Painted pebbles in early Scotland by Anna Ritchie Painted pebble clasa e f artefacso sar t uniqu northero et n Scotlan firse th t n dmillenniui m AD. They are small rounded beach pebbles of quartzite, which have been painted with simple dar w whice rathedesigne kno dy dy s browha i re n staise i thath colourn ne th f i no ns th i t I . dye itself which has survived, and it has consequently proved impossible to analyse the con- stituents used. The pebbles selected for painting range in size from 18 mm by 22 mm to 65 mm by 51 mm. Excavations over the last ninety years have yielded a total of nineteen painted pebbles, l froal m Northere siteth n si n Caithnessn i Isle r o s . Wit e exceptiohth example on f no e from Buckquoy in the Orkneys, all have come from broch sites where there are extensive remains of post-broch buildings Buckquoe Th . y pebbl associates wa e ) (no; p42 i 13 .d wit occupatioe hth n ohousa f e date stratigraph y ogam-inscriben b da y b d yan d spindle-whor late th e o seventt l h and early eighth centuries AD. A similar date is assigned to one of the painted pebbles from U | PROCEEDING 8 29 THF SO E SOCIETY, 1971-2 Jarlshof (no. 19), which came from the secondary cobbling in the entrance to the late wheelhouse- period byre othee pebbleo Th . rtw s from Jarlshof were associated wit occupatioe hth wheelf no - house 1 and belong to the earlier part of the wheelhouse period at Jarlshof, dating approxi- matel thire th fift o dt o y t h centuries AD (nos 17-18). Eleven painted pebbles were found during Sir Francis Tress Barry's excavations of brochs Keise th n si are Caithnesf ao s (nos 2-12). Ther soms ei e confusion surrounding their provenance, impossibls certaii e b t i o t d nw an whicbroce eno th f ho site involvede sar . Accordin Barryo gt , they came from four brochs (Barry 1899,191), whereas Anderson publisheo ,wh excavationse dth , states that three brochs were involved (1901, 145). Anderson illustrates five pebbles, captioned 'fro Keise mth s broch originae ' ; identifiablth (1901 , 11)t 22 8 g , bu ,l5 fi , plat, 3 e, e 2 wit s hno in the possession of the Society of Antiquaries of London shows that the caption contains a misprin should an t d read 'fro Keise mth s brochs' (Brown Portfolio 67)p , . Accompanying this plate in the Brown Portfolio is an unpublished coloured drawing labelled 'Painted stones from the Keiss brochs 1895-7', which illustrates three pebbles, nos 4, 7 and 10. Anderson states that three pebbles came fro Westee mth r broch (1901 source informatios , th hi 121) d f eo an , s nwa probably a letter addressed to him from J M Joass, dated 30th September 1895 at Golspie, which is in the possession of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland (Joass 1895). Included in this lette e sketchear r f fouo s r painted pebbles, thre f whico e captionee har d 'Wester broch' (no fourte sth 3-5d h )an 'Roa d broch Caithnese ' Th (no . 2) . s Inventory supports this attribution of some pebble Westee t leassth a Road o t t an r d sites t recordbu , s five from Weste thred an r e from the Road broch (RCAMS 1911, nos 513 and 517); the source of this information is unknown. There is a label on pebble no. 6 which reads 'Wester', so this may be one of the five mentioned Inventorye inth , together wit three hth e identified fro Joase mth s letter (nos 3-5). Some fact t leasa s t emerge from these confused records elevee th f nO . painted pebblen si NMAe th S collection attribute Keise th o sdt brochs identifiee , b eigh n ca t d from illustrations datin beforo gt e 1901 (nos 2-5, 7-8, 10-11) . pebblee Somth f o e s came from excavationt a s Wester (nos 3-5 and probably no. 6) and at the Road broch (no. 2). Barry himself is convincingly specifi statinn ci paintege th tha l al td pebbles came from secondary buildings outsid broche eth s and were found separately (1899, 191); they can therefore be dated to the post-broch period. excavatione Th t Burriasa Nortn ni h Ronaldsay yielde painteo dtw d pebbles (nos 14-15), t therrecoro n bu s ei f thei do r precise provenanc sitee th ; n there o secondar s ewa y occupation withi broce nth h itself post-brocd an , h buildings outsid broce eth h were also explored. painteA d pebbl founewas d durin recengthe t excavation Crosskirsat k broc Caithneshin s t cami (no ; e1) . fro mmiddea n deposit behin drefacina innee th f broce ro g walth d f han o l belonged to the period of the occupation of the broch (information from Dr H Fairhurst). earln A y dats beeeha n attribute pebble th o dt e from Clickhimi Shetlann ni d (no. 16), implicatione th t bu provenancs it f so arguablee ear foun s middea wa n dt i I . nbeace layeth n ho r outside the wall of the ring-fort, and was assigned by Hamilton to the fort period, c 400-0 BC (1968, 8, 79), although in this trench, which was c 20 m square, only two other objects attributed fore th t o periot d were same founth en di laye fragmena ( r f inciseo t d whalebon shera d dean of pottery). Redepositio f objectno a resul s f a wateso t r disturbanc s perhapsei a possibilit y here. Dating context thue sar s know totae seventeer th nnineteef fo o lf o t nou n painted pebbles; two may be as early as the last few centuries BC, while the other fifteen belong to the period between the abandonment of brochs, broadly c 200 AD, and the eighth century AD. It is surely legitimate therefore to regard painted pebbles primarily as a constituent of material culture in N Scotland in the historical Pictish period. SHORTER NOTES | 299 The motifs employed on painted pebbles are simple though carefully executed. The most common motifs are dots and wavy lines (nos 1, 3-5, 7-8, 14-15, 16-18), and small circles appear alone on two examples (nos 13, 19). A pentacle motif appears on no. 3, and this, together with involutee th bees ha d nPictise , linlinketh 16 f e. o hmoti t dno symbo ar witn o fe hth l repertoire (Thomas 1963, 46-8) pentacle th ; alss eha o been found incise pebbla n do e fro broce mth f ho Burrian, a site which has also yielded an example of Pictish symbols incised on an ox phalange (Traill 1890, 352, 361; Ritchie , 1969G N , J ,132 , pcrescente i lObTh . c) ,severa n Keisse o th f slo pebbles provide another close link with Pictish art (nos 6-7, 9), and triangles appear on nos 9-10 motife Th . s use painten do d pebble mostle sar y curvilineareminentle ar l al d y an ,suite d to the medium of paint applied to convex surfaces of very restricted size. Painted pebble inherentle sar y non-functional artefact literae th n si l sense theid ,an r interpreta- tion must necessaril speculativee yb . Hamilto suggestes nha d that they were designe slinge b o dt - stones made more potenadditioe th y tb magif no tribar co l emblems (1968,79,104),citingclassical Greek evidence in support of the idea. Thirteen surviving examples is not a very impressive total for sling-stones therd an , independens ei t local evidenc supporo et alternativn a t e explanation, that painted pebbles were charm-stones, which seems to the present writer to be more plausible. A belief in the efficacy of attractive pebbles as aids in curing sickness survived in Scotland until recent times; often know s 'cold-stones'na , these were natural pebbles selecte r theidfo r aesthetic shap colourationd ean thed an ,y were used particularl 'helpo yt curinn i ' g sick animals (Hutcheson 1900). Water into which suc hpebbla beed eha n dippe believes dwa havo dt e healing powers when given to sick cattle to drink; the pebble acted as an omen as well, for if it dried quickl animae yth l would recove rt driei swiftlyf i dd slowlan , animae yth l would make onlya slow recovery. One such stone preserved in the National Museum of Antiquities of Scotland ) belonge17 farmea O o N d t . ovaAngun n (NMe 1870si a r no th s l i t n lighAt si i ca ; t brown , whic farmee mm hth 3 pebble6 ry b kep smala 2 4 n ,i t l leathe suspendeg rba d roun necks dhi . beliee Th charm-stonen i f strono s s earln gi swa y medieval Icelan incors wa d- w thala a t porated int twelfth-centure oth y Gragas r law-booko , , forbiddin practice gth pain e o minof no r outlawry (Steffenson 1968, 192). Magic stones also figure in Icelandic sagas (e.g. Laxdaela Saga, Magnusso Palssod nan n 1969, 191-2laten i d r Icelandi)an c folk-tales (Simpson 1972, 46-7). More important than this medieval and later evidence for charm-stones is the tradition preserve Adomnan'n di s Life t oColumbaS f which indicate beliesa holn i f y stone perioa t sa d contemporary with archaeological find f painteo s d pebbles.