A Measured Survey of Cille Fhearchair, Shiel Bridge,

A Measured Survey of Cille Fhearchair, Shiel Bridge, Kintail

Survey Date: January 2015

Surveyors: Stefan Sagrott, Archaeological Data Officer, NTS Derek Alexander, Head of Archaeological Services, NTS

Report Date: 4th May 2015

Report Prepared by: Stefan Sagrott

Name: Cille Fhearchair

Alternative Name: Farquhar’s Cell

Site Type: Burial Ground (Possible), Enclosure(s), Standing Stone

RCAHMS CANMORE ID: 12000

Highland HER ID: MHG7459

OSNGR: 210924, 757962

Historic Environment Scheduled Monument ID: SM2650

Contents Introduction ...... 3 Location ...... 4 Archaeological and Historical Background ...... 5 Aims and Objectives ...... 9 Methodology ...... 9 Level 2 Survey ...... 10 Results ...... 11 Discussion ...... 14 Conclusion ...... 15 Bibliography ...... 16

Introduction

This report details the results of archaeological measured survey that took place at the National Trust for Scotland property of Kintail. The survey took place in January 2015.

The survey focussed on the two circular enclosures and standing stone known together as Cille Fhearchair. The work was requested by the NTS Regional Archaeologist West to create an electronic measured survey of the site and to record its full extent. A Total Station was used to produce a comprehensive measured survey of the structure and its surrounding area, which was then manually referenced to Ordnance Survey MasterMap. A photogrammetric survey of the standing stone was also carried out.

Results are to be logged with the National Trust for Scotland SMR, the HER (Historic Environment Record) and Historic Environment Scotland.

Location

The ruined structure is located 3km to the south-west of the National Trust for Scotland Kintail Ranger Office, right on the south-west property boundary and adjacent to (and cut by) the modern A87, close to Shiel Bridge.

The site is also located at the base of the valley, just east of , at around 25m above sea level, with the south slopes of Creagan Dubha and Sgurr an t-Searraich behind it, the dominant land cover in the area being coarse grassland (LCS88).

Lerwick

Stornoway

Inverness Kintail Aberdeen

Fort William

Stirling Edinburgh Glasgow

Land over 200m

0 100 km

This plan is based on an Ordnance Survey digital map reproduced with the permission of HM Stationery Office. © Crown Copyright NTS licence No. 100023880

Figure 1: Location of Kintail 193500 194000 194500 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 9 1 1 8 8 0 0 0 0 5 5 8 8 1 1 8 8 193500 194000 194500

This plan is based on an Ordnance Survey digital map reproduced with the permission of HM Stationery Office. © Crown Copyright NTS licence No. 100023880 0 100 200 300 m

Figure 2: Location of Cille Fhearchair, Shiel Bridge, Kintail Archaeological and Historical Background

Cill Fhearchair is located 0.6km south of Invershiel, on the north bank of the River Shiel, 200m east of the settlement of Shiel Bridge. Invershiel is depicted on General Roy’s Highland Map (1747) and consists of 6 buildings, however neither the settlement of Shiel Bridge or Cill Fhearchair are depicted, the area illustrated as being used for cultivation (see Figure 3).

Figure 3: Roy’s Highland Map (1747) showing the settlement of Invershiel. Reproduced with kind permission of the Trustees of the National Library of Scotland

On the 1st Edition OS 6” map published in 1875 the site of Cill Fhearchair is marked as a standing stone, inside a circular enclosure (20m by 19m), and a roofed structure (9.5m by 4.8m) inserted through the western side of the enclosure. A track is shown running to the south of the site, following the course of the River Shiel, running into the small settlement of Shiel Bridge which is also depicted.

By the publication of the 2nd Edition OS 6” map in 1904 the roofed building is no longer depicted and the circular enclosure is shown as complete.

The site is first mentioned in the Ordnance Survey name book of 1874 which describes it so: “Within the burial ground is a standing stone, undressed, 5' 9" high and 1' thick.” (OS 1874).

Figure 4: 1st edition Ordnance Survey Six Inch Map (Argyllshire, Sheet XXXI, 1875) with Inverigan House highlighted Reproduced with kind permission of the Trustees of the National Library of Scotland

Figure 5: 2nd edition Ordnance Survey Six Inch Map (Argyllshire, XXXI.SW, 1900) with Inverigan House highlighted Reproduced with kind permission of the Trustees of the National Library of Scotland

In his book on Ross and Cromarty place names, W.J. Watson describes the site as so:

Opposite Shiel Schoolhouse is a disused burying-ground, called Cill Fhearcliair, Farquhar's Cell or Church. St Ferchar does not seem to be otherwise known. (Watson 1904:175, 1926:304)

Despite being designated a Scheduled Monument in 1945, the site has received very little archaeological attention. The first detailed description of it was written by an Ordnance Survey staff member in 1966 when the site has already been truncated by the construction of the modern A87:

This burial ground appears to have consisted of two small co-joined circular enclosures. The northern one, c. 13.5m in diameter is enclosed by a turf-covered wall 1.5m wide by 0.4m max height. The other, abutting on to the S side of the first, is only vaguely visible, its S edge being destroyed by road works. The standing stone lies within this enclosure. No trace of any other internal feature was seen in either enclosure. The stone is within 10.0m of the new roadworks and appears to be in a very vulnerable position.

The site was visited as part of walkover survey of the Kintail property in 1997 and is described below, however no detailed measure survey was carried out. Cill Fhearchair - Fraquhar's cell or church - is the name given to a disused burial ground. The dedication may be to a saint but he does not appear in the Calendars. Within the 'burial ground' is a standing stone, undressed, c1.75m high by 0.3m thick.

The 'burial ground' appears to have consisted of two conjoined circular enclosures. That to the N is c13.5m in diameter with turf-covered walls c1.5m wide surviving up to 0.4m high. That to the S is only just visible as it has been partially destroyed during road-widening works. The standing stone is in this S enclosure, perilously close to the modern road. A 'modern' NTS sign has been inserted into the slight turf dyke of the S enclosure by the road. There are fragmentary remains of walling to N of this complex.

The surviving remains are not obviously recognisable as the site of a former burial ground and are only assumed to be so on the strength of local tradition. The recorded medieval church and burial ground were at Kildowich - St Dubhthach's - on the Nside of the mouth of the river Croe. The 1st and 2nd ed OS maps record that the standing stone was surrounded by a single circular enclosure. The relationship between the S and N circular enclosures is unclear, bearing in mind the details given on the 1st ed OS map.

The standing stone is one of the small number of standing stones in Ross & Cromarty (Matheson 2014:303), a search of Canmore reveals 8 standing stones recorded in the region and is therefore significant because of its uniqueness.

Aims and Objectives

The primary objectives of the survey were as follows:

1. To produce a measured electronic survey of the structure 2. To record its full extent

All of which serve the main aim of enhancing the existing site record to allow for efficient management and protection of the archaeology.

Methodology A Level 2 Survey (English Heritage 2007:23) was determined as the best approach for this fieldwork;

A Level 2 record provides a basic descriptive and interpretive record of an archaeological monument or landscape, as a result of field investigation. It is both metrically accurate and analytical, depicting the real landscape context of the archaeological features. The examination of the site will have produced an analysis of its development and use, and the record will include the conclusions reached, but it will not discuss in detail the evidence on which this analysis is based.

This record must include the core monument data. Beyond that, the information provided at Level 2 should be able to satisfy broad academic and management requirements. It will normally include a divorced (ie non-map based) measured survey or an accurately located map-based survey at a scale that will represent the form of the monument. In addition, the location and extent will be indicated on a 1:10 000 index map to ensure consistency with other levels of recording. Some statement of method, accuracy, and of the quality of investigation and survey will normally be included. Related information sets consulted at this Level may include field surveys, records of buildings, archives, aerial and ground photography, geophysical survey, field-walking, excavation records and other local sources.

A Level 2 record will typically consist of:

 the core monument record  the written account:  survey drawings: accurate cartographic location and extent of the monument(s)  ground photography (English Heritage 2007:23)

Level 2 Survey This used a Stonex R6 Electronic Distance Measuring (EDM) Total Station, coupled with a field controller running PenMap software to record topographic points and other topographic & archaeological detail across the earthwork and surrounding area. The results were tidied up using a CAD package and were further processed in a Geographic Information Systems (GIS) package, which allowed for the creation of a Digital Elevation Model (DEM) of the earthwork. Interpretative illustrations contained within this report were produced using Adobe Illustrator software.

A photogrammetric survey was carried out of the standing stone. This involved taking a series of images around the stone and processing them in Agisoft Photoscan to produce a pointcloud and a 3D meshed model.

Figure 6: The survey underway

N 1 m 0 5 m

Figure 7: Plan of Cill Fhearchair enclosures and standing stone Results

The site is as previously described; it consists of two conjoined circular enclosures (Figure 7). The northerly one measures 12.6m in internal diameter with a turf covered bank between 1.4m and 2.4m in width, and standing between 0.2m and 0.6m in height. On the southside of the enclosure, the bank changes in form from an inverted U-shape to having a straight edge drop on the inner-side of the bank. A number of small (the largest of which is 0.3m in length), upright, stones protrude (ca. 0.15m above the surface) from the inner edge of the northerly bank.

The southern enclosure only survives as two small lengths of bank on the north-west side and the south-east side, although it appears to have been of similar dimensions to the northern enclosure.

Figure 8: View of the site from the west

The north-west stretch is 3.9m in length, 2.4m in width and stands to 0.2m in height, with the south-eastern stretch being 10m in length, varying in width between 2.4m and 3.33m and standing up to 0.26m in height. At roughly the centre of this enclosure, on a small rise, is the standing stone.

Figure 9: View of the site from the northwest The stone is 1.54m in height by 0.35m in width, and is a rough, unhewn stone devoid of any carvings. The stone does not stand entirely upright, instead leaning to the north at roughly a 50 degree angle from the ground. A photogrammetric survey was carried out of the stone, which involved taking 70 photographs at a variety of positions and angles around the stone. The photographs were then processed in some software which has produced both a pointcloud and a 3D mesh of the stone (Fig 10). The mesh can be viewed online https://sketchfab.com/models/4740668fdd2442d3a501772247328c7e [last accessed 6/10/16]

The enclosure has been severely truncated by the construction of modern A87, which has removed over 70% of the enclosure.

In the field it was difficult to determine the relationship between the banks of the two enclosures.

An NTS plaque has been inserted close to a turf bank to the south-east of the site near the road.

The upcast from a number of small mole hills was noticed across the site.

Figure 10: Results of photogrammetry of the standing stone from the west (TL – sparse pointcloud, TR – dense pointcloud, BL – mesh, BR – textured mesh)

Discussion The site appears to be in a fairly good condition and is regularly sttrimmed during the summer months to keep the vegetation growth down.

The relationship between the two enclosures is hard to determine. It iss unclear if they are contemporary, if the south enclosure is cut by the northern enclosure orr if the southern one has been constructed against the northern enclosure. Certainly the historical map evidence shows an enclosure, complete with a standing stone in the centre; and on this basis it is assumed that it is the southern enclosure that is depicted.

By georeferencing the 1st edition 6” Ordnance Survey map and overlaying data in a GIS has indicated that the depicted enclosure is the southern one and that has been cut by the modern A87. The road runs through the site exactly where the depicted building is (see Fig. 11) and this could well explain why no structural remains are visible tooday, although it is curious that it is not depicted on the 2nd edition maps.

Figure 11: Georeferenced 1st edition OS map which the portion of the site destroyed by the road building highlighted in red. Reproduced with kind permission of the Trustees of the National Library of Scotland This plan is based on an Ordnance Survey digital map reproduced withh the permission of HM Stationery Office. © Crown Copyright NTS licence No. 100023880

On this basis it could be presumed that the northern enclosure is later thaan the southern and has been constructed after 1904, cutting through the north end of the southern enclosure. A detailed topographic survey of the interior of the northern enclosure has revealed a small elevated feature, roughly in the centre, that may well be the northern end of the southern enclosure. The function of the northern enclosure is unknown though it may well be the scant remains of a sheep pen, although no entrance could be detected during the survey. The site name and local tradition suggests that the site was at one point a small church with a burial ground within the enclosure however no evidence can be provided either way for this. The presence of a small building on the 1st edition map could be a small church, however now that any possible traces of it have been removed by the construction of the road, no definite argument can be made either way.

The standing stone, whilst leaning, appears to be stable and not subject to any weathering. The photogrammetric survey has not revealed any new information on the stone, but has provided a detailed record of its current condition. It is assumed that the stone is in its original location, however this is far from certain, and the lean on the stone could indicate that it has moved at some point in its history.

The site would benefit from a geophysical survey, which may reveal any burials below the surface and also provide some contextual information about the setting of the standing stone. It may also provide some further information regarding the missing section of the southern enclosure.

Conclusion Whilst the upstanding archaeological remains have been surveyed to some extent a number of times in the 20th and 21st centuries, this is the first time that a measured survey has been carried out by the National Trust for Scotland Archaeology Department and using a modern TST to collect the data. The results of the survey will be used for guidance and management by the NTS, as they have highlighted work that can be done to improve the condition of the site, and can be used to monitor the condition of the monument in the future.

The function of the site is still far from clear, although it remains an important archaeological site within the region; containing one of the few standing stones in Ross & Cromarty and being associated with local tradition. The interpretation of the site would benefit from further investigative work being carried out, such as a geophysical survey which may reveal sub-surface information about the site.

Bibliography

English Heritage (2007) Understanding the Archaeology of Landscapes. A guide to good recording practice, English Heritage Publications, Stroud

Macaulay Institute (1988) Land Cover Scotland Available from http://www.macaulay.ac.uk/explorescotland/lcs_mapformat.html [Last accessed 12/5/15]

Matheson, A.F. (2014) Scotland’s Northwest Frontier: A Forgotten British Borderland, Matador, Kibworth

Watson, W.J. (1904) Place names of Ross and Cromarty, The Northern Counties, Edinburgh

Watson, W.J. (1926) The Celtic Placenames of Scotland, Birlinn, Edinburgh