Garvellachs, Dun Chonaill

Dun Chonaill Castle, Garvellachs.

The island of Dun Chonaill lies at the NE extremity of the Garvellachs, about midway between the much larger neighbouring islands of Jura and Mull. The site is one of great strategic importance, commanding as it does the two main sea-routes giving access from the southern Hebrides to Lorn and the Sound of Mull. On a clear day the view from Dun Chonaill embraces almost the entire southern approaches to the Firth of Lorn, extending from the Ross of Mull to the Gulf of Corryvreckan. The northern outlet of the Sound of Luing lies only 5 km to the E, while northwards the Sound of Kerrera, Loch Linnhe and the island of Lismore are all plainly visible.

The island measures about 550m from NE to SW by 220m transversely overall. The central portion comprises an approximately flat-topped summit, some 85m in extent, rising to a height of about 60m OD and surrounded on all except the NE and s sides by steep cliffs which descend to a rocky shelf lying immediately above the water. At each end of the island there is a lesser summit, or knoll, separated from the central area by a narrow isthmus of low ground whose adjacent sea inlets provide a choice of landing-places in accordance with varying weather conditions. The southeasterly of the pair of inlets at the NE end of the island lies at the foot of the only practicable path of approach to the summit and is sheltered from the prevailing westerly winds; this evidently constituted the principal boat-landing. Although the island as a whole is fully exposed to the elements and landing is often difficult or impossible, the summit itself is comparatively sheltered and in summer supports a lush growth of grass. There is little room on the island for cultivation, however, other than for small garden plots, but the neighbouring islands of Garbh Eileach and Eileach an Naoimh contain several areas of cultivable ground and the former today supports a herd of deer; fish and various other seafoods are also obtainable locally.

Architectural Description:

The principal buildings of the castle occupied the summit which, where not rendered inaccessible by precipitous cliffs, was enclosed by a curtain-wall of medieval date. The approach path that led up from the boat-landing was likewise partially walled in and was also defended by a series of gateways. To the NE of the boat-landing lay another group of buildings, partially enclosed by a curtain-wall, while a further section of wall enclosed the summit of the adjacent knoll. The corresponding knoll at the SW end of the island was also partially enclosed by a curtain-wall. The curtain-walls appear in general to have been constructed of local rubble, composed mainly of flaggy sandstone with occasional limestone blocks and beach-boulders, laid in coarse lime mortar. Some portions of the curtain, however, were evidently of drystone construction, as were all the other buildings on the island now sufficiently well preserved to admit of examination. A single fragment of fine-grained sandstone, probably derived from Carsaig (n.1), was also noted at the date of visit, suggesting that some portions of the castle incorporated freestone dressings.

The Main Summit. From the principal boat-landing the approach path winds steeply upwards to enter a shallow gully which rises gently to the summit. The isthmus that separates this boat-landing from its neighbour to the NW is revetted on both sides with masonry and appears to have been artificially levelled to form a small platform. Immediately above this platform lay the lowermost of three gateways (A on the plan) that defended the approach; the position of the gateway is now indicated simply by a gap in the flanking walls. Beyond the gateway the path continues upwards for a distance of 30m, being flanked on its E side by a wall some 2m in thickness, before turning obliquely to rise more steeply beneath a rock cliff to a second gateway (B). This appears to have had a width of 1.4m and its jambs still stand to a height of 1.3m.

Beyond a short distance to the third gateway (C), which is centrally placed within a strongly built section of wall that blocks the mouth of the gully; the SE end of this wall is intaken at two levels, the outer facework being noticeably battered. Little remains of the gateway itself, but immediately to the SE of the entrance-passage there are traces of a small subrectangular building (D) which may have served as a guard-house. From there a narrow path ascends SE to give access to a small square platform (E), partly of artificial construction, which commands the boat-landing and approach path. This may have been a look-out post.

The arrangements on the summit itself can best be understood by reference to the plan. The curtain-wall was neither continuous nor uniform, having been designed rather to supplement than to replace the natural defences of the site. Thus, on the NW side, where the cliffs fall sheer to the rock ledge below, little or no walling was evidently considered necessary, whereas on the SE and sw sides short sections of a wall were constructed at various levels to seal off gullies and other possible paths of access, as well as along the rim of the summit itself. At the point F there appears to have been a postern gateway from which a narrow path descended to the SW shore. About half-way down this path a short section of transverse wall (G) may indicate the position of a lower gateway or outwork. A small building (H), situated just inside the postern gateway, may have been a guard-house.

The remains of ten buildings of subrectangular plan are now identifiable on the summit, but none is sufficiently well preserved to enable its character and function to be determined by superficial examination. The largest of them (J), which measures 16.5m by 7.5m transversely over walls some 1.2m in thickness, incorporates an annexe at one end. Another (K), only slightly smaller in size, stands at the mouth of a gully close to the NW curtain-wall. To the SW there is an enclosure (L) flanked on one side by a building and on the other by two small reed-grown depressions which may have been used as water-catchment pools. Two similar depressions (M) lie a little to the NE, close to the highest point of the summit. In the apparent absence of a well these catchment pools appear to have constituted the only source of water-supply. The age of these buildings is uncertain, but it seems probable that most of them are of medieval date.

The NE Knoll and Associated Buildings. The NE knoll was defended by what appears to have been a drystone wall, some 1.3m in thickness, running round the sand E sides of the summit. Elsewhere the knoll is inaccessible, except at its SW extremity where a narrow and easily defended path leads up to the summit by way of conveniently placed rock ledges. The fortification of this knoll, and of the corresponding knoll at the SW end of the island, may have been undertaken chiefly to prevent its occupation by an intending assailant of the main castle. The area of low ground between the knoll and the principal boat-landing was protected on the N by a curtain-wall some 1.5m in thickness. At the E end of this wall, which now stands to a maximum height of 2.5m, there are traces of a gateway (N) giving access to the NW shore of the island. To the S of the knoll there may be seen the remains of four subrectangular buildings (P), while a fifth (Q) lies a short distance to the NE. The buildings vary in size from about 12mby 6m to 5m by 3m over walls some 1.2m in thickness and all are noticeably round-cornered both internally and externally; some appear to have been dwellings. Although considerably better preserved than the structures on the summit these buildings are probably of contemporary or near-contemporary date.

The SW Knoll and Associated Buildings. The summit of the SW knoll, which is considerably larger than its neighbour at the NE end of the island, was likewise defended where necessary by an enclosing wall. This wall, too, is of drystone construction, but the preponderance of limestone boulders, quarried from the knoll, gives it a distinctive appearance. The wall is best preserved on the s side where it has a width of 1.5m and a height of 1.2m. Midway along this side of the wall a gap (R), situated at the head of the only practicable path of approach, may mark the position of the entrance. There are no traces of structures on the summit, but immediately beneath the E side of the knoll there is a well-preserved subrectangular building (S) and an adjacent enclosure, both probably of comparatively recent date.

Historical Note. Although not mentioned by name. Dun Chonaill was probably one of four castles known to have been held by Ewen (MacDougall) of Lorn from King Hakon of Norway in the middle of the 13th century. It is first named in 1343, when David II granted custody of the royal castles of Cairnburgh, lselborgh and Dun Chonaill, together with the lands and small islands pertaining to them, to John I, Lord of the Isles. Eleven years later John of Lorn relinquished his own claims to the same castles and in 1390 Donald, Lord of the Isles, granted to Lachlan MacLean of Duart various lands and castles, including half of the constabulary of the castles of Dun Chonaill and Dunkerd, together with lands in and near the Garvellachs. Nothing further is heard of Dunkerd, but 'the great castle of DunquhonIe' is included in a list of castles in the Western Isles compiled at about this time by the chronicler John of Fordun (n.2).

Dun Chonaill continued in the possession of the MacLeans until about the second quarter of the 17th century, when it passed to the Campbell Earls of Argyll, but although this period is comparatively well documented the castle has no record of military activity. Dean Monro, however, writing in 1549, noted the existence of 'ane Ile callit Dunchonill sa namet from Conill Kernoch ane strength, and alsmekle to say in English as ane round Castell'. Little mention is made of the castle by early travellers and the first detailed description of the site was published by Christison in 1889 (n.3).

The castle of Dunkerd, mentioned only in the document of 1390 referred to above, has not been identified. In view of Dunkerd's association with the Garvellachs, however, and the fact that its constabulary was united with that of Dun Chonaill, it is possible that the name may have been applied to the detached portion of the fortifications occupying the NE end of the island of Dun Chonaill (n.4).

RCAHMS 1984, visited June 1974

n1. Inventory of Argyll, 3, No. 380

n.2 Anderson, Early Sources, 2, 556; APS, 12, 6; Highland Papers, 1, 75- 8; RM S, 2 (1424-1513), no. 2264; Chron. Fordun, 1, 43; cf. also Inventory of Argyll, 3, No. 335.

n.3 RPC, II (1616-19), 164; RMS, 7 (1609- 20), nos. 1008 and 1628; 11 (1660-8), no. 921; Origines Parochiales, 2, part. 1, 277-8; Monro, Western Isles, 51, 122-4; Munro, R W, 'The Garvellach Isles', Notes and Queries of the Society of West Highland and Island Historical Research, 8 (1978), 12-14; PSAS, 23 (1888-9), 407-9; 30 (1895-6), 27-8; 90 (1956-7), 208.

n.4 Cf. the similar explanation of the name Iselborgh put forward in connection with Cairburgh Castle (RCAHMS). The name could well derive from Dun nan Ceard meaning 'fort of the smiths'.

RCAHMS surveyed Dun Chonail Castle at 1:500 over 3 days. The site plan was reproduced in ink and published at a reduced scale (RCAHMS 1984, fig. 267).