The archæology and prehistoric annals of Scotland

by Sir Daniel Wilson

The most numerous and remarkable of all the Scottish sepulchral mounds, both for number and size, are the stone tumuli or CAIRNS, many of which are works of great labour and considerable skill. These singular monumental pyramids are by no means to be accounted for from any local peculiarities furnishing a ready supply of loose stones. They abound in almost every district of the country, and are frequently of much larger dimensions than the earthen tumuli, though the nature of their materials has led to the destruction of many of them in the progress of inclosing lands for agricultural purposes. We learn from the Book of Joshua of the practice of raising heaps of stone over the dead as a mark of indignity or abhorrence. The contents of the Scottish sepulchral cairns, however, prove for them an altogether different origin, as will appear when we come to review them in detail. They are generally designed on a larger scale than the earthen tumuli, and must have ranked at a remote period among the most distinguished honours awarded to the illustrious dead.

Another remarkable, though much rarer sepulchral monument, is the Cromlech, or "Druidical altar," as it was long erroneously termed, until archæologists, abandoning theory for observation, discovered that these huge monolithic structures invariably marked the sites of ancient sepulture. Similar primitive colossal structures are found, not only throughout the whole British Isles, but in many parts of the continent of Europe, and are occasionally discovered, like the slighter cist, entombed beneath the earth-pyramid or tumulus, affording thereby singular evidence of the unostentatious liberality with which the honours of the dead were rendered in the olden time to which they belong.

The Wiltshire of Scotland, in so far as the mere number of sepulchral mounds, along with monolithic groups and other aboriginal structures, can constitute this distinction, is the mainland of Orkney, with one or two of the neighbouring isles. Few of their contents, however, have proved of the same valuable character as those which have been discovered not only in Aberdeenshire, Fifeshire, and some of the southern Lowland counties, but also in the Western Isles. We are therefore led to infer that the population of Orkney has been little more distinguished for wealth, or great advancement in the arts, during its earlier history than in more recent times. Abundant evidence, however, testifies to the occupation of these islands by a human population at a very remote era, and no Scottish locality ever furnished a greater variety of interesting relics of the primeval period. In the single parish of Sandwick, near Stromness, upwards of an hundred tumuli of different sizes have been observed, many of which have been recently opened, and their contents described. In the parish of Orphir, in like manner, considerable research has been made into the character and contents of these ancient memorials; while throughout nearly the whole of the neighbouring islands, the mosses and moors which have escaped the obliterating inroads of the ploughshare, are covered with similar monumental heaps.

It is not to be doubted that such relics of ancient population were once no less common throughout the whole mainland of Scotland, and especially in the fertile districts of the low country, where the earliest traces of a numerous population may reasonably be sought for. A sufficient number still remain in Fife and the Lothians, as well as in the southern counties, to afford means of comparison with other localities; while numerous discoveries of cists, urns, and ancient implements, leave no room to doubt that the same race once occupied the whole island, and practised similar arts and rites in the long cultivated districts of the low country, as in the remotest of the northern or western isles.

It is not improbable that extended observation may justify a more minute classification of the primitive sepulchral monuments of Scotland than has been attempted above, and may establish a relative chronological arrangement of them on a satisfactory basis. With our present imperfect knowledge, any theoretic system would only embarrass future inquiry. But meanwhile it may assist in forming a basis for further operations, to note the following attempts at systematic arrangement from such data as are available.

1. The Scottish long barrow, which is generally somewhat depressed in the centre, and more elevated towards one end than the other, may be assumed with little hesitation as one of the earliest forms of sepulchral earth-works. It is now comparatively rare. As the work of a thinly scattered population, it is probable that examples of it were never very numerous, and of these we may perhaps assume that the greater number have been gradually obliterated by structures of more recent date. So far as I am aware, no metallic implements have ever been found in the Scottish long barrow. Examples of pottery are also of very rare occurrence, and it is doubtful if any of these have furnished instances of the presence of the cinerary urn and its imperfectly burned contents in the primeval sepulchres. It is rather indeed from the absence of traces of art or ingenuity that we may most satisfactorily assign to this class of mounds the priority in point of antiquity. The form of the long barrow seems in itself to suggest the probability of an earlier origin than the circular tumulus, since it is only an enlargement of the ordinary grave-mound which naturally results from the displacement of the little space of earth occupied by the body, and in this respect strikingly corresponds with the most primitive ideas of a distinctive sepulchral memorial—a larger mound to mark that of the chief or priest, from the encircling heaps of common graves. In a long barrow opened in the neighbourhood of Port Seaton, East-Lothian, in 1833, a skeleton was found laid at full length within a rude cist. It indicated the remains of a man nearly seven feet high, but the bones crumbled to dust soon after their exposure to the air.[53] One of the largest Scottish earth-works of this primitive form is that already referred to, situated on the margin of the loch of Stennis, in the vicinity of the celebrated Orcadian Stonehenge. It is the only long barrow on the mainland of Orkney, but its form and proportions differ considerably from those commonly met with. It seems probable that this belongs to a late era, and owes its origin to the same Norwegian source as the neighbouring conoid earth pyramids that tower above the bowl barrows of the aboriginal Orcadians.

At a very early date, undoubtedly within the primitive era to which we give the name of the Stone Period, but apparently only towards its close, the practice of cremation was introduced. This, however, is one of the many points that must be left for final determination when a greater number of accurate and trustworthy observations have been accumulated. Meanwhile it may be assumed as unquestionable, that simple inhumation is the most ancient of all modes of disposing of the dead, and we possess abundant evidence of its use in this country, apparently by the earliest colonists of whom any definite traces now exist. We are not without proof that there was a long transition-period after the remarkable change consequent on the acquisition of metals, before the stone implements and arts were completely superseded by those of bronze; and it is to this era we shall most probably have to assign the first practice of cremation. Both the introduction of the metallurgic arts and the change of sepulchral rites may indeed be equally supposed to mark the influence, if not the advent, of a new race. In nearly every state of society the burial of the dead is associated with the most sacred tenets of religion, and its wonted rites are among the very last to be affected by change. It accords therefore with all analogy that the source of so remarkable a change should come from without, and accompany other equally important social revolutions. It will be seen in a succeeding chapter, that some of the very rudest and apparently most primitive of cinerary urns yet found in Scotland have been associated with undoubted proofs of their connexion with the bronze period. But it has not hitherto been the prevailing fault of British antiquaries to assign too remote an era to the introduction of the funeral pile. It has rather been one of the endless blunders springing from the too exclusively classical nature of modern education, to assume for it a Roman origin, and to accept the urn as an evidence of Roman influence and example, even where it was owned to be the product of native art. If, however, we make sufficient allowance for the poetical preference of the funeral fire and the inurned ashes, rather than the simple and more common rite, and so decline to receive some of the allusions of Virgil and Ovid as historic evidence of the ancient usage of the former by the Romans, we shall find good reason for inferring that the funeral pile should rank among the later introductions of Roman luxury, derived in all probability from the Greeks, by whom it was used at a very early period. The oldest accounts indeed which we possess of the sepulchral honours of the funeral pile, the urn, and the monumental tumulus, are the descriptions of the funeral rites of Patroclus and Hector in the Iliad. The whole circumstances are characterized by much simple grace and beauty:—the burning of the body during the night, the libations of wine with which the embers were quenched at the dawn, the inurning of the ashes of the deceased, and the methodic construction of the pyramid of earth which covered the sacred deposit, and preserved the memory of the honoured dead.[54] The testimony of Pliny, on the contrary, is most distinct as to the introduction of a similar practice among the Romans at a comparatively late period.[55]

Independent of the consideration of Roman usage, it is unquestionable that the funeral pile must have been in use in the British Isles for many generations before the era of the Roman Invasion, if not indeed before that of Rome's mythic founder. But the evidence of the Scottish tumuli, while it proves the ancient practice of cremation, shows also the contemporaneous custom of inhumation; nor is it possible, so far as I can see, to determine from the amount of evidence yet obtained, that one of these was esteemed more honourable than the other.[56] It is not, indeed, uncommon for the larger tumuli to contain a single cist, with the inhumed remains untouched by fire, and around it, at irregular intervals, several cinerary urns, sometimes varying in size and style, but all containing the half-burned bones and ashes of the dead. The inference which such an arrangement suggests would seem to point to inhumation as the more honourable rite; but even where either inhumation or cremation has been the sole mode of disposing of the bodies, we still detect obvious marks of distinction, and of superior honours conferred on one or more of the occupants of the tumulus. In one of the largest of a numerous group of tumuli near Stromness, in Orkney, which was opened by the Rev. Charles Clouster, minister of Sandwick, in 1835, evidences of six separate interments were found, all so disposed on the original soil, and in contact with each other, as scarcely to admit of doubt that the whole had taken place prior to the formation of the earthen mound beneath which they lay. Two large and carefully constructed cists occupied the centre, and contained burnt bones, but without urns; while around these were four other cists, extremely rude, and greatly inferior both in construction and dimensions. In such we probably should recognise the family cemetery,—the two larger and more important cists containing, it may be, the chief and his wife, and the surrounding ones their children, or favourite dependents, or perhaps their slaves.

One of the most interesting examples which have been accurately observed of simple interment accompanied with urns and relics entirely belonging to the primitive period, was discovered on the opening of a small tumulus in the parish of Cruden, Aberdeenshire. Within it was found a cist containing two skeletons nearly entire. One of these was that of an adult, while the other appeared to have been a youth of twelve or thirteen years of age, in addition to which there were also portions of the skeleton of a dog. Beside them stood two rude clay urns, slightly ornamented with encircling lines, but containing no incinerated remains; and within the cist were found seven flint arrow-heads, two flint knives, and a polished stone, similar to one now in the Scottish Museum, which is described in a succeeding chapter. It is slightly convex on one side, and concave on the other, with small holes drilled at the four corners, by which it would seem to have been attached, most probably, to the dress, as an article of personal adornment. These curious relics are now in the collection of Adam Arbuthnot, Esq., of Peterhead.