Outline plans of five
Iron Age sites in Scotland and one (West Brandon) in northeast England. All
illustrate the importance of the round house in its different forms. Dun
Troddan is a broch, and the defences at Clickhimin enclose another structure of
this type. Kilphedir is a wheelhouse. Glenachan, West Brandon, and Hayhope
Knowe are bounded by single or double palisades. At Hayhope Knoll there is also
an earthwork enclosure. Information from D. Harding (2004).
A form of defended homestead peculiar to Scotland is the
broch. Nearly 600 are known, almost all of them lying beyond the Highland Line,
with over a hundred in Caithness. A broch is a tower, of drystone construction,
the walls about 15 feet thick and the interior area anything from 30 to 40 feet
in diameter. Few are more than 20 feet high, although the one at Dun Telve,
Inverness-shire, is, even now, 33 feet high, and this in spite of its having
been robbed over the centuries for building stone, a fate which has overtaken
many of the others. The most famous, the largest and the best-preserved broch
is that at Mousa, in the Shetlands, and this is 40 feet high. There was but a
single door into a broch, and a staircase and other chambers were constructed
in the thickness of the walls. They are often difficult to date individually,
but in general terms they were being built in the last centuries BC and
occupation in some cases, as at Dun Cuier, on Barra, continued on and off into
the seventh century AD.
An aerial view of the broch on Mousa, in the Shetlands. The ruin in the
rectangular enclosure is a house, the old Haa.
Round dry-stone defensive structure of the 1st millennium
BC, examples of which are concentrated in Shetland, Orkney, Caithness and the
Western Isles in Scotland. Traditionally the term `broch' has been restricted
to the more elaborate circular examples of a diverse family of compact
fortified buildings erected in the Scottish Iron Age; the famous broch of MOUSA
forms, in effect, a type site. Mackie has attempted to regularize the term by
selecting the technically sophisticated high hollow-built wall, which often
contains chambers and a staircase to an upper floor, as a principal defining
feature (Mackie 1965). However, Hedges (Hedges and Bell 1980) and others have
argued that simpler round fortified structures such as the early (c. 600 BC) Bu
Broch, Stomness, are also true brochs. A solution to this, partly semantic,
problem is provided by Armit who argues that Mackie's elaborate brochs are best
classified as `tower brochs' within a wider category of round houses, thus
freeing the term `broch' to be used more loosely (Armit 1990).
Traditionally, brochs have been consigned to a relatively
brief interval after the 1st century BC. However, modern excavations have made
this late dating seem unlikely, and even the developed `tower brochs' may have
been emerging a century or so earlier. Recent explanations of the origins of
the broch (e. g. Armit 1990) have discarded the idea of migrants from the
south, preferring to stress local prototypes and the broch's functional and symbolic
importance in the negotiation of power.
#
#
In the early centuries of the first millennium, native society
was undergoing profound political and social change. We see in the heightened
development of social inequality and hierarchy the emergence of what
anthropologists might term a `chiefdom society'. The appearance of souterrains
(large underground stores) in the eastern mainland is but one reflection of
ongoing attempts to maximize the extraction of wealth from the land and
concentrate it in the hands of the few. All over Scotland, small-scale power
structures founded on face-to-face relations were being superseded by
far-reaching systems of control, distant authority delegated to local leaders
in return for a share of the tribute. The rise and fall of the famous brochs
are an architectural manifestation of the beginning of this trend away from the
intensive and towards the extensive exercise of power, as hierarchies of space
within a settlement (internally differentiated sites of similar form throughout
the landscape) were replaced by new hierarchies between settlements (major
centres controlling dependent sites). Political units, however, remained
comparatively small. Identity was vested at the level of the tribe whose
members might have numbered only a few thousand.
#
The tendency to build self-contained circular enclosures
reached its apogee in western and northern Scotland, and especially in the Hebrides,
Orkney, and Shetland (Fig. 5.12). Unfortunately some of the strongest
patterning has been obscured by disagreements about terminology and chronology
(Armit ed. 1990; Armit 1992; Parker Pearson and Sharples 1996: chapter 12; D.
Harding 2004: chapter 5).
Again the circular archetype was very important and extended
from individual dwellings to more monumental walled enclosures. All these
features were conceived on an impressive scale. They vary from the crannogs
built in open water to small circular compounds, and from relatively
insubstantial dwellings to massive domestic buildings, the most impressive of
which - the brochs of the Scottish mainland, the Western and Northern Isles -
resemble towers (Armit 2003b). Some of these structures are isolated but quite
densely distributed and were surely designed to impress, whilst others can be
found inside defended enclosures which contain a variety of other buildings.
Many of them were distributed along the coast where there were a number of
promontory forts (Armit 1992).
Here is another case in which large round houses may have
been an important settlement form from an early stage of the Iron Age. Ian
Armit (2003b) has argued that structures ancestral to brochs were built as
early as 600 BC and that during the Iron Age stone houses in Atlantic Scotland
became increasingly complex in design. True brochs seem to have emerged about
200 BC. They are interpreted as defended high-status dwellings, characterised
by such features as internal staircases and guard cells. They must have had
more than one storey, and there can no longer be any doubt that they were
roofed.
Some of the structural principles that characterise the
brochs extend to other forms of defensive architecture: to some of the circular-walled
enclosures known as duns and even to the monumental gateways of a number of the
promontory forts in Shetland (Hamilton 1968; D. Harding 2004: 137-50). Another
key element is the way in which domestic structures were organised. In some
brochs there seems to have been a communal space with a hearth located in the
centre of the building. It was ringed by a range of compartments which were
divided from one another by partitions projecting from the interior wall. In
Shetland and the Hebrides, this principle was expressed on a smaller scale in
the distinctive dwellings known as wheelhouses (Parker Pearson and Sharples
1999: chapter 12). A number of these were built after the broch themselves, and
it has yet to be worked out how far their histories overlapped. In any case
there are important contrasts between them.
Wheelhouses were sometimes set into
the ground, whereas brochs were conspicuous monuments, and on certain sites the
domestic accommodation was probably at first floor level (Armit 2003b: chapter
3). Wheelhouses were sometimes associated with souterrains, but the connection
between storage structures and individual dwellings is entirely different from
the more centralised system illustrated by hillforts in southern Britain.