Publication Account
Date 2007
Event ID 1039142
Category Descriptive Accounts
Type Publication Account
Permalink http://canmore.org.uk/event/1039142
NB13 3 BEIRGH ('Berie', 'Traigh na Berie 1', 'Loch na Berie', 'Riof', 'Reef')
NB/1034 3516
...contined from Part 1 (Event ID 587320)
2. Discussion
Until the excavations are continued down to the primary broch floor level all comments about the date of the primary structure, the design of its interior furnishings and the early history of the occupations that took place in it must remain tentative. Nevertheless, after a brief review of the original structure, an attempt is made here to set the Beirgh sequence, as it is known at present, into a wider context. This is done in the hope that such a preliminary scheme, even if it turns out to be mistaken in parts, may help with the development of a final synthesis.
2.1 The broch
In general Beirgh broch occupies a strong position on an islet in what was once a freshwater loch; that defensive considerations were important is suggested by the fact that the entrance is on the opposite side of the islet to the causeway to the shore [3, 68-9]. The broch is in a typical Outer Hebridean situation – between the cultivable ground of the machair (with the sea beyond) and the rough grazing further inland.
Beirgh is a good example of something close to a ground-galleried broch of classic Hebridean type. The solid, well-built masonry, the massive ledge scarcement and the way in which the stair has a landing giving access to a doorway to this raised ledge – and thus leading out on to the raised wooden floor which presumably once rested on that ledge – all suggest to the author that this is a hollow-walled broch tower skilfully and confidently built in the classic tradition. If further explorations occur they will surely reveal the ring of massive post-holes (perhaps with waterlogged post-butts in them) which will be all that remains of the internal wooden roundhouse – with its raised annular floor resting on the scarcement – which surely existed inside the broch during the first phase of occupation.
The long sequence of secondary occupations suggests that the site was of some importance over several centuries, presumably because it dominated the machair and other agricultural 1and around the modern villages of Cnip and Valtos. Yet one cannot rule out the possibility that – as with many other long-occupied brochs – the importance was due to the prestige of the founding family and to the new, relatively tall tower which they had erected for themselves and which must have seemed overpoweringly impressive when it first appeared.
Judging by the example of Dun Mor Vaul on Tiree (NM04 4) the building of the secondary wall around the central court (the Roundhouse) could imply that the upper stories of the galleried wall of the broch were demolished at some stage in the middle Iron Age. Perhaps however it was not reduced immediately to its present level as the pottery and artifacts which accumulated in the Level 1 gallery imply that the latter was still roofed (its lintels fell in later). The stone round-house should also imply that the complex primary wooden roundhouse, perhaps having several storeys, was dismantled; this demolition of the woodwork could support the idea of the demolition of the upper works of the tower at the same time. The original high roof would also then have been replaced with a new low one, doubtless resting on the secondary wall. Harding has come to a similar conclusion and suggests that the tower may have been pulled down even before the stone roundhouse was inserted – exactly as at Dun Mor Vaul.
A sharp change in building tradition – involving the final abandonment of the long-lasting roundhouse tradition and the laying of a sterile layer – occurred at the end of that phase but this seems to have occurred while the middle phase of the local Iron Age material cultural sequence was still flourishing (below).
2.2 Material cultural sequence
Some remarks about the material cultures discovered at various post-broch levels help us to get a preliminary overall picture [3, 64-66]. However the absence in this report of any published drawings of pottery from the pre-'Pictish' levels hinders any attempt to assess the cultural relationships of the site's middle Iron Age inhabitants. Fortunately there are two very useful drawings of potsherds from the site in another of Harding’s publications (2000, figs. 9 and 10).
The excavators' accounts of the site have so far emphasised three major and distinct Phases of occupation, namely (1) the Iron Age stage with the broch (or Atlantic roundhouse) and the roundhouse that was inserted into it, (2) the 'early Pictish' period with a sequence of 'cellular structures' and (3) the 'late Pictish' period with figure-of-eight buildings. Thus one gets the clear impression that there is a fundamental cultural break between the broch and the roundhouse on the one hand and the sequence of ‘Pictish’ buildings which followed them on the other.
This terminology, because it is based purely on the local evidence, is at variance with that suggested by the author forty years ago (MacKie 1965, fig. 6), elaborated six years later (MacKie 1971, fig. 7). In this scheme, which is based on data from all over Atlantic Scotland, the fundamental difference in material culture between the 'age of the brochs' – or the middle Iron Age – and the following period is crucial (Stevenson 1955). This latter period – labelled V in 1965 and 'late Iron Age' in 1971 (this is the Early Historic period on the main-land)– is characterised by the complete dis-appearance of the middle Iron Age decorated pottery and associated artifacts and by the first appearance of ornamental-headed and hipped bone pins and by composite bone combs; these never appear in earlier levels.
Foster has shown that these pins and combs span the period from about AD 600-1100 (Foster 1990, Illus. 9.3). With the exception of the evolved Dun Cuier ware (which seems to have been made only at the very end of the Middle period) the great array of decorated middle Iron Age pottery styles evidently disappeared before this Late period.
At Beirgh this late Iron Age horizon is evidently that of the 'late Pictish' period; the 'early Pictish' period by contrast appears not to have these characteristic artifacts. In fact the latter yielded items which elsewhere are of standard middle Iron Age type, such as the spear-butt moulds. The pottery sequence will surely provide the key and – despite the appearance of the new Cellular buildings in the ruined broch – on the basis of the published evidence one would expect the middle Iron Age decorated wares to have continued in use throughout the 'cellular' phases and for these horizons therefore to belong to that period.
Although facts about the pottery sequence are sparse in the report – for example in the first ‘Pictish’ (or ‘Cellular’) phase we are told that there was indeed a “continued use of applied cordon decoration and short everted rims on pottery…” [3, 73] – much more useful information is given elsewhere (Harding 2000, 21-2 and Figs. 9 and 10). For example the potsherds from the immediately post-broch, or roundhouse, horizon are obviously of classic middle Iron Age forms, and very similar to the material from Dun Bharabhat (NB03 1). The classic large storage urns are present (‘Phase 10’, two at lower left), and are closely analogous to the Vaul ware urns from Tiree except in their decoration. There is also a classic Balevullin vase with geometrical incised decoration and a representation of a waist cordon (‘Exterior NE’, bottom).
The Everted Rim jars have clearly arrived on the site by this stage and these include several rim sherds with internal fluting – the Clickhimin sub-style (‘Phase 10’, three at lower right); this is one of the rare examples of a middle Iron Age style which is found all over the maritime part of the broch province, and also found in early Iron Age levels in the type site (HU44 1). Also potentially important in this context is the clear example of an early Iron Age carinated vessel (‘Exterior NE’, top right) which, because of its late context, ought to be some form of heirloom. Similar finds in late contexts were made at Dun Mor Vaul and Dun Ardtreck (NM04 4 and NG33 2).
Samples of pottery from the early and late ‘Pictish’ phases - from the latter come fragments of plain pottery (associated, as noted, with composite bone combs) and this phase clearly belongs to the late Iron Age. However the sherds from the previous level (the ‘Cellular phases’) are classic middle Iron Age forms and they include fragments of cordoned vessels (which are almost certainly pieces of jars) and something very close to the Clettraval sub-style of the Everted Rim jar, so prominent on Tiree (bottom le ft). There are also two rim sherds of classic Dun Cuier ware (‘Cellular phases’, top left) with its characteristic long, slightly incurving and nearly upright rim. These appear to demonstrate the truth of the assumption that this is the final manifestation of the cordoned jars of the middle Iron Age (they were found without the earlier forms at the type site on Barra) and it would be interesting to know if any of these sherds were in fact found in the ‘late Pictish’ levels.
There is good evidence now from a few other sites that the complex middle Iron Age material culture (apart from the buildings) continued on at least until AD 500, possibly well into the 6th century, both in the west (Dun Ardtreck – MacKie 2002) and in Shetland (at Scalloway – site HU43 4). This great maritime Iron Age culture, with its origins in the late Bronze Age, evolved over more than fifteen hundred years to construct a large number of the most sophisticated domestic and monumental drystone buildings known anywhere in the world and to develop a remarkably sophisticated material culture and economy, and it is the disappearance of this that marks the great hiatus in the local archaeological record. Compared with this dramatic break the adoption of a new type of stone building in the later stages of the middle Iron Age is of minor importance and the term ‘Pictish’ for it is a complete misnomer.
Major periods in the history of an Iron Age site should surely be defined by the entire associated material culture rather than by a single trait like a house type. Indeed when viewed against the material cultural background there is almost a perverseness about the system suggested for Beirgh by its excavator, which also seems to reflect an obsession with stone structures rather than with the entire technology and economy of the site.
It must have been obvious from an early stage that the ‘Early Pictish’ period of cellular structures was yielding a material culture which was more or less identical to that of the previous broch period so why describe it as ‘Pictish’? This not only pushes aside, first, the clear evidence of a basic continuity with earlier times and, second, that for a sharp change in material culture in the ‘Late Pictish’ horizons, but also assumes without real argument a cultural identity with Pictland proper which hinges on only the handful of the characteristic carvings which are known in the Western Isles. Orkney too is on the periphery of Pictland proper and one may doubt that resemblances between any buildings there and in the Long Island constitute plausible evidence for the political subjection of the Outer Hebrides to the Pictish kingdom.
The four C-14 dates for the cellular structure mentioned earlier entirely support the allocation of this period to the later part of the Middle Iron Age. They indicate a time span largely within the first half of the first millennium.
3. Dimensions
The overall diameters are 16.7m (54.8 ft) east-west and 17.1m (56.07 ft) north-south [3, fig. 16]. The correspond-ing internal diameters are 10.2 and 10.7m (33.4 and 35.1 ft) so the average wall pro-portion would thus be 38.2%. Beirgh broch encloses one of the largest central courts known among brochs anywhere.
Sources: 1. NMRS site no. NB 13 NW 3: 2. RCAHMS 1928, 20, no. 69: 3. Harding and Gilmour 2000: 4. Harding and Armit 1990, 94-107.
E W MacKie 2007
