Accessibility

Font Size

100% 150% 200%

Background Colour

Default Contrast
Close Reset

Pricing Change

New pricing for orders of material from this site will come into place shortly. Charges for supply of digital images, digitisation on demand, prints and licensing will be altered. 

 

Loch Of Stenness

Crannog(S) (Period Unassigned)

Site Name Loch Of Stenness

Classification Crannog(S) (Period Unassigned)

Alternative Name(s) Orkney Crannog Survey

Canmore ID 273914

Site Number HY21NE 85

NGR HY 260 151

NGR Description HY 260 151 to HY 262 150

Datum OSGB36 - NGR

Permalink http://canmore.org.uk/site/273914

Ordnance Survey licence number AC0000807262. All rights reserved.
Canmore Disclaimer. © Bluesky International Limited 2025. Public Sector Viewing Terms

Toggle Aerial | View on large map

Digital Images

Administrative Areas

  • Council Orkney Islands
  • Parish Sandwick
  • Former Region Orkney Islands Area
  • Former District Orkney
  • Former County Orkney

Archaeology Notes

HY21NE 85

A preliminary study of Orkney crannogs was undertaken in 2004. The lochs of Stenness and Wasbister on Rousay were examined, where sites had been noted that had the appearance of having been artificially constructed. In the vicinity of the Loch of Stenness are numerous important archaeological sites including the Stenness standing stones, the Ring of Brodgar and a number of cairns. The sites to be examined were at the end of the loch furthest from these remains.

Loch of Stenness (Sandwick parish)

HY 260 151 Site 1. Small island in shallow water, 60m from the shore. The part of the site above the water is oval and has the remains of a wall along the long axis. The site was examined above and below water but there was substantial plant growth on the top that obscured the surface to a significant extent. In the water immediately around the island the stones covering it were obvious for the first few metres, but the loch bed further out was substantially covered with fine algae, water weeds and small clumps of seaweed.

A sondage was cut into the stones, 6.4m out from the edge of the site on the S side. About 25cm down, three sherds of pottery were discovered and a small piece of bone. Two of the sherds are rims and the other piece joins with one of them. There is a burnt residue on the outside of the two rim sherds, and on all of them the surface features show little erosion. The sherds were in a layer of stones, brown earthy silt and the remains of weed roots. There is a clear stone slab causeway leading to the shore. At certain states of the tides the causeway is submerged, but it is clearly visible at all times.

Along the edge of the shoreline adjacent to the site there are stones set on edge, overlain by a substantial depth of topsoil. It is possible that these stones were a revetment to protect the peninsula on the shore, known as The Ness, from erosion in the past. There is also an alignment of bedrock at the end of The Ness that appears to have been quarried in the past, and one slab is still out of place, raised on a smaller stone that seems to have been placed under it to act as a fulcrum to lever the slab out. On The Ness is reputedly the remains of a chapel, seen now as a mound covered with earth and grass. Nearby in the water, on the opposite side of The Ness from the planned site, is a boat noost and a small enclosure made of slabs, of unknown purpose.

HY 261 149 Site 2. From the shore this island looked similar to Site 1, but on closer inspection it was seen to be crescent-shaped and there was no evidence that it had been occupied. Nothing was discovered in the examination of the loch bed around the site. The same brown earthy silt layer was noted as at Site 1, but it seemed to overlie loch bed clay that appeared to be the natural substrate.

HY 262 150 Site 3. Near to Sites 1 and 2 is a ridge of material that appears to cut off the end of the loch. It is in line with Site 2, and it had been thought that they might be related. Examination underwater showed that the ridge is much wider underwater than it appears on the surface. The area that projects above the water does so at certain states of the tide, and it is submerged at other times. Earlier in the year it had been noted that the outer face of the ridge seemed to be artificially built up, but this could not be seen on this trip because of the substantial cover of algae and weeds. Overall, it would appear that the ridge is substantially natural, but it may have been modified in the past to dam the area behind it, possibly as an aid to fishing or to artificially maintain the water level at Site 1.

N Dixon and B Forbes 2004.

A summary of the work carried out by the Scottish Trust for Underwater Archaeology in 2004 is included in The University of Edinburgh's 50th Annual Report, 2004.

N Dixon 2004

References

MyCanmore Image Contributions


Contribute an Image

MyCanmore Text Contributions