1991 DISCOVERY & EXCAVATION IN SCOTLAND An Annual Survey of Scottish Archaeological Discoveries. Excavation and Fieldwork EDITED BY COLLEEN E BATEY WITH JENNIFER BALL PUBLISHED BY THE COUNCIL FOR SCOTTISH ARCHAEOLOGY ISBN 0 901352 11 X ISSN 0419 -411X NOTES FOR CONTRIBUTORS 1 Contributions should be brief statements of work undertaken. 2 Each contribution should be on a separate page, typed or clearly hand-written and double spaced. Surveys should be submitted in summary form. 3 Two copies of each contribution are required, one for editing and one for NMRS. 4 The Editor reserves the right to shorten published contributions. The unabridged copy will be lodged with NMRS. 5 No proofs will be sent to Contributors because of the tight timetable and the cost. 6 Illustrations should be forwarded only by agreement with the Editor (and HS, where applicable). Line drawings should be supplied camera ready to suit page layout as in this volume. 7 Enquiries relating to published items should normally be directed to the Contributor, not the Editor. 8 The final date for receipt of contributions each year is 31 October, for publication on the last Saturday of February following. Contributions from current or earlier years may be forwarded at any time. 9 Contributions should be sent to Hon Editor, Discouery & Excavation in Scotland, CSA, c/o Royal Museum of Scotland, Queen Street, Edinburgh, EH2 1JD. Please use the following format:- REGION DISTRICT Site Name ( parish) Contributor Type of Site/Find NCR (2 letters, 6 figures) Report Sponsor: HS, Society, Institution, etc, as appropriate. Name of Contributor: (where more than one, please indicate which name should appear in the list of contributors) Address of main contributor. DISCOVERY & EXCAVATION IN SCOTLAND REGION DISTRICT Site Name Parish Name of Contributor Type of Site or Find NCR (2 letters, 6 figures) Report Sponsor: HS, Society, Institution, etc, where appropriate Address CONTENTS Notes for Contributors 2 Map of Regions/Districts 4 Editorial 5 Archaeological Contributions 7 RCAHMS Report 78 Index of Contributors 89 Subject Index 91 Borders Region 1. Berwickshire 2. Ettrick and Lauderdale 3. Roxburgh 4. Tweeddale Central Region 5. Clackmannan 6. Falkirk 7. Stirling Dumfries & Galloway Region 8. Annandale and Eskdale 9. Nithsdale 10. Stewartry 11. Wigtown Fife Region 12. Dunfermline 13. Kirkcaldy 14. North-East Fife Grampian Region 15. Aberdeen 16. Banff and Buchan 17. Gordon 18. Kincardine and Deeside 19. Moray Highland Region 20. Badenoch and Strathspey 21. Caithness 22. Inverness 23. Lochaber 24. Nairn 25. Ross and Cromarty 26. Skye and Lochalsh 27. Sutherland Lothian Region 28. East Lothian 29. Edinburgh 30. Midlothian 31. West Lothian Strathclyde Region 32. Argyll and Bute 33. Bearsden and Milngavie 34. Clydebank 35. Cumbemauld and Kilsyth 36. Cumnock and Doon Valley 37. Cunninghame 38. Dumbarton 39. East KUbride 40. Eastwood 41. Glasgow 42. Hamilton 43. Inverclyde 44. Kilmamock and Loudon 45. Kyle and Carrick 46. Clydesdale 47. Monklands 48. Motherwell 49. Renfrew 50. Strathkelvin Tayslde Region 51. Angus 52. Dundee 53. Perth and Kinross Orkney Islands Area Shetland Islands Area Western Isles Islands Area EDITORIAL The size of this volume and the range of work reported therein is a measure of the tremendous amount of activity being undertaken in Scottish archaeology. Although this is not a complete record of all ongoing or recently undertaken work, a high proportion is here included, and in future it is hoped that there will be more material forthcoming from Regional archaeologists who have been too busy to contribute this year- Many entries have had to be standardised, and in some cases abbreviated, so it is essential that anyone reading these summaries consult the fuller original versions held in the NMRS. When an individual object is reported either to a museum or directly by the finder, details are included because the find spot may be of significance. A major element in the work undertaken has been in the form of large-scale area surveys, either in advance of road building or upgrading, pipeline work or forestry. It is in these areas in particular that the role of Developer funding becomes more prominent. The reporting of this work is a challenge to the system set up for the layout of D&ES, and although this year cross-referencing has been used to link the areas of work in adjacent parishes, the overall scale of the work is not readily reflected. It is proposed in future to amend the system of entry for such large-scale survey, possibly by the inclusion of an overall map of the survey area at the very least. The Editor would welcome comment from those whose results will fall within this category. This clearly is a problem to be faced, it will not go away! Once again there is no Scottish Bibliography supplied in the volume. It is anticipated that in the following volume a consolidated bibliography will appear for those years which have not been covered. This delay will enable us to make full use of computerised bibliographies which will shortly be on-stream. The production timetable for D&ES is tight and becomes increasingly difficult as the volume grows in size. It would be most helpful if contributors could forward information immediately it becomes available so that it can be processed in good time. The final date by which contributions should reach the Editor is October 31. This allows editing, checking of grid references, limited correspondence about problems and enquiries to be undertaken before the Printer's deadline of the beginning of December. The text is then set. proofs checked and the printing undertaken in January... This schedule does not allow for any delays, and there are a few simple ways in which contributors can assist thy process: 1. Please Type or Print Clearly all entries. 2. Check you are providing all the information required, as shown on the form supplied. 3. Provide Two copies of each entry on separate sheets of paper 4. Supply good quality, clear illustrative material at the time of submission if at all possible. Illustrations should be on film or bromide rather than photocopies, 5- Ensure that the Sponsors name is clearly indicated. Thanks are due to the Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland for the Region/District map. provided as a guide to the exact locations of Regions and Districts, and for the detailed and illustrated report, showing the ever-increasing range of the Commission's work. This is an important element and of considerable value for local researchers. Thanks are also due to Historic Scotland for reports of excavations and surveys funded by the Department and to staff for assistance with editing this material. Additional thanks are offered to HS and to RCAHMS for their continuing substantial financial contributions towards publication. The vital task of checking the accuracy of the grid references supplied in the entries has been undertaken again by Ian Fleming of the National Monuments Record. This has been carried out with great speed and efficiency in relation to the information supplied, and since a great many had to be slightly amended, it would be helpful if people could amend their original records. Thanks go to Ian for his patience. The final acknowledgement must go to Edwina Proudfoot who has edited D&ES for several years. Her enthusiasm for Scottish archaeology and the need to publicise the range of work being undertaken here, has been crucial in ensuring the continued expansion of the contents of the volumes. It is with some degree of trepidation that I conclude this, my first editorial, in the hope that the inevitable errors born out of inexperience have been kept to a minimum. C E Batey Glasgow Museums BORDERS BORDERS REGION end of a large building identified in the 1983—5 excavation. This was thought to be the Friary church, although the location of a church to the south of the cloister would be unusual. From the traces of ETTRICK & LAUDERDALE DISTRICT foundations the wall was clearly composed of two well constructed faces and a rubble core. The foundations of the east end were Newstead Roman Fort (Melrose parish) strengthened by large, flat basal slabs, probably due to the proximity R F J Jones, S Clarke, K Clark, P N Cheetham of the lade {see below). The SW wall robbing appeared to reflect the Excavation and Survey presence of a large buttress on that face. It became apparent that the NT 571 344 Excavation in the SW of the fort revealed that in site had been levelled with large dumps of redeposited natural clay earlier Antonine occupation the 'Dividing Wall1 had separated an prior to the construction of the Friary. extensive industrial area from more conventional fort buildings. Fort Some 19m to the west, preserved wall was discovered running buildings constructed of rammed earth walls on stone foundations parallel with the Friary buildings. This was thought to possibly be a had at least two phases of modification. After demolition of the precinct wall enclosing the Friary grounds. It was disturbed to the 'Dividing Wall' a sequence of sill-beam timber buildings was south by 19th century culverting of the Skiprunning bum, a water- constructed over the industrial area. Following demolition of fort course which defines the modern property boundary. buildings a ditch was cut through the collapsed walls and the back of South of the presumed church the continuation of a feature traced the rampart. Geophysical survey revealed plan detail of W sector of in the 1983—5 excavation was observed. It was then thought to be a the fort and survey to the S indicated potential industrial structures man-made watercourse, perhaps a lade supplying a mil! to the NE of aligned on 2 S roads from the fort.