individuals methodological backgrounds of the with varied backgrounds. Some were English approaches of the two periods to rural settle- (Johnson, Pennant, Wordsworth & ment and landscape were also distinct. As Teignmouth), but others were Scots, Lowland such, I will move on to the beginnings of and Highland (Boswell and Martin, respect- academic discourse on the subject. ively). Most of their accounts were the result The flurry of work on Highland rural of flying tours of the region, while others were settlement from the mid to late 19th century written with indigenous insight (Martin). can be understood not so much as reflecting Most were travel journals, but not all. Burt’s an interest in the recent past of the Highlands contribution came as a series of Letters from A for its own sake, but as being related to the Gentleman in the North of Scotland to his study of prehistory. Contemporary theory Friend in London, as the original title ran. He stressed that an understanding of the distant 478 | SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 2002 past could better be achieved through ethnolo- prevalent in western Europe and the United gical analogy. For instance, J Y Simpson in his States in the 1860s and 1870s, and was pro- ‘Address on Archaeology’ to the Society of moted by the shared commitment of these two Antiquaries of Scotland in 1860 stated: disciplines to an evolutionary approach (Trig- ger 1989, 110). In our archaeological inquiries into the prob- Archaic habits and works were seen to able uses and import of all doubtful articles in persist to their greatest extent in the Western our museums or elsewhere. . .[l ]et us, like the Isles. So it was that from the late 1850s until geologists, try always, when working with such the turn of the century, a series of archaeolo- problems, to understand the past by reasoning from the present. Let us study backwards from gical and ethnographic studies was carried out the known to the unknown. In this way we can in the Outer Hebrides with a view to under- easily come to understand, for example, how standing and recording aspects of the sup- our ancestors made those single-tree canoes, posed archaic society then inhabiting the area. which have been found so often in Scotland, by Such studies continued in cases into the early observing how the Red Indian, partly by fire 20th century (eg MacKenzie 1904; Curwen and partly by hatchet, makes his analogous 1938), and sometimes explicitly subscribed to canoe at the present day (Simpson 1862a, 31). a theoretical approach like that outlined by Simpson, introduced above (eg Curwen 1938, It was not just that the material culture of 261). The work of this period often focused on such societies as the ‘Red Indian’ showed shieling (summer pasture) sites, especially the superficial resemblances to that of past societ- beehive structures of the Outer Hebrides, as ies in Scotland. The connection was seen to most reminiscent of older, prehistoric forms. run deeper than this: This focus included excavations, as on St Kilda (Muir 1860). Particularly notable is the work there are in reality two kinds of antiquity, both of Captain (or Commander) F W L Thomas of which claim and challenge our attention. One of these kinds of antiquity consists in the study (1860; 1868). As an example, I will discuss his of the habits and works of our distant predeces- paper ‘On the Primitive Dwellings and Hypo- sors and forefathers, who lived on this earth, gea of the Outer Hebrides’ (1868). and perhaps in this segment of it, many ages Thomas’s study of Hebridean dwellings ago. The other kind of antiquity consists of the explicitly follows Simpson’s suggestion that study of those archaic human habits and works prehistorians should work backwards from which may, in some corners of the world, be the known to the unknown. For Thomas, in found still prevailing among our fellow-men – walking into a Hebridean house ‘we appear to or even among our fellow-countrymen – down reach backward to the Stone period almost at to the present hour, in despite of all the blessings of human advancement, and the progress of once’ (Thomas 1868, 154). To illustrate this human knowledge (Simpson 1862a, 32–3). point, he goes on to describe a number of blackhouses, providing annotated plans and The material culture of some contemporary drawings from photographs. These houses are societies – and other aspects of those societies’ seen as recent examples of ‘a very old style’ culture, as Simpson goes on to explain – is not (ibid, 156) and specific features, such as the just superficially similar to that of some past thickness of the walls, are drawn on as being societies. The two are intimately linked, as the of great archaic importance, as being evident former is the survival of the latter into the in recent and ancient forms of dwelling alike present. It is the past, in the present. (ibid, 157–8). Perhaps most interesting in this This close alignment between prehistoric context, however, is his discussion of shieling archaeology and ethnography was generally structures. Describing the experience of DALGLISH: HIGHLAND RURAL SETTLEMENT | 479 entering one such structure that was inhabited superior to modern savages. Generally, it at the time of his visit, he says: questioned the unilinear evolutionary scheme considered above. The study of Scottish High- The situation was delightful to an archaeologist, land/Island rural settlement still played a role for he found himself almost introduced to the within this different context. Particularly signi- Stone period: the dwelling of moor-stones and ficant is Arthur Mitchell’s The Past in the turf, without one morsel of wood or iron, no Present: What is Civilisation? (1880). Mitchell other tool required than a wooden spade; was prominent in the Scottish archaeological baskets of bent, docks, or straw; straw or hair ropes for an unwilling cow; and a very few years community being, in 1880, Professor of before the present time, both cooking and milk Ancient History to the Royal Scottish Acad- vessels made on the spot from the first clay that emy and Secretary of the Society of Antiquar- could be found (Thomas 1868, 162). ies of Scotland. In The Past in the Present, Mitchell aims to question the linear evolution- The interesting aspect of his discussion of ary approach adopted by many of his contem- shieling structures is the context in which they poraries (Mitchell 1880, v–vi). He argues at are placed. Certain architectural traits, most length that the study of contemporary ‘primit- notably the corbelled stone roofing giving rise ive’ societies rather evidences evolutionary to the term beehive, are seen to be common to degenerationism. In this context, he uses the these structures and other, older ones. Such term ‘neo-archaic objects’ to separate primit- perceived formal similarities between the bee- ive material culture of the present from that of hive shieling and Pict’s houses (ie wheelhouses) the past. However, as the quotations below and hypogea (ie souterrains) are taken to make clear, there was still seen to be a concrete demonstrate the survival of the past into the link between past and present. Mitchell was present. This assumption allows Thomas to not interested in severing that link, but in use information gathered on the use of space discussing how it might best be understood. A in the shieling to aid interpretation on the use second main thread in Mitchell’s argument is of space in the Pict’s house. For instance, it that while contemporary primitive societies allows him to calculate the number of people produce material culture that is at first glance who could have slept in the latter with refer- simple and uncivilized, it is in fact not a ence to the number in the former, related to product of people of low intelligence. Further, floor space. Also significant is the fact that it need not be less effective than modern Thomas notes that while hypogea existed in equivalents in accomplishing those tasks the Lowlands and in continental Europe, in necessary to procure a living. the form of eirdehouses, beehive dwellings did In one sense, then, Mitchell breaks the not (Thomas 1868, 187–9). It is no surprise, investigative link between ethnography and then, that his interpretation of these hypogea archaeology – contemporary primitive societ- is based on examples from the Hebrides. It is ies are not necessarily directly equivalent to there that the principles governing their con- those in the past. Direct comparisons between struction and use are seen to survive and, thus, the two are problematic. In another sense he to be accessible to the archaeologist. re-affirms that link. Enthnological studies can An evolutionary interpretation of the warn against certain assumptions about past archaeological record was not the only societies. Primitive material culture does not accepted theoretical framework at the time necessarily imply inferior intellect, neither (Trigger 1989, 102–3). From the 1830s on, the need it be less effective in its role than modern, doctrine of degenerationism became increas- civilized equivalents. The final point he argues ingly popular. In an extreme form, this held is that rude and high forms of material culture that humanity originally existed in a state far can occur in the same period and in the same 480 | SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 2002 nation. The nation can be civilized while not building and involves much clever planning. It all of its parts seem to be so. This again may have been the palace or reception-hall of provides a warning to the prehistorian, in that an ancient chief (Mitchell 1880, 69). uncivilized material culture may come from a civilized society. So, while direct comparison This example is explicitly linked to then con- between prehistoric and neo-archaic societies temporary beehive houses in the following is problematic, ethnological studies have value terms: in indirect comparison, most notably in refin- ing the archaeologist’s general assumptions The handsome beehive building, which I have about ‘primitive’ societies. just described, is. . .believed to be older than Mitchell draws on several case studies to any of which I have spoken. In other words, as this kind of dwelling passed out of use, it illustrate his points. Most of these concern the appears to have undergone a degradation or customs and material culture of the Scottish debasement. . .If it is unlikely that we shall ever Highlands and Islands in the 19th century. He again have one of these simple beehive houses draws on personal experience and on many of built in Scotland, it is infinitely more unlikely the studies noted above. A whole chapter is that we shall ever have one of the size and devoted to the description of ‘The Black complicated design of that at Meall na Uamh Houses and the Beehive Houses of the Heb- (Mitchell 1880, 70). rides’ (Mitchell 1880, 48–72). The Hebridean blackhouse is discussed with reference to the Whether the rural settlement of the 19th- fact that, although it is of rude construction, century Scottish Highlands was studied in the intelligence and relative capacity of culture terms of a linear evolutionary scheme or with of its builders are not displayed in the primitive reference to degenerationism and other agen- nature of the architecture. The inhabitants of das, this period of study is characterized by the the blackhouse are aware of more sophistic- fact that the material was not studied for itself. ated building techniques, but do not subscribe Throughout, the aim was to place the study of to them (Mitchell 1880, 54–5). This is a puzzle prehistory on a more secure footing. In this to Mitchell, but, for him, the situation is worth light, such settlements were not historically discussing as it demonstrates the problems in situated and, as a result, their study in relation equating primitive architecture with inferior to cartographic or documentary material and intellect. to their proper historical context was ham- Beehive houses of the Outer Hebrides are pered. That this was the dominant approach of interest to Mitchell in illustrating another can be seen by its prevalence in the pages of of his points. His discussion draws on the these Proceedings, where many of the papers perceived architectural link between them and mentioned above were published. Aspects of the wheelhouse (Mitchell 1880, 58–72). The this line of thought are also evident in at least 19th-century beehive dwelling is seen to be a one major historical work of the period (Skene degenerate form of the wheelhouse (to which 1880, ch 10, esp 393–4). However, empirical Mitchell applies the term beehive house also). study of Highland and Island rural settlement He describes the wheelhouse at Meall na was begun. The published accounts of this Uamh, Huishinish, South Uist in these terms: period of study provide us with a record of these settlements in use and in this sense they [it] exhibits the same architectural style and are invaluable. They are also useful as expres- knowledge as the simpler beehive houses which sions of one set of contemporary perceptions have been noticed. But it is vastly more preten- of Highland rural society. tious – altogether a larger conception, and As we shall see below, the ahistorical designed for a larger purpose. It is a handsome nature of these studies formed a major part of DALGLISH: HIGHLAND RURAL SETTLEMENT | 481 their legacy to the 20th century. There is, framework. Gomme’s paper deals with the however, another defining characteristic of the survival of archaic social organization in both 19th-century work that is worth considering as Highland and Lowland Scotland. In his ana- a basic structuring theme of subsequent stud- lysis of the Highlands (Gomme 1890, 157–64), ies. This is its holistic approach. Studies of he considers that the archaic nature of society material culture other than settlement and of there is to be seen in kin-based, communal other, non-material, aspects of society accom- forms of social organization as well as in panied the work discussed above. The majority material culture. He makes explicit the links of these other studies took place within the between settlement, other forms of material theoretical frameworks already outlined. culture, tradition and superstition, and social In the 19th century, folklore and supersti- organization. tion in Scotland were viewed by many as remnants of an older way of life (Gazin- RURAL SETTLEMENT STUDIES AS Schwartz 2001, 269). J Y Simpson, who FOLK-LIFE defined the agenda for studying the past in the As has been suggested, aspects of the ethnolo- present, penned ‘Notes on some Scottish gical approach to rural settlement studies, Magical Charm-Stones, or Curing-Stones’ dominant in the late 19th century, formed the (1862b). In this, magical charms are related to basis of the successive approach, the works of their various functions in a timeless and cross- which can be referred to as folk-life studies. cultural manner. These charms exist in the The essential feature of the late 19th-century present as they did in the past and their approach that informed folk-life studies was function in the present can be taken as a guide its holistic nature. There was also the partial to their function in the past. Arthur Mitchell legacy of a lack of historical contextualization. and others also wrote of Scottish superstitions Both themes can be seen in Iorwerth Peate’s (eg Mitchell 1862; Stewart 1888). These were introduction to the first volume of the journal of interest primarily as relics of antiquity Folk Life (Peate 1963). This journal was (Mitchell 1862, 288). established by the Society for Folk Life Studies There were other studies relating to mov- in the early 1960s and is concerned with the able material culture. In these, many forms of British Isles as a whole. However, papers on material were considered, including querns, the Highlands were published regularly in its pottery (craggans), lamps (crusies), and fishing early years (eg Cregeen 1965; Dunbar 1965; weights (impstones) (eg McGregor 1880; Mac- Storrie 1967; Fenton 1968; 1974) and the Adam 1881; Goudie 1888). agenda of the Society and its journal are Perhaps the two key works here are Mitch- therefore relevant. Peate explained that: ell’s The Past in the Present (discussed above) and G L Gomme’s introductory address to the The Society aims to further the study of tradi- Glasgow Archaeological Society, ‘Archaic tional ways of life in Great Britain and Ireland Types of Society in Scotland’ (1890). Mitch- and to provide a common meeting point for the ell’s book discusses a wide range of material many people and institutions engaged with the and other characteristics of Highland/Island varied aspects of folk-life (Peate 1963, 4; my society in relation to the survival of archaic emphasis). social and material forms into the late 19th century. This is also the agenda of Gomme’s The subject of study is traditional ways of life. paper. It is clear from these two works that it The use of the word traditional implies some is not just settlement studies, but also related lack of historicity, ‘Tradition is the factor material culture and social analyses, that were which maintains the link between those habits carried out within the ‘past in the present’ [of living] in present and past times’ (Peate 482 | SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 2002

1938, 321). The holistic nature of intended Scottish Country Life (1999, rev edn). High- study is captured in the reference to its varied land Folk Ways contains much information on aspects. Peate had outlined the pre-1939 frag- house architecture and settlement morphology mentation of published folk-life studies (ch 3 & 7). This analysis of the fabric of throughout archaeological, anthropological, settlement is complemented by discussion on and other journals as a result of their wide- farmland and the wider landscape (ch 3 & 5). ranging focus and lack of an appropriate, Consideration of material culture does not end consolidated outlet (Peate 1963, 3). there. There is a chapter on the movable Although the basis of Highland folk-life objects within the house (ch 8), as well as studies lay in part in the preceding period, information on the material aspects of craft, there were also changes in theory and practice. economy, transport and much else throughout Despite the focus on traditional ways of life, a the book. This concern with the material is limited degree of historicity was in fact placed within the context of a consideration of restored, but only with regard to the transition other aspects of culture. For instance there are from traditional to modern society. This came chapters on: ‘The People Who Lived on the from, and resulted in, the coupling of a consid- Land’ (6); ‘The People’s Daily Round and eration of this traditional material and cultural Common Tasks’ (9);‘Food, Physic and Cloth- life with the study of relevant historical docu- ing’ (14); ‘Sports and Festivals’ (15); and ments. The folk-life approach grew from early ‘Seasons and Great Occasions’ (16). works like Isabel Grant’s Every-Day Life on Scottish Country Life likewise contains sections on house architecture and landscape an old Highland Farm, 1769–1782 (1924), organization (ch 1 & 11). The rest of this book based on the account book of a Strathspey is more concerned with the practicalities and tacksman. However, historic specificity and economy of farming than is Grant’s, which the consideration of change in many folk-life has a wider cultural scope. Thus, Scottish studies are largely confined to the period of Country Life contains chapters on: ‘Tilling the agricultural Improvement, when the tradi- Soil’ (2); the harvesting and processing of tional way of life began to disappear. Pre- grain (3 & 4 & 5); the various crops cultivated Improvement society is static, whereas (6 & 8); the pastoral economy (7 & 9); food, Improvement brings movement and change. fuel and transport (10 & 12 & 13 respectively); In terms of changing practice, folk-life and the organization of the farming commun- studies are not usually accompanied by a ity(14). programme of fieldwork, whereas excavation The holistic cultural approach originated and analysis of particular structures had been with the diverse studies of the 19th century important within the previous tradition. The and coalesced in the major folk-life studies of reasons for this change are unclear. However, the 20th century. The result of this approach the emphasis on a wide range of cultural topics was that any consideration of Highland rural and reliance on documentary and oral history settlement and landscape placed that material no doubt contributed to the lack of field study. within a rich social and cultural context. Added to this, no doubt, is a general lack of Adifference between the ‘ethnology’ and archaeological training and experience ‘folk-life’ approaches to study, however, was amongst folk-life scholars. in their consideration of historicity. Folk-life Looking at the holistic nature of study studies of the 20th century introduced a con- first, this is clearly evident from the contents sideration of the specific historical context of pages of perhaps the folk-life approach’s two the material and societies in question, where best-known works, Grant’s Highland Folk the earlier, ethnological studies had been for- Ways (1995, rev edn) and Alexander Fenton’s mulated around the concept of the past in the DALGLISH: HIGHLAND RURAL SETTLEMENT | 483 present. The timeless nature of Highland rural is probably the restoration of a degree of society, where the past and present merged historicity to the subject that allowed the seamlessly, was replaced by an historic past. widening of the geographic sphere of study. Change became an issue where continuity had Nineteenth-century writers largely concerned often previously been argued or assumed. themselves with the far north and west of However, as suggested above, this theoretical Scotland as the area in which past material reorientation was largely confined to consid- and social organization had survived most erations of the period of agricultural Improve- notably. The introduction of a more historical ment. basis was accompanied by a consideration of Isabel Grant’s earliest substantive study is other Highland areas (eg Martin 1987; Grant an analysis of a tacksman’s account book 1995) and of Scotland as a whole (Fenton (Grant 1924). This source provides the basis 1999). However, some late-19th-century stud- for a discussion of the changing material, ies had begun to consider archaic survivals social and economic structure of a specific outside of the north and west (eg Gomme region in the late 18th century. This stands in 1890). contrast to the assumed unchanging nature of Having said all this, the difference between Highland society that had informed earlier 19th-century studies and folk-life studies in studies: theoretical terms is not necessarily that great. Nineteenth-century students of rural society The historical value of the Account Book is and its material culture saw the subject of their greatly enhanced by the date at which it was study as the unchanging continuity of aspects written. William Mackintosh of Balnespick [its of the past into the present. However, the fact author] happened to live through the most that they confined the geographical extent of crucial time in the whole history of the High- their studies to the far north-west, where lands, for by 1769 not only had the new system archaic survivals were at their greatest, sug- of agriculture. . .which we speak of as the ‘Agricultural Revolution’, begun to permeate gests they recognized change as having taken the wilder and more backward uplands of place throughout the rest of the country. They Badenoch, but the whole social, political and did not look at other areas, on the whole, mental life of the people was being rapidly because they were of little use in providing changed (Grant 1924, 3). information for analogy with prehistory. They perceived both traditional and modern society The approach was historical and admitted within Scotland, but they were seen as almost the changes that had occurred in Highland mutually exclusive. society in the recent past. This philosophy is With folk-life studies the split between evident elsewhere. For instance, Grant later traditional and modern is maintained. How- gave an account of the stages of development ever, the relationship between the two is now of the interior of Highland houses, especially more chronological than spatial. Modern, concerning the placing of the hearth (Grant Improved society and material culture 1995, 160–3). The use of space within High- replaced its traditional counterpart in time. land houses of the recent past was considered Folk-life conceptions of the traditional and the to have gone through changes. It was not modern do have much in common with those simply a story of the continuity of the prehis- of the 19th century, despite the differences toric past into the present. Fenton (1999, already outlined. In folk-life studies the expli- ch 11) draws more explicit links between cit statement that the present under considera- agricultural Improvement and the changing tion can be related directly to prehistory is not layout of the house, although his analysis is made. However, the lack of consideration of not limited to the Highlands alone. In fact, it change in material culture and society outside 484 | SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 2002 of the period of Improvement, by implication least the national (cf Creed & Ching 1997, suggests that traditional culture and society 24–6 on this process in general ): was unchanging. Grant’s Highland Folk Ways is ‘a picture of this [Highland folk] life, within there is clearly a national consciousness about the period for which we have records and rural lifestyle in Scotland. . .derived more from traditions’ (Grant 1995, xiii). The records in a contaminated and romantic viewpoint of ‘ye olde Scotland’ than from any academic debate question, however, are largely used in consid- (MacKay 1993, 50). erations of political and social phenomena (eg ch 2, ‘The Clans’) that are kept apart from the This may be generally true. However, the use material and social aspects of everyday life. of the word ‘contaminated’ is unwarranted This consideration of the clans traces their and is presumably intended to underline the history back to the 12th century (Grant 1995, reality of recent academic discourse on the 15). Alongside this, a chronological frame- subject. It is to this recent academic discourse work for each of the various chapters on that we now turn. aspects of everyday life is absent. We are simply presented with statements such as, ‘The RURAL SETTLEMENT STUDIES AS actual cultivation of the land was done by HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY groups’ (Grant 1995, 44). I suggest that this encourages the reader to graft the temporal In 1960 Horace Fairhurst made some import- framework of a (much-simplified) political ant observations regarding the antiquity of the and social history onto a consideration of main characteristics of 18th-century rural set- everyday practice and its associated material tlement and landscape (Fairhurst 1960). He culture. Material and social life in the High- gave a general descriptive account of the lands becomes static over the period from at clachan (his term for nucleated deserted settle- least the 12th to the 18th centuries. It is worth ment of the 18th and 19th centuries) and its noting here the assertion by Peate that rural Lowland equivalent, the fermtoun. He noted populations are characterized by immobility some basic aspects of settlement morphology and primitiveness, and that modern conditions and house construction of regional or chrono- have affected rapid transformations of the logical importance. Of more significance, how- countryside (Peate 1938, 321). ever, is his observation of a lacuna in Scottish The description of pre-Improvement High- settlement history between the Iron Age and land society and material culture as traditional the 18th century. Fairhurst recognized that can be seen as part of the process of character- this lacuna had previously been disguised: izing it as unchanging, in opposition to the In the absence of documentary proof. . .it must fluid modern world. This idea of the traditional be admitted that we are largely projecting into in Highland and especially Gaelic society car- a more distant past the conditions prevailing in ries with it notions of an authentic, whole, and the early 18th century (Fairhurst 1960, 73). socially cohesive society (MacDonald 1997, 3–6) that perhaps form the basis of the attract- Pre-Improvement settlement form had been iveness and popularity of folk-life accounts. viewed as static in time and the projection of This popularity is despite academic condemna- 18th-century material culture characteristics tions of key folk-life works (eg Evans 1961). into earlier periods as unproblematic. Fair- The success of these studies should perhaps be hurst problematized the history of rural settle- understood within a wider context of the ment prior to the 18th century. appropriation of stereotyped aspects of the The four decades subsequent to Fairhurst’s Scottish (and especially Highland) rural past 1960 paper have seen a number of general in the creation of modern identities, not studies on the problem, that is our lack of DALGLISH: HIGHLAND RURAL SETTLEMENT | 485 knowledge, of rural settlement prior to the Having said all this, the identification of 18th century (eg Fairhurst 1967; 1971; Laing medieval settlement and landscapes remains 1969; Dunbar 1971; Morrison 1977; Yeoman problematic. Perhaps one reason for this is the 1991; 1995, ch 8). The period in question has fact that most of these projects have been become known, in terms of settlement studies, characterized by a vague methodology. They as the Invisible Centuries (Yeoman 1991) or ‘a concentrate on locating the missing settlement prolonged dark age’ (Fairhurst 1967, 158). through excavation of a visible deserted site, Further, the acronym MoLRS (Medieval or perhaps of relatively recent date, usually fairly Later Rural Settlement) has become enshrined randomly selected, in the hope that earlier in the literature as a general term for post-Iron material may be recovered. Promisingly, dis- Age rural settlement, underlining the accept- cussion has recently begun to focus on the ance of the problem (eg Hingley 1993a; it development of more rigorous methodologies could also be argued that the term MoLRS for locating medieval settlement (eg Banks has become something of a euphemism and 1996; Banks & Atkinson 2000). that, while it recognizes our lack of knowledge The detailed results of all of these wide- of medieval settlement, it conveniently merges ranging projects and studies is not of real the medieval with the later and allows us to concern here. Rather, they are of interest in side-step the issue: Olivia Lelong, pers comm). showing the increasing concern with the chan- It has become accepted that archaeological ging nature of Highland, and Lowland, rural excavation and survey are important tech- settlement. In both ethnological and folk-life niques for dealing with the problem of our studies this historicity had been absent in lack of knowledge of pre-18th-century settle- different ways. The idea that settlement and ment and landscape (eg Fairhurst 1960; 1968; landscapes of the 18th and 19th centuries can 1969; Fairhurst & Petrie 1964; Dixon 1993). be taken as representative of the end point in a Despite Fairhurst’s (1968, 135) statement that continuum is now seriously challenged. recently deserted settlements were not Recognition of this new past has had ‘antiquities’ in the normal sense, he clearly still ramifications for the ways in which we considered them a subject for archaeological approach the subject of rural settlement. Some research. Survey and excavation in the Highlands of these – the need to establish the nature of and Islands have not only given us an under- medieval settlement and to construct meth- standing of individual sites, but are now begin- odologies in order to do so – we have just seen. ning to elucidate some general characteristics There are also ramifications for the ways in of settlement in the period between the Iron which we view the relevant archaeological Age and the 18th century (eg Crawford 1983; resource. Management and preservation issues RCAHMS 1990, 12–13, passim; Barrett & in relation to sites and landscapes are increas- Downes 1993; 1994; 1996; Caldwell & Ewart ingly under discussion as their significance in 1993; Armit 1997; Branigan 1997; James 1998; writing the history of the period is realized (eg Sharples & Parker Pearson 1999; Caldwell, Bangor-Jones 1993; Hingley 1993a; 1993b; McWee & Ruckley 2000). The work of some 2000; Mackay 1993; Swanson 1993; Turner historical geographers and historians has also 2000). Such cultural resource management begun to explore aspects of the character of issues are clearly significant and deserve con- pre-18th-century settlement with some success, tinuing discussion. However, I will say no largely through documentary and carto- more on the subject as here I want to concen- graphic sources (eg Dodgshon 1977; 1993; trate on describing recent MoLRS fieldwork Smout 1996; see Bangor-Jones 1993, 36–7 for and on relating the growth of such fieldwork a brief overview). to the theoretical concern of historicity. 486 | SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 2002

In 1993, Donnie MacKay noted that there more recent settlement (Lelong & MacGregor had been few rural settlement excavations in 2001). Scotland and that most fieldwork had been Site-specific research projects are also in survey orientated (MacKay 1993, 43). At the progress. For example, there is the excavation time, this was generally true. Apart from of an immediately pre-Improvement settle- Fairhurst’s well-known work at Lix and Rosal ment at Easter Raitts, near Kingussie, Strath- and that of the Stewarts at Lianach there had spey (Lelong & Wood 2000). Work there in been little significant excavation (Fairhurst recent years has targeted a number of different 1968; 1969; Stewart & Stewart 1988). This dwellings, outhouses and other features. situation is beginning to change, however. Excavation of rural settlement sites is now Excavation of rural settlement sites of the 18th also a concern in the context of developer- and 19th centuries and exploration for and funded rescue archaeology, where fieldwork is excavation of pre-18th-century settlement executed by commercial archaeology units (eg have become accepted archaeological pursuits. McCullagh & Tipping 1998; MacGregor, These concerns are now often included in Lelong & Johnston-Smith 1999). the designs of wider-ranging landscape pro- However, this said, the majority of jects. Indeed, it has been argued that the MoLRS fieldwork continues to be survey- landscape context is essential for a proper orientated. All of the above projects involve or understanding of MoLRS sites (Atkinson have involved some form of survey, whether 1995). Landscape specific projects include for geophysical, standing building, topographic, example, the Dunbeath project, looking at the landscape, settlement or other, alongside the archaeology and history of a single estate in excavation work. There has also been an Caithness through time (Morrison 1996). increasing number of specifically survey-ori- Work around Loch Olabhat in North Uist (eg entated projects. Armit 1997) has provided some valuable Highland rural settlement made its first insights. SEARCH (Sheffield Environmental appearance in the Inventories of the Royal & Archaeological Research Campaign in the Commission with the Argyll volumes Hebrides) has conducted excavations on sites (RCAHMS 1971; 1975; 1980; 1982; 1984; in the Western Isles dating from the Neolithic through to the 19th century (Branigan & 1992). In these, descriptive text, sometimes Foster 1995; Gilbertson, Kent & Gratton 1996; with accompanying plan surveys or photo- Branigan 1997; Sharples & Parker Pearson graphs, is provided for one or two well- 1999; Symonds 2000). The Ben Lawers His- preserved examples. The volume for north- toric Landscape Project likewise has a wide east Perth focused on understanding archae- chronological remit within a specific land- ological landscapes in that area (RCAHMS scape, the north side of Loch Tay (Atkinson 1990). Surveys of multi-period landscapes 2000). Geographically adjacent to Loch Tay, included potential historic period settlements the Rannoch Archaeological Project has a and field systems. Amongst these were the new similar remit (MacGregor 2000). The Loch Pitcarmick-type buildings, examples of which Borralie area in northern Sutherland is a have since been excavated, producing landscape rich in archaeological remains of radiocarbon dates in the mid to late first varying character from a wide variety of millennium  (RCAHMS 1990, 12–13, periods from the Neolithic. It too forms the passim; Barrett & Downes 1993; 1994; 1996). focus of a recently conceived landscape project The landscape-oriented approach adopted, in that aims to record and contextualize the the north-east Perth volume, and discussed in archaeology of past human interaction in a brief above, shows a wider interest in land- specific landscape that includes medieval and scape studies in archaeology in general. Its DALGLISH: HIGHLAND RURAL SETTLEMENT | 487 potential for addressing the problems of pre- archaeologists. Rural settlement was not 18th-century settlement is significant if the archaeology. The legacy of the 19th century to case of the Pitcarmick-type building is any- folk-life studies included a tendency to extra- thing to go by. The Afforestable Land Survey polate 18th-century material conditions back of RCAHMS has also provided several useful into the past. The lack of field survey within recent surveys including areas of rural settle- folk-life studies can be understood as partly a ment (see Dixon 1993). result of this. Surveys of MoLRS sites have also been The problematization of pre-18th-century conducted by a wide variety of other archae- settlement by scholars such as Horace Fair- ological groups, both professional and ama- hurst from the 1950s played a key role in teur (eg Gailey 1962; Shepherd & Ralston bringing rural settlement into the archaeolo- 1981; MacDonald & Scott Wood 1995; 1996; gical mainstream. The separation of the his- 1998; 1999; Johnstone & Scott Wood 1996; tory of past settlement from tradition (folk- MacDonald 1999). Most of these surveys have life) and the appreciation that documents concentrated on single settlement sites. relevant to the study of that history were few Therefore, considering excavation and sur- made this an archaeological problem. The vey together, there seems to have been some- subject has no doubt also benefited from the thing of an explosion in rural-settlement- general extension of archaeological concern to related fieldwork in recent years. This may be include recent material culture, such as yester- due to a number of factors. As already out- day’s refuse and beer can design (Shanks & lined, the intellectual shift involving the prob- Tilley 1987; Rathje & Murphy 1992). lematization of pre-Improvement settlement Other reasons for the increase in fieldwork history has provided a specific aim for much concerning rural settlement might be sug- recent excavation and survey (eg Fairhurst gested. Upstanding structures are common on 1960; Fairhurst & Petrie 1964). More prosaic such sites and are perhaps assumed to be easy influences have also been significant, and I to understand as houses, barns, tool sheds, have already mentioned the excavation of and many other seemingly unproblematic rural settlement sites in a developer-funded spaces. This perhaps partly explains the popu- context. The impetus of development to rural settlement fieldwork seems straightforward, larity of deserted townships in the training of but it is important to realize that the inclusion students in survey technique. of rural settlement sites, especially those of the Most of all, the upsurge in fieldwork con- last few hundred years, within the remit of cerning rural settlement and landscape in developer-funded archaeology itself requires recent decades can be seen to represent increas- the recognition of such sites as archaeology. ing interest in a historically situated archaeolo- The fact that RCAHMS only began to include gical account of the rural past of the such sites and landscapes in its inventories Highlands. As we have seen, this past has fairly recently (1971 for the Highlands) under- become an important concern in several lines the fact that their acceptance as archae- spheres other than archaeological fieldwork, ology is a recent phenomenon. In the tradition whether driven by development or research. It of the 19th century such material found its has produced debate over the management of archaeological role in providing analogy for the relevant archaeological resource (eg papers prehistoric studies. The study of rural settle- in Hingley 1993a) and stimulated increasing ment within folk-life studies likewise separated academic interest (perhaps seen most notably the topic from traditional archaeological con- in recent conferences and within collections of cerns. Rural settlement was for folk-life papers on the subject: eg Morrison 1980; scholars and too recent and familiar for Atkinson, Banks & MacGregor 2000). 488 | SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 2002

However, despite the restoration of forms Wood 1999), as are many excavation reports of historicity with folk-life and recent archae- (eg Fairhurst 1968; 1969; MacGregor, Lelong ological work on rural settlement, I would & Johnston-Smith 1999, 17–44). suggest that the material culture in question is Admittedly, the character of these works is yet to be used to anything near its full potential often the result of a strict remit not of the in writing the medieval and later history of the excavator’s or surveyor’s design. For instance, Highlands. Certain essential factors, to be the excavations and survey at Tigh Vectican, discussed immediately below, within recent Arrochar, were undertaken by a commercial approaches to the subject have limited the archaeological field unit (GUARD) on behalf potential contribution of archaeologists to of Argyll and Bute Council (the developer) discussion of recent Highland society. This under terms of reference supplied by West of potential contribution is at least as significant Scotland Archaeology Service (MacGregor, as that of the documentary historian, who has Lelong & Johnston-Smith 1999, 5). The main traditionally defined the research agenda for aim was to establish and define the nature of and history of the period in question. the archaeological resource on the site in order to produce recommendations for mitigation during any subsequent development (ibid, 6). ARCHAEOLOGY, DOCUMENTS, AND In such circumstances, it is easy to understand THE WRITING OF SOCIAL HISTORY why the report is largely confined to empirical Despite the restoration of historicity to the statements. It is equally easy to understand subject and the recent upsurge of interest in why such an approach has been followed in a rural settlement, there has been almost no context where the prime objective is to teach attempt to construct the recent social history students survey technique (see MacDonald & of the Highlands from an archaeological per- Scott Wood 1995; 1996; 1998; 1999; Johnstone spective. The archaeology of rural settlement & Scott Wood 1996; MacDonald 1999). is largely an empirical exercise. This can be However, most empirical accounts do con- understood through a consideration of the tain some historical component. This often relationship of history and archaeology in takes the form of a brief chronological narrat- rural settlement studies and I will concentrate ive detailing the main documentary and carto- here on those studies relating to the 18th and graphic sources available that relate to the site 19th centuries. (eg RCAHMS 1990, 95, passim; Johnstone & Even the most recent of RCAHMS invent- Scott Wood 1996, 27; MacGregor, Lelong & ories simply gives a physical description as the Johnston-Smith 1999, 8–17). This account is entry for an individual site, although there is nearly always physically separated within the some synthesis of this material in the introduc- written report from that of the archaeology tions to the volumes (eg RCAHMS 1990, itself. The role of historical narratives within 11–13, 95–171). A typical entry will categorize such reports is largely to refine our empirical the structure or site, as a township or shieling understanding of the material culture. Docu- for example. It will note the relationship of the ments can be used to date changes in the archaeology to the local topography and the character of settlement or landscape, to flesh spatial inter-relationships of the archaeolo- out the archaeological bones by suggesting the gical elements of the site. It will give the potential functions of the various structures dimensions of the various structures, a descrip- on a site or by giving information on past tion of construction techniques and fabric, and material culture (organic materials, for much more. Surveys carried out by organiza- example) now largely invisible archaeologic- tions other than RCAHMS are usually equally ally; or to suggest the existence of other empirically orientated (eg MacDonald & Scott missing aspects of a site such as its medieval DALGLISH: HIGHLAND RURAL SETTLEMENT | 489 antecedents (eg Gailey 1962; Fairhurst 1968; The result of this type of approach is that 1969). Here, archaeological and documentary the role of archaeology in producing the history research are pursued together, but still largely of the Highlands, in terms of rural society in apart, to further our empirical understanding. the more recent centuries, has been an Most reference to the social aspects of a site or extremely limited one. Archaeological landscape is with this agenda in mind. The research largely becomes an exercise in the evidence given in the trial of Patrick Sellar, the illustration of narratives defined by document- notorious Sutherland factor, is used in the ary historians, such as the traditional account Rosal excavation report to suggest where the of Improvement. One main role of archae- wood for the couples in the houses came from ology in this situation is to fill in the gaps (Fairhurst 1968, 146). where documentary evidence is lacking (a role It would be unfair to maintain that there most easily seen in the case of medieval rural has been absolutely no critical use of the settlement studies – although because the archaeology of this period in discussing key medieval period does constitute an obvious social issues, such as Clearance (eg Fairhurst and large gap in knowledge, it is one area with 1968, 142–3). However, such discussion is huge potential for an active social archae- literally confined to half a dozen or so pages ology). Another is to confirm document-based out of the hundreds of the combined reports. hypotheses. Such roles are clear from the Further, where any account is given of the manner in which material culture is used social history of a site or area it has largely within largely documentary-based research (eg Bil 1990; Stewart 1990). Archaeology here been a case of lifting the traditional document- primarily maps and illustrates. As such, ary historical narrative (of Improvement or archaeological rural settlement studies tend to Clearance, for example) and pasting it onto maintain a traditional historical account. In the empirical archaeological account. the case of Improvement, this often means To take one example, Fairhurst’s account uncritically accepting the views of the of the clearance of the township of Rosal is Improvers themselves (MacKay 1993, 46). almost entirely concerned with defining the This account of Improvement has come under extent of the brutality of Patrick Sellar during scrutiny from documentary historians in this episode (1968, 142–3). The archaeology recent years who have increasingly focused on only enters the picture as a possible means of the question of overt resistance to Improve- assessing whether or not Sellar had the houses ment and Clearance (see Harvey 1990 for an burnt, as some sources suggest, or whether, by overview). contrast, the tenants moved out ‘in an orderly Empirical archaeological research and the fashion’ (Fairhurst 1968, 143). It can be combination of documentary and material questioned whether archaeology is the appro- culture resources in the manner described have priate means of addressing this question. More been useful. Such studies have laid the founda- important here is the complete lack of an tion of a basic understanding of settlement attempt to use the archaeology to write the and landscape in physical and chronological inhabitants of Rosal into the story. For Fair- terms that is essential to any social archae- hurst, consideration of Clearance involves ology. Potentially important historical con- recapitulating a well-known historical debate. texts for aspects of material culture have been Sellar’s actions regarding Rosal are clearly defined (eg the link between geometric settle- relevant – this is, after all, a deserted settlement ment morphology and Improvement: Gailey – but the story of Rosal in this period should 1960, 104; 1962a, 162–3). However, such work be so much more than a narrative of his has remained very superficial in terms of actions. writing social history (MacKay 1988, 111). 490 | SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 2002

A small minority within the subject has material culture as a resource in the construc- recently addressed the significant problem of tion and reconstruction of society is ignored. the passive nature of archaeology in the con- Material things are seen to change as a con- struction of recent Highland history. The two sequence of change in ideology and culture. discussions relevant here are both concerned There is no scope for seeing change in material with assessing the cognitive aspects of past culture as intended to create social change, for landscapes (see Knapp & Ashmore 1999 for a seeing the material environment as active in range of similar studies). Donnie MacKay the creation and maintenance of social rela- (1988, 111–12) outlined this approach as a tionships. concern in rural settlement studies. He writes: This first criticism relates directly to a second. The construction of cognitive land- Clearance settlement archaeology, for want of scapes in the approach outlined by MacKay is a better title, is about people, and the effect that the construction of normative and largely the various social processes at work in the 17th, static perceptions of landscape. We are met 18th and 19th centuries have had. Archaeology with statements of how the association of should not merely be restricted to fairies and dwarfs with landscape features and classification. . .we should elaborate on our times of the day impinged on travel, for evidence to consider the implications of social example (MacKay 1988, 112). The assump- and ideological factors in creating our historical tion is that everyone held the same ideas about landscapes. . .Field survey. . .with the help of documentary and folklore sources and an their physical surroundings and this caused awareness of the social processes at work everyone to act in the same way. There is no throughout the period, give us the opportunity discussion of how such concepts might be to relate archaeology to the ideological and mobilized, questioned, or refuted in different cultural factors which were transforming the social contexts or by different people. Every- lifestyle of much of the Scottish Highlands one is duped into believing the norm. For (MacKay 1988, 111). MacKay, ideology is apparently directly trans- latable as belief. There is no social component, The importance of the approach outlined by in the sense of the dynamics of interpersonal MacKay is its emphasis on considering how relationships. people perceived their material surroundings. Olivia Lelong has recently put forward a He goes on to outline how we might see this more concrete study of such cognitive land- perception as mediated through folklore and scapes (2000). In this, she discusses the Suther- religious belief, for example (Gazin-Schwartz land Clearances and the attendant relocation 2001 is a recent statement of this perspective of tenants of the Sutherland estates from the and extends discussion to movable material inland straths to the coastal strip. With this culture). physical dislocation came a cognitive disloca- However, this approach does have its prob- tion. Tenants, their families and others were lems. Material culture is separated from trans- uprooted from a landscape they knew intim- formative ideological and social processes. ately and which played a role in structuring There is a danger here of, again, uncritically their understanding of the world. This was a lifting narratives constructed in the discipline landscape of fields and agriculture, of moun- of documentary history and applying them to tains and rivers, that bore the physical marks the archaeology. Again, history and archae- of past human activity and within which their ology are separate. daily practices were embedded. Physical relo- In understanding the archaeological data cation to the coast confronted these people by pasting separately constructed historical with a landscape that was dominated by a new narratives on top of them, the potential of element, the sea. This was fluid, bearing no DALGLISH: HIGHLAND RURAL SETTLEMENT | 491 physical trace of past activity that they could were serviced by an individual fireplace set in understand. It was strange. People did not the wall. have the necessary experience of interacting The daily experiences of these groups, with this new landscape that was required in living as they did within quite distinct spaces, order to extract a decent living from it. Some emphasized the family or the individual to learnt to adapt while others protested at this different degrees. Routine domestic activities enforced physical and cognitive relocation in the home of the labourer or smallholder through emigration. occurred in the near-constant presence of Lelong’s paper is different from MacKay’s others. In the house of the substantial tenant, in that she considers how people interacted people were separated from one another with their material environment and how this through the spatial organization of their rou- structured their perception of their world. She tine lives. This variation in domestic space can is less concerned with symbolism and more be related to more abstract historical issues, interested in daily practice and routine. Her such as differing and competing concepts of account is to some degree still normative, landholding. On the one hand, daily experi- ff however, in that di erent perspectives made ence of the world as part of a family was and is possible within these daily routines are not connected to hereditary concepts of landhold- ff considered. An assessment of di ering daily ing. Daily experience emphasizing the auto- routines within a given settlement or group of nomous individual is related to individualistic settlements within the landscape is of course concepts of landholding as embedded in the difficult due to the limited excavation and lease system and in modern commercial farm- survey data available. It is vital, therefore, that ing. those recording rural settlements and land- The reasons that different people lived scapes in the Highlands take on board the different domestic lives can thus be understood potential contribution of their work to the with reference to what Improvement meant social history of the region and rethink their for them in terms of tenurial security. The fieldwork strategies. well-off tenant farmer had good reason to I have explored the significance of such an adhere to the individualistic mode of life that archaeology of the routine for our understand- ing of Highland society in detail elsewhere underlay his position as a favoured lease- (Dalglish 2001; forthcoming). Case studies holder. The now-dispossessed labourer had from the southern Highland mainland show equally good reason to counter their disposses- that variation within the archaeology of sion with a hereditary claim to the land and an Improvement relates to the complex and con- emphasis on familial interaction and solidity. tingent ways in which people related to each Such histories, focusing on the divergent other through time. For example, with social relations of various groups and indi- Improvement, the organization of space within viduals, are naturally complex and can be done the house came to vary widely for different no justice in the space available here. The groups. Generally speaking, smallholders and labourer and substantial tenant of the south- labourers lived within single-space houses, ern Highlands are in many ways extremes focused on a central hearth. The house of the within a much more complex network of social middling tenant showed more subdivision of interaction. The point I want to emphasize is space and might contain one or more fireplaces that in practising rural settlement archaeology, set in its walls. However, much activity in such with its significant potential for our under- houses still took place within one space, the standing of past everyday social interaction, ‘kitchen’. The houses of the substantial ten- we are well positioned to move beyond norm- antry were highly subdivided and most rooms ative understandings of the past. 492 | SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 2002

Even with cases of Clearance, where large traditional and modern society and the charac- numbers of previously differentiated people terization of the former as conservative, homo- were similarly and more uniformly affected by geneous and unchanging. For some, these Improvement, we should be open to the diverse theoretical orientations allowed the assump- historical experiences of different people and tion that, in the case of traditional societies, different groups of people. Pre-clearance set- the past and the present merge into one and tlement on Waternish, Skye, as recently sur- are directly translatable into each other. veyed, shows complex patterning, with It is now recognized that there are funda- isolated farmsteads around the fringes of mental gaps in our knowledge of historic townships otherwise populated by clusters of society and its material world in the Highlands buildings which themselves vary in size and Islands. With the introduction of the (RCAHMS 1993, 9). How did the inhabitants modern archaeological approach, archaeology of these different parts of the township interact as a discipline has given itself a significant role in daily life and why were some of them in future research. Currently, this is especially separated in space? How does the patterning clear in the case of medieval rural settlement, of this pre-clearance routine environment where archaeological fieldwork is perhaps the relate to later interaction within and between best line of approach to the problem (although crofting townships? Were previous relation- historical geography has also proven the use- ships recreated or denied, and why? While fulness of a re-assessment of known carto- such pre- and post-clearance societies should graphic and, to some extent, documentary not be characterized as divisive, they should sources). equally not be characterized as culturally The role of archaeology in relation to the homogeneous and devoid of internal politics. historic period should not, however, be con- fined to filling in gaps left by documentary historians. Some recent studies, like Lelong’s, CONCLUSION have begun to develop new approaches that allow archaeologists to say something new Through this paper, I have traced two themes, about well-documented periods and processes, the development of historicity and of the such as Clearance. In these studies, archaeolo- modern archaeological approach in Highland gists have a basic role in building our under- rural settlement studies. These two themes standing of Highland society, as we can underlie any current study of Highland rural construct possible environments in which settlement. people would have learnt and renegotiated The rise of historicity has given the discip- their understanding of and role in the social line of archaeology a key role in writing the and physical world. With such different under- history of the Highlands and Islands in the standings of the world in mind, archaeologists historic period. It is now clear that material can begin to assess how people in the past may culture, settlement and landscape were not have perceived and approached historical epis- static prior to the period of agricultural odes like Clearance. Improvement as had previously been assumed. In general, I agree that this concern with Some evidence of their changing nature has practical understandings of the world, learnt been documented in recent years. I have in everyday, routine life, is a strength in argued above that this assumption of stasis archaeology and gives the discipline a signific- has discernible roots in the theoretical assump- ant role in relation to historical periods. How- tions of the Rural Settlement Studies as Ethno- ever, a re-assessment of the theoretical logy and Folk-life approaches. Most notable assumptions of this ‘archaeology of the rou- here is the distinction drawn between tine’ in a Scottish context is needed. The DALGLISH: HIGHLAND RURAL SETTLEMENT | 493 construction of homogeneous, normative rou- came into being and were maintained (in tine environments, from which all people relation to historical archaeology, these issues approach society at large with the same under- have been more regularly and coherently standing of the world, does not allow for social explored outside of Scotland and outside of difference, misunderstanding and conflict (tra- Britain (see, for example, papers in Leone & ditionally, such difference and conflict has only Potter 1999) ). A critique of modern assump- been discussed in the case of tenant–landlord tions is perhaps most relevant to the archae- relationships: for a discussion of this tendency ology and history of the past few centuries. see, eg Carter 1981; MacDonald 1997, 69–75; Thus, an archaeological analysis of Highland, Macinnes 1998, 180–4). In many historical and wider Scottish, rural settlement is well narratives, a Highland people is described placed to inform us on key social issues in the which is a homogeneous entity (MacDonald Scotland we inhabit now, providing that ana- 1997, 69–75; cf Dalglish forthcoming, ch 7 in lysis aims to actively and critically explore relation to narratives of Improvement in the social interaction in the past. Highlands). Some recent history is challenging this assumption and the received fact that the ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS said Highland people was conservative, tradi- My thanks to Olivia Lelong and Katinka tional and passive with regard to social change Stentoft for their comments on an earlier draft (eg Devine 1999; MacKillop 1999). of this paper. In adopting an active role in the construc- tion of the recent history of Highland and Island society, archaeologists should take REFERENCES account of the increasingly evident complexity Armit, I 1997 ‘Excavation of a Post-Medieval and diversity of that society. As suggested Settlement at Druim nan Dearcag, and related above, some recent historical research has sites around Loch Olabhat, North Uist’, Proc done just that. The archaeological concern Soc Antiq Scot, 127, 899–919. with the material and routine world allows a Atkinson, J A 1995 Medieval or Later Rural Settle- further, and in some ways unique, opportunity ment (MOLRS) Study: Recommendations for the consideration of social diversity and Towards a Policy Statement. Unpubl report for the ways in which people constructed, accepted Historic Scotland. Atkinson, J A 2000 ‘Rural Settlement on North or sought to change their social world. The Lochtayside: Understanding the Landscapes study of routine social practice can take into of Change’, in Atkinson, J A, Banks, I & ff account di erent and competing practical MacGregor, G (eds) 150–60. understandings of the world (cf Barrett 1994 Atkinson, J A, Banks, I & MacGregor, G (eds) for a substantive example of the archaeology 2000 Townships to Farmsteads: Rural Settle- of routine and Bloch 1989 for an anthropolo- ment in Scotland, England and Wales. Oxford. gical perspective). It can consider the struc- Bangor-Jones, M 1993 ‘The incorporation of docu- tured possibilities for social action, and ask mentary evidence and other historical sources why certain actions were taken in relation to into preservational and management strat- contingent historical circumstance. The study egies’, in Hingley, R 1993a, 36–42. of different past understandings and of the Banks, I B J 1996 Rural Society and Settlement: Isolated Monuments and Farming Communities negotiation of social relations between differ- in Northern and Western Scotland in the Late ent groups is important as pursuing these Atlantic Iron Age. PhD thesis, Univ Glasgow. issues allows us to understand how some Banks, I & Atkinson, J A 2000 ‘Bragar Townships relationships have come to be taken for Project: developing a methodology for locating granted, to understand how those modern hidden settlement patterns’, in Atkinson, J A, assumptions upon which inequality is based Banks, I & MacGregor, G (eds) 69–77. 494 | SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 2002

Barrett, J C 1994 Fragments from Antiquity. Oxford. Scottish Highlands form the Sixteenth to Nine- Barrett, J C & Downes, J M 1993 ‘North Pitcarmick teenth Centuries . New York. (Kirkmichael Parish)’, Discovery Excav Scot Devine, T M 1999 ‘A conservative people? Scottish 1993, 102–3. Gaeldom in the Age of Improvement’, in Barrett, J C & Downes, J M 1994 ‘North Pitcarmick Devine, T M & Young, J R (eds) Eighteenth (Kirkmichael Parish)’, Discovery Excav Scot Century Scotland: New Perspectives, 225–36. 1994,87–8. East Linton. Barrett, J C & Downes, J M 1996 North Pitcarmick: Dixon, P 1993 ‘A Review of the Archaeology of A Radiocarbon Dated Chronology. Unpubl Rural Medieval and Post-Medieval Settlement report, Univ Sheffield. in Highland Scotland’, in Hingley, R (ed), Beresford, M & Hurst, J G (eds) 1971 Deserted 24–35. Medieval Villages. Woking. Dodgshon, R A 1977 ‘Changes in Scottish township Bil, A 1990 The Shieling, 1600–1840: the Case of the organization during the medieval and early Central Scottish Highlands. Edinburgh. modern periods’, Geografiska Annaler, 59, Bloch, M 1989 Ritual, History and Power: Selected 51–65. Papers in Anthropology. London. Dodgshon, R A 1993 ‘West Highland and Hebri- Branigan, K 1997 ‘Mankind on the Margin: the dean settlement prior to crofting and the SEARCH Project’, Current Archaeol 13(8), Clearances: a study in stability or change?’, 284–307. Proc Soc Antiq Scot, 123, 419–38. Branigan,K&Foster, P 1995 Barra: Archaeological Dunbar, J G 1965 ‘Auchindrain: a mid-Argyll ffi Research on Ben Tangaval. She eld. township’, Folk Life,3,61–7. Caldwell, D H & Ewart, G 1993 ‘Finlaggan and the Dunbar, J G 1971 ‘The Study of Deserted Medieval Lordship of the Isles: an archaeological Settlements in Scotland. II The Peasant approach’, Scott Hist Rev, 72, 146–66. House’, in Beresford, M & Hurst, J G (eds), Caldwell, D H, McWee, R & Ruckley, N A 2000 236–46. ‘Post-Medieval settlement on Islay – some Evans, E E 1961 ‘Review of Highland Folk Ways’, recent research’, in Atkinson, J A, Banks, I & Antiquity, 35, 247–8. MacGregor, G (eds), 58–68. Fairhurst, H 1960 ‘Scottish clachans’, Scott Geog Carter, I 1981 ‘The Changing Image of the Scottish Mag, 76, 67–76. Peasantry, 1745–1980’, in Samuel, R (ed) People’s History and Socialist Theory,9–15. Fairhurst, H 1967 ‘The archaeology of rural settle- London. ment in Scotland’, Trans Glasgow Archaeol Crawford, I A, 1983 ‘The present state of settlement Soc, 15, 139–58. history in the West Highlands and Islands’, in Fairhurst, H 1968 ‘Rosal: a deserted township in O’Connor, A & Clarke, D V (eds) From the Strath Naver, Sutherland’, Proc Soc Antiq Stone Age to the ’Forty-Five, 350–67. Edin- Scot, 100 (1967–8), 135–69. burgh. Fairhurst, H 1969 ‘The Deserted Settlement at Lix, Creed, G W & Ching, B 1997 ‘Recognizing rusticity: West Perthshire’, Proc Soc Antiq Scot, 101 identity and the power of place’, in Ching, B & (1968–9), 160–99. Creed, G W (eds) Knowing Your Place: Rural Fairhurst, H 1971 ‘The study of deserted medieval Identity and Cultural Hierarchy,1–38. London. settlements in Scotland. I, rural settlement’, in Cregeen, E 1965 ‘Flailing in Argyll’, Folk Life,3, Beresford, M & Hurst, J G (eds), 229–35. 90. Fairhurst, H & Petrie, G 1964 ‘Scottish clachans II. Curwen, E C 1938 ‘The Hebrides: a cultural back- Lix and Rosal’, Scott Geog Mag, 80, 150–63. water’, Antiquity, 12, 261–89. Fenton, A 1968 ‘Alternating stone and turf – an Dalglish, C 2001 ‘Rural settlement in the Age of obsolete building practice’, Folk Life,6, Reason. Archaeologies of capitalism and the 94–103. recent history of Highland Scotland’, Archaeol Fenton, A 1974 ‘Sowens in Scotland’, Folk Life, 12, Dialogues, 8.1, 2–23. 41–7. Dalglish, C forthcoming Rural Settlement in the Fenton, A 1999 Scottish Country Life, rev edn Age of Reason: an Archaeology of the Southern (originally published 1976). East Linton. DALGLISH: HIGHLAND RURAL SETTLEMENT | 495

Gailey, R A 1960 ‘Settlement and Population in Lelong, O & Wood, J 2000 ‘A township through Kintyre, 1750–1800’, Scott Geog Mag, 76, time: excavation and survey at the deserted 99–107. settlement of Easter Raitts, Badenoch, Gailey, R A 1962 ‘The evolution of Highland rural 1995–1999’, in Atkinson, J A, Banks, I & settlement’, Scott Stud,6,155–77. MacGregor, G (eds), 40–9. Gazin-Schwartz, A 2001 ‘Archaeology and folklore Leone, M P & Potter, P B 1999 Historical Archae- of material culture, ritual, and everyday life’, ologies of Capitalism. New York. Internat J Historical Archaeol, 5(4), 263–80 Levi, P (ed) 1990 Journals of the Western Isles. Gilbertson D, Kent, M & Gratton, J (eds) 1996 The London. Outer Hebrides: The Last 14,000 Years. MacAdam, I 1881 ‘On the use of the spindle and Sheffield. whorl by the fishermen of the present day’, Gomme, G L 1890 ‘Archaic types of society in Proc Soc Antiq Scot, 15 (1880–1), 148–51. Scotland’, Transactions of the Glasgow MacDonald, A (ed) 1999 An Archaeological Survey Archaeol Soc, (NS)1, 144–64. of Loch Restil and Glen Croe. Glasgow. Goudie, G 1888 ‘The Crusie, or ancient oil lamp of MacDonald, J & Scott Wood, J (eds) 1995 An Scotland’, Proc Soc Antiq Scot, 22 (1887–8), Archaeological Survey of Two Settlements at 70–8. Oskaig and Holoman on Raasay. Glasgow. Grant, I F 1924 Every-Day Life on an Old Highland MacDonald, J & Scott Wood, J (eds) 1996 An Farm. London. Archaeological Survey of Four Townships at Grant, I F 1995 Highland Folk Ways, rev edn Balachuirn, Balmeanach, Inbhire and Brae on (originally published 1961). Edinburgh. Raasay. Glasgow. Harvey, K J 1990 ‘The Modernization of Scotland, MacDonald, J & Scott Wood, J (eds) 1998 An 1750–1914’, Scotia, 14, 47–58. Archaeological Survey of the Townships of Hingley, R (ed) 1993a Medieval or Later Rural North and South Screapadal with a Survey of Settlement in Scotland: Management and Pre- the Surrounding Area on Raasay. Glasgow. servation. Edinburgh. MacDonald, J & Scott Wood, J (eds) 1999 An Hingley, R 1993b ‘Past, current and future preser- Archaeological Survey of the Township of Man- vation and management options’, in Hingley, ish Beg, with a Survey of the Surrounding Area R 1993a, 52–61. on Raasay. Glasgow. Hingley, R 2000 ‘Medieval or later rural settlement MacDonald, S 1997 Reimagining Culture: Histories, in Scotland: the value of the resource’, in Identities and the Gaelic Renaissance. Oxford. Atkinson, J A, Banks, I & MacGregor, G MacGregor, G 2000 Rannoch Archaeological Pro- (eds), 11–19. ject: 1999 Pilot Season, Archaeological Survey James, H F 1998 Gunna Excavations 1998. Unpubl at Bunrannoch and Walk Over Survey. Unpubl report, Glasgow Univ Archaeol Res Div. rep, Glasgow Univ Archaeol Res Div. Johnstone, A & Scott Wood, J (eds) 1996 An MacGregor, G, Lelong, O & Johnston-Smith, DJ Archaeological Field Survey of Deserted Town- 1999 Tigh Vectican, Arrochar. Unpubl rep, ships at Tirai, Glen Lochay, Killin. Glasgow. Glasgow Univ Archaeol Res Div. Knapp,AB&Ashmore, W (eds) 1999 Archaeolog- Macinnes, A I 1998 ‘Highland society in the era of ies of Landscape: Contemporary Perspectives. ‘‘Improvement’’ ’, in Cooke, A, Donnachie, I, Oxford. MacSween, A & Whatley, C A (eds) Modern Laing, L R 1969 ‘Medieval settlement archaeology Scottish History 1707 to the Present, volume 1: in Scotland’, Scott Archaeol Forum,1,69–79. The Transformation of Scotland, 1707–1850, Lelong, O 2000 ‘The prospect of the sea: responses 177–202. East Linton. to forced coastal resettlement in nineteenth MacKay, D A 1988 ‘The Western Highlands and century Sutherland’, in Atkinson, J A, Banks, Islands: a cultural backwater?’, Scott Archaeol I & MacGregor, G (eds), 216–23. Rev,5,110–14. Lelong, O & MacGregor, G 2001 Loch Borralie, MacKay, D A 1993 ‘Scottish rural Highland settle- Kyle of Durness. Unpubl report, Glasgow Univ ment: preserving a people’s past’, in Hingley, Archaeol Res Div. R (ed) 1993a, 43–51. 496 | SOCIETY OF ANTIQUARIES OF SCOTLAND, 2002

MacKenzie, W M 1904 ‘Notes on certain structures an Inventory of the Ancient Monuments, vol 1, of archaic type in the Island of Lewis – beehive Kintyre. Edinburgh. houses, duns, and stone circles’, Proc Soc Antiq RCAHMS 1975 Argyll: an Inventory of the Ancient Scot, 38 (1903–4), 173–204. Monuments, vol 2, Lorn. London. Mackillop, A 1999 ‘Highland estate change and RCAHMS 1980 Argyll: an Inventory of the Ancient tenant emigration’, in Devine, TM&Young, J Monuments, vol 3, Mull, Tiree, Coll and North- R (eds) Eighteenth Century Scotland: New ern Argyll. Edinburgh. Perspectives, 237–58. East Linton. RCAHMS 1982 Argyll: an Inventory of the Ancient Martin, A 1987 Kintyre Country Life. Edinburgh. Monuments, vol 4, Iona. Edinburgh. Martin, M 1994 A description of the Western Islands RCAHMS 1984 Argyll: an inventory of the ancient of Scotland circa 1695; by Martin Martin; monuments, vol 5, Islay, Jura, Colonsay. including A voyage to St. Kilda by the same London. author, and, A description of the Western Isles RCAHMS 1990 North-East Perth: an Archaeolo- of Scotland by Sir Donald Monro; edited with gical Landscape. Edinburgh. introduction by Donald J Macleod (originally RCAHMS 1992 Argyll: an inventory of the ancient published 1695). Edinburgh. monuments, vol 7, Mid Argyll and Cowal, McCullagh, R P J & Tipping, R (eds) 1998 The Medieval and Later Monuments. Edinburgh. Lairg Project 1988–1996: the evolution of an RCAHMS 1993 Waternish, Skye and Lochalsh archaeological landscape in Northern Scotland. District, Highland Region: an archaeological survey. Edinburgh.Edinburgh. McGregor, A 1880 ‘Notes on some old customs in Shanks, M & Tilley, C 1987 Reconstructing Archae- a b ig .hIln of Skye’, Proc Soc Antiq Scot,14 ology. Cambridge.theIsland (1879–80), 143–7. Sharples, N & Parker Pearson, M 1999 ‘Norse Mitchell, A 1862 ‘On various superstitions in the Settlement in the Outer Hebrides’, Norwegian North-West Highlands and Islands of Scot- Archaeol Rev, 32, 41–62. land, especially in relation to lunacy’, Proc Soc Shepherd,IAG&Ralston, S M 1981 ‘Rural Antiq Scot, 4 (1860–2), 251–88. settlement in Grampian Region: approaches Mitchell, A 1880 The Past in the Present: What is and sources’, Proc Soc Antiq Scot, 111, Civilization? Edinburgh. 493–509. Morrison, A 1977 ‘The question of Celtic survival Simmons, A (ed) 1998a Burt’s letters from the north or continuity in some elements of rural settle- of Scotland, as related by Edmund Burt. Edin- u g .etnthe Scottish Highlands’, in Laing, L burgh.mentin (ed) Studies in Celtic Survival,67–76. London. Simmons, A (ed) 1998b A tour in Scotland and Morrison, A (ed) 1980 Rural Settlement Studies: voyage to the Hebrides, 1772, by Thomas Pen- Some Recent Work. Glasgow. nant. Edinburgh. Morrison, A 1996 Dunbeath: a Cultural Landscape. Simpson, J Y 1862a ‘Address on Archaeology’, Glasgow. Proc Soc Antiq Scot, 4 (1860–2), 5–51. Morrison, A 2000 ‘Scottish rural settlement studies: Simpson, J Y 1862b ‘Notes on some Scottish retrospect and prospect’, in Atkinson, J A, Magical Charm-Stones, or Curing-Stones’, Banks, I & MacGregor, G (eds), 2–10. Proc Soc Antiq Scot, 4 (1860–2), 211–24. Muir, T S 1860 ‘Notice of a beehive house in the Skene, W F 1880 Celtic Scotland: A History of Island of St Kilda’, Proc Soc Antiq Scot,3 Ancient Alban, vol III. Edinburgh. (1857–60), 225–32 . Smout, C 1996 ‘Pre-improvement fields in upland Peate, I C 1938 ‘Folk Culture’, Antiquity, 12, Scotland: the case of Loch Tayside’, Landscape 318–22. Hist, 18, 47–55 Peate, I C 1963 ‘The Society for Folk Life Studies’, Stewart, A 1888 ‘Examples of the survival in Folk Life,1,3–4. Scotland of superstitions relating to fire’, Proc Rathje, W & Murphy, C 1992 Rubbish! The Archae- Soc Antiq Scot, 22 (1887–8), 391–5. ology of Garbage. New York. Stewart, J H 1990 Settlements of Western Perthshire: RCAHMS 1971 Royal Commission on the Ancient Land and Society North of the Highland Line, and Historical Monuments of Scotland Argyll: 1480–1851. Edinburgh. DALGLISH: HIGHLAND RURAL SETTLEMENT | 497

Stewart, J H & Stewart, M B 1988 ‘A Highland Thomas,FLW1860 ‘Notice of beehive houses in longhouse – Lianach, Balquhidder, Perth- Harris and Lewis; with traditions of the ‘‘Each- shire’, Proc Soc Antiq Scot, 118, 301–17. Uisge’’, or Water-Horse, connected therewith’, Storrie, M C 1967 ‘Balliekine, Arran – survivor of Proc Soc Antiq Scot, 3 (1857–60), 127–44. two revolutions’, Folk Life,5,92–9. Thomas, F L W 1868 ‘On the primitive dwellings Swanson, C 1993 ‘The need for a management and and Hypogea of the Outer Hebrides’, Proc Soc preservation strategy’, in Hingley, R 1993a, Antiq Scot, 7 (1866–8), 153–95. 1–3. Trigger, B G 1989 A History of Archaeological Symonds, J 2000 ‘The Dark Island revisited: an Thought. Cambridge. approach to the historical archaeology of Mil- Turner, R 2000 ‘Managing MoLRS in the NTS’, in ton, South Uist’, in Atkinson, J A, Banks, I & Atkinson, J A, Banks, I & MacGregor, G MacGregor, G (eds) 196–209. (eds), 34–9. Teignmouth, Lord 1836 Sketches of the coasts and Yeoman, P 1991 ‘Medieval rural settlement: the islands of Scotland and the Isle of Man, vol 2. London. invisible centuries’, in Hanson,WS&Slater, E Thin, J (ed) 1981 Recollections of a tour made in A (eds) Scottish Archaeology: New Perceptions, Scotland,  1803, by Dorothy Wordsworth. 112–28. Aberdeen. Edinburgh. Yeoman, P 1995 Medieval Scotland. London.