Measured Survey
Date 12 April 2012
Event ID 931016
Category Recording
Type Measured Survey
Permalink http://canmore.org.uk/event/931016
This small fort was surveyed by RCAHMS in April 2012 in advance of excavation there by the Galloway Picts Project in May and June. In lieu of the results of that work, the following account is limited to a description of the physical remains and it should be read with reference to the annotated plan SC1309006.
The fort comprises a hilltop enclosure (I), defined by a thick wall running around the crest of the summit, with two further lines of defence to the N and S. The first of these is a second wall (II) about 7m down the slope, the third an outer wall (III) which is accompanied by a massive external rock-cut ditch.
The summit enclosure is sub-oval on plan, measuring about 29m from N to S by 17m transversely within the remains of a timber-laced wall that has been reduced for the most part to a low grass-grown stony bank up to 5m in thickness. That this wall has been burnt is evident from the fragments of vitrified material visible both in the surviving bank and in the scree below. On the W side of the fort in particular the wall has been heavily robbed, with the pattern of the scarring indicating that the robbers dug into it from the outside, only stopping when they reached and removed the inner wall-face. This robbing was probably carried out to provide stone for the drystone dyke that runs along the western foot of the hill. Certainly, the deliberate casting down of wall material would account for both the massive amount of loose scree towards the foot of the slope and the presence within the dyke of lumps of vitrified wall-core. It may also provide a context for the saddle quern (NX55NE 172) incorporated into the wall, which was identified during the course of the survey.
The pattern of the robbing of the rampart in relation to the natural topography, especially the top edges of vertical rock-faces, also demonstrates that on the W side at least the original timber-laced wall could not have been more than about 4m in thickness. The entrance to the enclosure, though it may not be original, is on the S, where there is a distinct dip in the surface of the bank and where it is approached from the S by a passage that lends its way between two prominent rock outcrops, the W one bearing carvings of Pictish symbols (NX55NE 2.02). The interior of the summit enclosure is characterised by a spine of bedrock that runs the length of the interior and separates the higher western half from the lower eastern half. Several low scarps within the former are suggestive of building stances or platforms but none is definitive; the area of the latter is dominated by the spoil-heaps and trenches of Charles Thomas’ excavation in 1960.
The first outwork (II) is situated only a little way down the slope from the summit fort but the relation between the two is not at all clear. On the N, this line is indicated by nothing more than a bank or wall that has been cast down to form a 15m long crest with a flat area behind. It runs from the naturally steep cliff-edge on the W to a point where it would have started to arc around the NE flank of the hill. Any evidence that it did indeed continue is now masked by the grass-grown scree from the ruined timber-laced wall above. At the S end, this wall again appears to have run for a distance of at least 8m from the steep natural slope on the W, along the crest of a narrow terrace to a point where it is interrupted by what appears to be a continuation of the spine of rock visible in the interior. The NE side of this spine forms the SW side of the sunken approach to the entrance but there is no indication that the bank turned back along this spine to meet the wall of the inner enclosure. There is also no visible evidence that the outwork continued to the NE of the entrance passage, the area where it might be expected to be seen being obscured, at least in part, by the spoil cast down the slope from the excavation of the well or cistern. It may be the case, however, that the fort builders thought that a sufficient obstacle was provided by a steep natural rock-face, one of several NE and SW orientated seams of outcrop on the E flank of the hill.
The outermost outwork (III) again runs from the steep natural slopes on the W to the still steep but far less craggy E flank of the hill. Excavation by Thomas at the N end of the fort showed this line to comprise a wall with an outer drystone face fronted by a rock-cut ditch measuring some 50m in length and up to 5m in breadth. The eastern end of this feature has been lost to quarrying but it is unlikely to have extended much further onto the ever-steepening E flank of the hill. On the S, the feature takes a slightly different form. The wall extends a distance of about 30m from the steep W slope along the leading edge of a terrace, the front face of which has been artificially steepened by quarrying away rock from its foot. There is no outer edge per se to this feature but at a distance of 4-7m from the scarped slope there is a low stony bank that Thomas interpreted as a rampart. However, it is difficult to see how such a low feature could have served any useful defensive role and it is more likely to be the equivalent of a low counterscarp bank formed with spoil thrown forward from the enhanced face of the terrace. Within the intervening gap are what may be the remains of a small oval or subrectangular building (IV), its E end defined by a low stony bank, its N side by a low scarp and its S side by the low bank running along the crest of the terrace. No trace is visible of its W end.
Situated immediately SW of the entrance passage, between the wall of the summit enclosure and the first outwork, is a oval stance (V), which measures about 9m from NE to SW by 5m transversely and may indicate the site of a timber building. On the S, its front is marked by the flattened remains of the first outwork bank and it is here that any entrance is likely to have been situated; its E side is defined by the spine of rock forming the SW side of the entrance passage; and on the W and N there is a deep cut into the natural slope. One of the trenches dug by Charles Thomas in 1960 traversed the back of this feature but the results were inconclusive.
The well or cistern (VI) is situated on the SE flank of the hill immediately below the summit fort and on the NE side of the entrance passage opposite the Pictish carvings. The remains visible at the time of survey represented an overgrown reconstruction undertaken after the incomplete and inconclusive excavation by Thomas.
The quarry on the NE flank of the hill that has truncated the outer defenses is undated, though it is unlikely to be earlier than late-18th or early-19th century, when the drystone dykes in the vicinity are most likely to have been built. The quarry comprises two pits, the more northerly representing the end of a long trench that has followed a seam of rock upslope from the NE. The quarriers have evidently found a reason to widen and deepen their trench at the upper end and this has resulted in the formation of a considerable spoil-heap. The southerly pit is much smaller but it, too, appears to have followed a NE and SW orientated seam.
Visited by RCAHMS (JRS, GG, IP, ATW) 12 April 2012.
