'Of Fish and Men' ('De iasg agus dhaoine'): A Study of the Utilization of Marine Resources as Recovered from Selected Hebridean Archaeological Sites 9781841718798, 9781407320519

Table of contents :
Front Cover
Title Page
Copyright
Abstract
Acknowledgments
Dedication
Table of Contents
List of Figures
List of Tables
Chapter 1: Introduction
Chapter 2: Methodologies
Chapter 3: The physical and bio-geographical context of the Outer Hebrides
Chapter 4: Taphonomy: fish bone and molluscan assemblages at Bostadh Beach
Chapter 5: Aspects of harvesting marine resources in recent centuries
Chapter 6: A preliminary overview of fishing artefacts in the Scottish archaeological record
Chapter 7: Archaeological signatures, ethnography and modern fisheries biology: the Bostadh Beach case study
Chapter 8: Iron Age and Norse Period fishing in the Western Isles
Chapter 9: Conclusion
Bibliography

Citation preview

BAR 400 2005  CERÓN-CARRASCO  ‘OF FISH AND MEN’

‘Of Fish and Men’ (‘De iasg agus dhaoine’) A Study of the Utilization of Marine Resources as Recovered from Selected Hebridean Archaeological Sites

Ruby N. Cerón-Carrasco

BAR British Series 400 B A R

2005

‘Of Fish and Men’ (‘De iasg agus dhaoine’) A Study of the Utilization of Marine Resources as Recovered from Selected Hebridean Archaeological Sites

Ruby N. Cerón-Carrasco

BAR British Series 400 2005

Published in 2016 by BAR Publishing, Oxford BAR British Series 400 ‘Of Fish and Men’ (‘De iasg agus dhaoine’) © R N Cerón-Carrasco and the Publisher 2005 The author's moral rights under the 1988 UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act are hereby expressly asserted. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be copied, reproduced, stored, sold, distributed, scanned, saved in any form of digital format or transmitted in any form digitally, without the written permission of the Publisher.

ISBN 9781841718798 paperback ISBN 9781407320519 e-format DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9781841718798 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library BAR Publishing is the trading name of British Archaeological Reports (Oxford) Ltd. British Archaeological Reports was first incorporated in 1974 to publish the BAR Series, International and British. In 1992 Hadrian Books Ltd became part of the BAR group. This volume was originally published by Archaeopress in conjunction with British Archaeological Reports (Oxford) Ltd / Hadrian Books Ltd, the Series principal publisher, in 2005. This present volume is published by BAR Publishing, 2016.

BAR

PUBLISHING BAR titles are available from: BAR Publishing 122 Banbury Rd, Oxford, OX2 7BP, UK E MAIL [email protected] P HONE +44 (0)1865 310431 F AX +44 (0)1865 316916 www.barpublishing.com

Abstract This book attempts to interpret the exploitation of marine resources and the organisation of their uses during later prehistory in the Western Isles of Scotland. Particular attention is focused on the analysis of the fish, molluscan and cetacean remains recovered during the excavation of a settlement at Bostadh Beach in Great Bernera, Lewis. Comparisons are made with fish bone assemblages recovered from other later prehistoric sites in the Western Isles. A key objective is the reconstruction of regional fishing practices particularly during the Iron Age and Norse periods. This account demonstrates how marine resource exploitation was undertaken and shows how these resources may have been used. Archaeozoological and ethnoarchaeological methods of study were employed. Five aspects of research are considered: fish biology, modern fisheries, ancient fisheries, taphonomy and ethnography. The role of fishing during the Iron Age and Norse periods around the Hebridean Islands is assessed, in terms of economic, social and technological factors. Fish biology and taphonomy provided the necessary association between modern and ancient fishing traditions. Taphonomy and ethnographical studies also linked past and present and allowed a more solidly based reconstruction of the islands’ fishing industry through time. The combination of archaeological faunal analysis and ethnoarchaeological approaches provides data for understanding the character of fishing practices in the later prehistory of Great Bernera and other nearby Hebridean Isles. A key outcome is that a major difference is detected between local Iron Age and subsequent Norse practices, with the latter displaying far greater reliance on the systematic exploitation of herring (Clupea harengus) rather than cod (Gadus morhua) that was characteristic of the Norse period in other areas of Scotland.

i

Acknowledgments The completion of this work would not have been possible without the support, assistance and cooperation of a great number of colleagues, friends and family. It is with great pleasure that I can now share the results of this research and give my heartfelt thanks to all the organisations and individuals who contributed to this. Special thanks are given to Historic Scotland for supporting the Bostadh Beach Project and financing my research. To CFA and the Department of Archaeology for giving me the opportunity to be part of this project. Thanks to Mr Tim Neighbour who directed the excavations and all those who took part in them and in the post-excavation work. I am deeply thankful to Professor Ian Ralston for his guidance, understanding and all his support through the most vital moments of writing up the results of my research. Special thanks are also given to Professor James Coull for all his comments on this work. To all my colleagues from the ‘Fish Remains Working Group’ (ICAZ) also for their encouragement and inspiration: special thanks are given to Dr Eufrasia Roselló-Izquierdo, Professor Arturo Morales, Professor Oscar Polaco, Dr Ana Fabiola Guzmán, Dr Irit Zohar, Dr L. Bartosiewicz, Dr Sophia Perdikaris, Dr James Barrett, Dale Sarjeantson, Dr Foss Leach, Dr Rebecca Nicholson and all in FRGW. Many colleagues have shared their unpublished data and reference collection: I give special thanks to Andrea N Smith, Claire Ingrem, Dr. John Watt and Dr Graham Pierce. My especial thanks to the School of Scottish Studies in particular to Ian MacKenzie (Photographic Archive) and to Dr Martin McIntyre (Martain Mac an t-Saoir) who helped translate the dedication in Gaelic. To the National Museum of Scotland, special thanks to Jerry Herman for all his comments on cetaceans. I am also grateful to Dr Coralie Mills for her support throughout my years of learning and writing fish remains analysis and to John Barber who invited me in the first place to specialise in fish remains and to forget all those human skeletons… never to look back… I thank Dr Adrian Tams, Dr Jennifer Thoms and Dr Mike Church: for all the shared good and bad times. Thanks to Dr Bill Finlayson for his support in the first years of my research and to Professor Dennis Harding. To all those people who help me cope with technical and computer pains, to Ian Morrison, Pat Storey,

Kevin Hicks, George Mudie, Graham Dawes, Richard Strachan and David Henry. I would also like to thank Dr Anne Crone, Dr Ann MacSween, Rod McCullagh, Olwyn Owen, Patrick Ashmore, Dr David Breeze, Donald Murdie and Alan Fairweather. To all the people in Bernera particularly Mrs Noreen MacIver, Mrs Dora MacAulay, Ian Angus MacAulay jn. & family. I would like to thank all the many friends who have seen me through this, to my brother Galo for all the music that kept me going. To my dear family in Chile and to my dear family in Ramsay Garden: Dr Alicia Salazar-Dawes, Graham Dawes, and to ‘my children’ Nena, Greame and to Grahame. For their great love and support. Without all of you my years of research may have been long and lonely…

ii

Dedication Tha mi ag ainmeachadh na h-obrach seo air mo phàrantan, Judith Carrasco Araya de Cerón agus José Raúl Cerón Morales, oir s’ iad-san an luchd-teagaisg agus na caraidean a b’ fheàrr a bh’ agam riamh. Chuir iad annam-sa mar a ghabhainn gaol air a’ Mhuir agus air a h-uile creutair a tha beò innte. ‘S ann air sàilleamh a’ ghràidh sin a chòrd an t-saothair seo cho mòr rium. Dh’ iarr iad orm cuideachd eòlas a shireadh on fheadhainn a bhios a’ strì ris an Fhearann agus ris a’ Mhuir, leithid: oibrichean, mèinneadairean, iasgairean. O chionn ‘s ann aca-san as motha a tha tuigse air Nàdar. Tha mi cuideachd a’ cur na h-obrach seo as leth Dhòmhnaill Sgàire an Dubh Thòb (Dòmhnall Sacaria Mac Amhlaigh) agus cuideachd Mac Nèill Iain Chlabair (Iain Aonghas Mac Amhlaigh) a bhrosnaich mi gus Cuantan nan Innse Gall fhaicinn tron sùilean-sa. Dham theaghlach is do mhuinntir chòir Bheàrnaraigh Leòdhais, thoiream mo chridhe.

Éste trabajo esta dedicado a Judith Carrasco Araya de Cerón y a José Raúl Cerón Morales, mis padres, que han sido mis mejores profesores y amigos. Ellos me enseñaron a amar el Mar y sus criaturas y por eso éste trabajo a sido un inmenso placer. También me enseñaron a buscar el conocimiento de las personas de la Tierra y del Mar porque ellos son los que mejor conocen la Naturaleza. También dedico éste trabajo a la memoria de Domhnall Sgaire an Dubh Thob (Donald Zachariah MacAulay) y de Mac Niaill Iain Chlapper (Ian Angus MacAulay) que me inspiraron a ver el Mar Hébrido con sus ojos. A mi familia y a las buenas personas de Bernera en mi corazón.

I dedicate this work to Judith Carrasco Araya de Cerón and to José Raúl Cerón Morales, my parents, who have been my best teachers and friends. They taught me to love the Sea and all its creatures and I have enjoyed this work immensely because of this. They also told me to seek the knowledge of people from the Earth and the Sea for they are the ones who understand Nature the most. I also dedicate this work to the fond memory of Domhnall Sgaire an Dubh Thob (Donald Zachariah MacAulay) and to Mac Niaill Iain Chlapper (Ian Angus MacAulay) who inspired me to see the Hebridean Sea through their eyes. To my family and to the good people of Bernera in my heart.

iii

Table of Contents Abstract .............................................................................................................................................................................. i Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................................................... ii Dedication ......................................................................................................................................................................... iii Table of contexts ..........................................................................................................................................................iv-vi List of figures ............................................................................................................................................................ vii-viii List of tables ..................................................................................................................................................................... ix List of plates ...................................................................................................................................................................... ix List of appendixes.............................................................................................................................................................. ix Chapter 1: Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 1-2 1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 The research question .................................................................................................................................................. 1 1.3 The scope of the research............................................................................................................................................. 1 1.4 A note on the Scottish Iron Age................................................................................................................................... 1 1.5 Archaeology and the coast ........................................................................................................................................... 1 Chapter 2: Methodologies .......................................................................................................................................... 3-11 2.1 The Fish remains: Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 3 2.2 Nomenclature of the fish skeletal elements ................................................................................................................. 3 2.3 Identification of fish remains ....................................................................................................................................... 4 2.3.1 Accuracy of identification ........................................................................................................................................ 5 2.4 Guidelines for the identification of some skeletal elements of the family Gadidae ..................................................... 6 2.4.1 Pectoral girdle ........................................................................................................................................................... 6 The posttemporal ....................................................................................................................................................... 6 2.4.2 Hyoid arch ................................................................................................................................................................ 7 The hyomandibular .................................................................................................................................................... 7 The ceratohyal and the epihyal .................................................................................................................................. 8 2.4.3 Branchial arch: toothed bones of the pharyngeal region ........................................................................................... 8 Pharyngeal plates ...................................................................................................................................................... 8 2.5 Recording the condition of fish bone........................................................................................................................... 8 2.6 Measurement of fish bone elements ............................................................................................................................ 8 2.6.1 Otoliths and their applications .................................................................................................................................. 9 2.7 Quantification of fish remains ..................................................................................................................................... 9 2.8 Identification of marine molluscs .............................................................................................................................. 10 2.9 The quantification of molluscs .................................................................................................................................. 10 2.10 The cetacean bone analysis...................................................................................................................................... 11 2.11 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................................... 11 Chapter 3: The physical and bio-geographical context of the Outer Hebrides ................................................... 12-26 3.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................... 12 3.2 Geography ................................................................................................................................................................. 12 3.3 Aspects of topography in the Hebridean Islands ....................................................................................................... 12 3.4 The weather system: Some implications for human activity ...................................................................................... 12 3.5 The marine environment ............................................................................................................................................ 13 3.6 Sea level changes ....................................................................................................................................................... 14 3.7 Different shore types.................................................................................................................................................. 15 3.7.1 The sea shore .......................................................................................................................................................... 15 3.7.2 Zonation of the sea shore ........................................................................................................................................ 16 3.7.3 A description of the zones of the sea shore ............................................................................................................. 16 3.8 ‘The fishings of the Lewis’: a survey of fishes present in the waters adjacent to the island ................................................................................................................................................. 17 3.8.1 The marine food chain ............................................................................................................................................. 17 3.8.2 The natural history of fishes ................................................................................................................................... 18 3.8.3 Demersal fish species ............................................................................................................................................. 18 3.8.4 Gadidae species ...................................................................................................................................................... 18 3.8.5 Non-gadoid demersal fish species .......................................................................................................................... 20 3.8.6 Pelagic fish species ................................................................................................................................................. 20 3.8.7 Freshwater fish species ........................................................................................................................................... 21 3.9 Molluscs ..................................................................................................................................................................... 22 3.9.1 The mollusca species present in the Bostadh Beach assemblage ............................................................................ 22 iv

3.10 Cetaceans ................................................................................................................................................................. 23 3.10.1 Coastal cetaceans in the Western Isles .................................................................................................................. 24 3.10.2 Deepwater/offshore cetaceans .............................................................................................................................. 24 3.10.3 The stranding phenomenon amongst cetaceans .................................................................................................... 25 3.10.4 Records of stranded cetaceans in the Western Isle ............................................................................................... 25 3.11 A note on seals ......................................................................................................................................................... 25 3.12 Other marine resources: the seaweeds of the Outer Hebrides .................................................................................. 26 3.13 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................................... 26 Chapter 4: Taphonomy: fish bone and molluscan assemblages at Bostadh Beach ............................................. 27-34 4.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................... 27 4.2 Taphonomy in archaezooology .................................................................................................................................. 27 4.3 The taphonomy of fish remains ................................................................................................................................. 28 4.3.1 Processing fish on land ........................................................................................................................................... 28 4.3.2 Consumption of fish ............................................................................................................................................... 28 4.3.3 Post-depositional changes ....................................................................................................................................... 29 4.4 The taphonomy of marine molluscs ........................................................................................................................... 29 4.4.1 Types of natural taphonomic processes in marine molluscs ................................................................................... 29 4.4.2 Cultural taphonomic processes in marine molluscs ................................................................................................ 29 4.5 The fish bone and marine mollusca recovered at Bostadh Beach .............................................................................. 29 4.5.1 Description of context types ................................................................................................................................... 30 4.5.2 Fish bone survival and inter-contextual variability ................................................................................................. 31 4.5.3 The Bostadh Beach Iron Age settlement deposits ................................................................................................... 31 4.6 Taphonomy, activity systems and use of space ......................................................................................................... 32 4.6.1 Possible systems of activity and use of space at Bostadh Beach: the contextual evidence ..................................... 32 4.6.2 Internal settings: cooking and related activities at Bostadh Beach ......................................................................... 32 4.6.3 External settings ...................................................................................................................................................... 33 4.7 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................................................... 33 Chapter 5: Aspects of the harvesting marine resources in recent centuries ........................................................ 35-44 5.1 Introduction: Archaeology, ethnohistory and ethnology as interpretative tools ........................................................ 35 5.1.1 Analogy .................................................................................................................................................................. 35 5.1.2 Ethnoarchaeology ................................................................................................................................................... 35 5.1.3 The ethnoarchaeology of fishing in the Western Isles ............................................................................................ 35 5.2 Ethnographic studies and observations in Greater Bernera, Lewis, Western Isles .................................................... 36 5.3 The people, their language, the weather and the sea in oral traditions ....................................................................... 36 5.3.1 The weather lore of the Hebridean islands .............................................................................................................. 36 5.4 Fishing methods ......................................................................................................................................................... 37 5.4.1 Fishing from the shore ............................................................................................................................................ 37 5.4.2 Fishing at sea .......................................................................................................................................................... 37 5.5 Fishing implements .................................................................................................................................................... 38 5.5.1 Buoys used in Great-line fishing ............................................................................................................................. 38 5.5.2 Fishing lines and nets .............................................................................................................................................. 38 5.5.3 Boats ....................................................................................................................................................................... 38 5.6 The use of landmarks and fishing-marks ................................................................................................................... 39 5.7 Traditional elements in the dietary usage of fish in the Scottish Islands ................................................................... 40 5.8 Traditional fish by-products in the Scottish Islands ................................................................................................... 41 5.9 Division of labour in fishing communities ................................................................................................................ 41 5.10 Shellfish as bait and food in the Western Isles based on ethnographic accounts and observations ...................................................................................................................................................... 41 5.10.1 Shellfish as food ................................................................................................................................................... 41 5.10.2 Shellfish as bait ..................................................................................................................................................... 42 5.11 Whaling and sealing ................................................................................................................................................ 42 5.12 A note on the uses of seaweed ................................................................................................................................. 43 5.13 Conclusion .......................................................................................................................................................... 43-44 Chapter 6: A preliminary overview of fishing implements in the Scottish archaeological and historical record ......................................................................................................................................................................... 45-50 6.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................... 45 6.2 Artefacts in context .................................................................................................................................................... 45 6.3 Function and materials ............................................................................................................................................... 45 6.4 The beginnings of fishing .......................................................................................................................................... 45 v

6.5 Fish hooks and gorges ............................................................................................................................................... 46 6.6 Harpoons and spears .................................................................................................................................................. 47 6.7 The fishing rod ........................................................................................................................................................... 48 6.8 Boats, boat rivets and nails ........................................................................................................................................ 48 6.9 Fishing nets ................................................................................................................................................................ 48 6.10 Sinkers ..................................................................................................................................................................... 49 6.11 Fish traps .................................................................................................................................................................. 49 6.12 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................................... 50 Chapter 7: Likely archaeological signatures based on ethnography and modern fisheries biology: Bostadh Beach case study ........................................................................................................................................ 51-57 7.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................... 51 7.2 The settlement site at Bostadh Beach, Greater Bernera, and its fishing .................................................................... 51 7.3 The archaeological evidence ...................................................................................................................................... 51 7.4 Description of the Later Iron Age settlement Houses 1-4 ......................................................................................... 52 7.5 The icthyo-archaeological evidence from the Later Iron Age settlement .................................................................. 52 7.5.1 Evidences for Later Iron Age fishing at Bostadh Beach ......................................................................................... 53 7.6 Reconstruction of fishing and fish exploitation for food and other products ............................................................. 53 7.7 The Norse period at Bostadh Beach ........................................................................................................................... 54 7.7.1 The later building and midden ................................................................................................................................ 54 7.7.2 The Norse midden ................................................................................................................................................... 54 7.8 The icthyo-archaeological evidence for the Norse midden ........................................................................................ 54 7.9 A note on the ‘Squatter Phase’ at Bostadh Beach ...................................................................................................... 55 7.10 Evidence of exploiting marine molluscs at Bostadh Beach ..................................................................................... 55 7.11 Fishing and gender at Bostadh Beach ...................................................................................................................... 55 7.12 Evidences for the use of cetaceans ........................................................................................................................... 56 7.13 Conclusion .......................................................................................................................................................... 56-57 Chapter 8: Discussion of fishing during in the Iron Age and Norse period of the Western Isles ...................... 58-63 8.1 The Iron Age: introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 58 8.2 Simple Atlantic Roundhouses and Complex Atlantic Roundhouses ......................................................................... 58 8.2.1 Dun Vulan Brooch, South Uist and its fish bone assemblage ................................................................................. 58 8.3 The Wheelhouses ....................................................................................................................................................... 59 8.3.1 The Cnip wheelhouse and its fish bone assemblage ............................................................................................... 59 8.3.2 The Sollas wheelhouse and its fish bone assemblage ............................................................................................. 59 8.3.3 Hornish Point, South Uist ....................................................................................................................................... 60 8.4 Loch na Beirgh Cellular phase and ‘Figure-of-eight’ structural sequences ............................................................... 60 8.4.1 The Cellular phase at Loch na Beirgh ..................................................................................................................... 60 8.4.2 The Later Pictish periods at loch na Beirgh: The Figure-of-eight houses ............................................................... 60 8.4.3 Outline of fishing practices at Loch na Beirgh during the Cellular and Figure–of-eight structural sequences ................................................................................................................ 60 8.4.4 Galson Beach, Lewis .............................................................................................................................................. 61 8.5 Some concluding remarks about fish exploitation during the Iron Age in the Western Isles .................................... 61 8.6 Fishing during the Norse period in the Western Isles ................................................................................................ 62 8.6.1 The Udal (North), North Uist ................................................................................................................................. 62 8.6.2 Rosinish, Benbecula ............................................................................................................................................... 62 8.6.3 Bornish, South Uist ................................................................................................................................................ 62 8.7 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................................. 63 Part V Chapter 9: Conclusion .............................................................................................................................................. 64-65 Bibliography.............................................................................................................................................................. 66-77

vi

List of Figures Chapter 2: 2.1a Osteo-anatomy of a teleost (bony fish) shown as shaded areas ............................................................................... 78 2.1b The skull of a bony fish ........................................................................................................................................... 79 2.2 The pectoral girdle ..................................................................................................................................................... 80 2.3 The posttemporal structure ........................................................................................................................................ 80 2.4 The posttemporal of some Gadidae ............................................................................................................................ 81 2.5a The mandibular arch ................................................................................................................................................. 82 2.5b The hyomandibular structure ................................................................................................................................... 82 2.6 The hyomandibular of some Gadidae ......................................................................................................................... 83 2.7a The hyoid arch ......................................................................................................................................................... 84 2.7b Ceratohyals and epihyals of some Gadidae ............................................................................................................. 84 2.8 The pharyngeal plates of some Gadidae .................................................................................................................... 85 2.9 The otolith .................................................................................................................................................................. 86 2.10 Relative growth of total length in cod ...................................................................................................................... 87 2.11 Relative growth of total length in saithe .................................................................................................................. 88 Chapter 3: 3.1 Map of the Outer Hebrides ......................................................................................................................................... 89 3.2 Location of Bostadh in Great Bernera ....................................................................................................................... 90 3.3 The effect of wind speed on temperature................................................................................................................... 91 3.4 The Gulf Stream and the North Atlantic Drift ........................................................................................................... 92 3.5 Sketch of main current paths West and North Scotland ............................................................................................ 93 3.6 Mean surface Salinity ................................................................................................................................................ 94 3.7 Machair distribution ................................................................................................................................................... 95 3.8 Zonation of the shore ................................................................................................................................................. 96 3.9 ICES statistical areas ................................................................................................................................................. 97 3.10 Gadidae species mentioned in the text ..................................................................................................................... 98 3.11 Non-gadidae species mentioned in the text .............................................................................................................. 99 3.12 Freshwater species mentioned in the text .............................................................................................................. 100 3.13 Edible molluscs recovered at Bostadh Beach ......................................................................................................... 101 3.14 Non-edible molluscs recovered at Bostadh Beach ................................................................................................. 102 3.15 Average length of coastal and offshore ceatcea in the Western Isles .................................................................... 103 3.16 Inshore cetaceans found around the Western Isles ................................................................................................ 104 3.17 Offshore cetaceans found around the Western Isles .............................................................................................. 105 Chapter 4: 4.1 Fish bone elements recovered at Bostadh Beach with cut marks ............................................................................ 106 4.2 Natural factors influencing bone survival ................................................................................................................ 107 4.3 Context groups for the Later Iron Age settlement at Bostadh Beach ....................................................................... 107 4.4 Bostadh Beach House 1: Midden contexts fish species representation.................................................................... 108 4.5 Bostadh Beach House 1: Sandy deposits fish species representation ...................................................................... 108 4.6 Bostadh Beach House 1: Pit fill deposits fish species representation ...................................................................... 109 4.7 Bostadh Beach House 1: Hearth & ash deposits fish species representation ........................................................... 109 4.8 Bostadh Beach House 2: Midden contexts fish species representation..................................................................... 110 4.9 Bostadh Beach House 2: Sandy deposits fish species representation ...................................................................... 110 4.10 Bostadh Beach House 2: wall core, pit & posthole fill deposits fish species representation ................................. 111 4.11 Bostadh Beach House 2: Hearth & ash deposits fish species representation ......................................................... 111 4.12 Bostadh Beach House 3: Midden contexts fish species representation .................................................................. 112 4.13 Bostadh Beach House 3: Sandy deposits fish species representation ..................................................................... 112 4.14 Bostadh Beach House 3: wall core, pit & post hole fill deposits fish species representation ................................ 113 4.15 Bostadh Beach House 2: Hearth & ash deposits fish species representation ......................................................... 113 4.16 Bostadh Beach House 1 Interior: systems of activity ............................................................................................ 114 4.17 Bostadh Beach House 2 Interior: systems of activity ............................................................................................ 115 4.18 Bostadh Beach House 3 Interior: systems of activity ............................................................................................ 116 4.19 Bostadh Beach House 3: petal-shaped hearth ........................................................................................................ 117 Chapter 5: 5.1 The tabh ................................................................................................................................................................... 118 5.2 Sheep skin buoy ....................................................................................................................................................... 118 5.3 Deep-sea dorgh ........................................................................................................................................................ 119 vii

5.4 Hand-line dorgh ....................................................................................................................................................... 119 5.5 Types of traditional open-boats from Scotland........................................................................................................ 120 5.6 Fishing arrangements in the small boats .................................................................................................................. 121 5.7 Great Bernera Fishing Marks: Inshore Winter & Spring Marks.............................................................................. 122 5.8 Great Bernera Fishing Marks: Inshore Winter & Spring Marks from the Sea ......................................................... 123 Chapter 6: 6.1 Fish gorges ............................................................................................................................................................... 124 6.2 Fish hooks................................................................................................................................................................ 124 6.3 Refraction of light.................................................................................................................................................... 125 6.4 Fishing spears ........................................................................................................................................................... 125 6.5 North West Coast Pacific America fishing spears and harpoons............................................................................. 126 6.6 Fishing harpoons found in Scotland ........................................................................................................................ 127 6.7 Norwegian rock carving of skin boats ...................................................................................................................... 128 6.8 Dug-out boat ............................................................................................................................................................. 128 6.9 Pictish boat depiction ............................................................................................................................................... 129 6.10 Plan of Scar boat fastenings ................................................................................................................................... 130 6.11 Steatite line-sinkers................................................................................................................................................ 131 6.12 Badachro Caradaidh (fish trap.............................................................................................................................. 132 6.13 Fasag Caradaidh (fish trap) .................................................................................................................................. 133 6.14 Rubha nan Sidheaan: cupmarked stones and fish trap........................................................................................... 134 Chapter 7: 7.1 Location of the Bostadh Beach settlement site ........................................................................................................ 135 7.2 Iron Age settlement site at Bostadh Beach .............................................................................................................. 136 7.3 Bostadh Beach House 1: fish representation ............................................................................................................ 137 7.4 Bostadh Beach House 2: fish representation ............................................................................................................ 138 7.5 Bostadh Beach House 3: fish representation ............................................................................................................ 139 7.6 Bostadh Beach House 4: fish representation............................................................................................................ 140 7.7 Concentration of fish bone per house ...................................................................................................................... 141 7.8 Bostadh Beach fish representation: all houses ......................................................................................................... 141 7.9 Bostadh Beach LIA saithe and cod size representation ........................................................................................... 142 7.10 The Norse structure at Bostadh Beach ................................................................................................................... 143 7.11 Bostadh Beach Norse period fish representation ................................................................................................... 144 7.12 Bostadh Beach: ‘Squatter’ Phase ........................................................................................................................... 145 7.13 Bostadh Beach: ‘Squatter’ Phase fish representation............................................................................................. 146 7.14 Bostadh Beach: LIA marine mollusca representation per house ........................................................................... 147 7.15 Bostadh Beach: Norse midden marine mollusca representation............................................................................ 147 7.16 Limpets: shell shape according to habitat .............................................................................................................. 148 7.17 Fish representation and possible exploitation patterns at Bostadh Beach .............................................................. 149 7.18 Division of labour in fishing communities in Scotland till AD 1900’s ................................................................. 150 Chapter 8: 8.1 Distribution of the sites discussed in Chapter 8 ....................................................................................................... 151 8.2 Plans of structures discussed in Chapter 8 ............................................................................................................... 152 8.3 Dun Vulan fish representation ................................................................................................................................. 153 8.4 Cnip fish representation ........................................................................................................................................... 154 8.5 Loch na Beirgh Cellular phases (structural sequences) ........................................................................................... 155 8.6 Loch na Beirgh fish species representation .............................................................................................................. 156 8.7 Galson Beach fish species representation ................................................................................................................. 157

viii

List of Tables Chapter 3: 3.1 Relationship between wind speed, actual (x) and windchill (y) temperatures ......................................................... 158 3.2 The effects of cold on the human body ................................................................................................................... 158 3.3 Fish species mentioned in the text ........................................................................................................................... 159 3.4 Numerical comparison of coastal Cetaceans ........................................................................................................... 160 3.5 Numerical comparison of Deep water/offshore Cetaceans ...................................................................................... 160 Chapter 4: 4.1 Stages of the taphonomic process and their interpretation ....................................................................................... 160 4.2 Bostadh Beach House 1: fish element representation per context type ................................................................... 161 4.3 Bostadh Beach House 2: fish element representation per context type ................................................................... 162 4.4 Bostadh Beach House 3: fish element representation per context type ................................................................... 163 4.5 Bostadh Beach House 1: Midden contexts Fish species representation ................................................................... 164 4.6 Bostadh Beach House 1: Sandy contexts Fish species representation ..................................................................... 164 4.7 Bostadh Beach House 1: Pit-fill contexts Fish species representation ..................................................................... 165 4. 8 Bostadh Beach House 1: Hearth & ash spread contexts Fish species representation ............................................. 165 4.9 Bostadh Beach House 2 Midden contexts Fish species representation ................................................................... 165 4.10 Bostadh Beach House 2 Sandy contexts Fish species representation ................................................................... 166 4.11 Bostadh Beach House 2 wall core, pit & post hole fills Fish species representation ............................................. 166 4.12 Bostadh Beach House 2 Hearth & ash spreads deposits Fish species representation ............................................ 166 4.13 Bostadh Beach House 3 Midden contexts Fish species representation .................................................................. 167 4.14 Bostadh Beach House 3 Sandy contexts Fish species representation ..................................................................... 167 4.15 Bostadh Beach House 3 Wall core, pit & post hole fills Fish species representation ............................................ 168 4.16 Bostadh Beach House 3 Hearth & ash spreads deposits Fish species representation ............................................ 168 Chapter 6: 6.1 Some archaeological fishing artefacts recovered throughout Scotland .................................................................... 169 6.2 Some fish traps, fish weirds and associated structures recorded in Scotland ........................................................... 170 Chapter 7: 7.1 Bostadh Beach Radiocarbon 14 dates ...................................................................................................................... 171 7.2 Bostadh Beach cetacean bone fragments and artefacts............................................................................................ 172 List of plates Plate 1 Fish remains from Bostadh Beach ................................................................................................................... 173 Plate 2 Saithe otoliths recovered at Bostdah Beach ...................................................................................................... 174 Plate 3 Cod otoliths recovered at Bostadh Beach ......................................................................................................... 175 Plate 4 Scales of Red sea-bream from Bostadh Beach................................................................................................. 176 Plate 5 Herring vertebrae recovered at Bostadh Beach ................................................................................................ 177 Plate 6 Cetacean vertebra with cut-marks ..................................................................................................................... 178 List of Appendixes Appendix 1: Catalogue of the fish remains from Bostadh Beach (Sieved samples) (No. 1-51) ..................................... 179 Appendix 2: Catalogue of the hand-retrieved fish remains from Bostadh Beach (No. 1-15) ........................................ 228 Appendix 3: The edible marine mollusca from Bostadh Beach (No. 1-5)...................................................................... 243 Appendix 4: Bostadh Beach non-edible marine mollusca (No. 1-2) .............................................................................. 248 Appendix 5: Stranded cetacean records for Western and Northern Isles (from reports for 1913-1992) (No. 1-9)......... 250

ix

Crawford n/d) in South Uist; Sollas, in North Uist, Rosinish in Benbecula and Loch na Berie (NB 103 351, Harding et al 1995), Cnip (NB 098 366, Harding & Armit 1987), and Galson Beach (NB 436 594, Neighbour & Knott 1996) in Lewis.

Chapter 1 Introduction Most communities inhabiting coastal areas make use of marine resources, either seasonally or throughout the year. A variety of strategies may be adopted, depending upon the local environment (type of coastline, seabed topography, climatic conditions, etc.). This choice is also dependent upon the technologies available for capturing marine fauna, as well as the perceived needs of the local population. All these aspects are, to a lesser or greater degree, amenable to research in the case of earlier, as indeed for present-day, communities.

The results of the analyses of fish remains from these sites are presented and discussed. Fish remains were the most abundant material recovered from the sites studied by this author, particularly that at Bostadh Beach. To a lesser extent, marine mollusca and cetacean bone were also recovered at that site: these have also been examined and the results of that work have been incorporated into the main analysis. Some of the issues raised here are of a conceptual nature; these include theoretical concerns surrounding the definition of the precise nature of local transitions within a subsistence economy. Other research questions comprise practical and methodological issues. What, for example, are the signatures of a subsistence economy based on marine exploitation? How can we reconstruct this aspect of economy on a given site? How can we expand from such site-specific arguments to generate a set of techniques, indicators, and signatures that may have a wider regional application?

The research question The writer’s aim is to interpret the exploitation and management of marine natural resources during the prehistory of the Western Isles of Scotland with particular attention to the later prehistoric settlement of Bostadh Beach, Great Bernera, Lewis (OS Map Reference NB137402) (Neighbour forthcoming). Radiocarbon dates now available indicate that the main buildings belong to about the 8th-9th centuries AD (Scottish Universities Research and Reactor Centre 2002). The research presented here is part of a wider project that has included the study of soil micromorphology (Tams 2002), macroplants (Church 2002), terrestrial mammal and bird studies (Thoms 2005).

A note on the Scottish Iron Age ‘Iron Age’ is used here in the sense the term is employed by example Foster (1996) and Armit in Atlantic Scottish archaeology (see Armit & Ralston 2003). As the Roman incursions made minimal impact here, the period is considered to extend from about the beginning of the second quarter of the first millennium BC to the appearance of the Vikings/Norse at the end of the eighth century AD.

More specifically, the present study investigates the use of marine resources during the Late Iron Age and Norse periods in this remote area of Scotland. The main tasks are to demonstrate, primarily using data recovered from settlement sites, how marine resource exploitation was undertaken; and to show how these resources may have been used by applying archaeozoological and ethnoarchaeological methods.

‘Early Iron Age’ covers the centuries through to ca 200 BC. ‘Middle Iron Age’ broadly corresponds to the apogee of the complex Atlantic Round Houses, including brochs towers. The ‘Late Iron Age’ (itself capable of subdivision) overlaps with the Later Roman Empire in Southern Britain, and continues into the early Historic period (Alcock 2003)

The scope of this research The main source of data used here is the settlement site at Bostadh Beach in Great Bernera. Bostadh Beach was excavated by CFA (Centre for Field Archaeology, now CFA Archaeology Ltd) and the Department of Archaeology, University of Edinburgh (Neighbour & Burgess 1997, Neighbour 2001; Neighbour forthcoming). In addition, all post-excavation procedures were carried out by staff of CFA and the Department of Archaeology. Post-excavation procedures included sieving and sorting of all bulk soil samples retrieved at the site for environmental materials recovery.

Archaeology and the coast The coastal environment provides a highly structured, i.e. organised, and visible pattern of resource availability that throws into sharp relief the possibilities of archaeological interpretation. The many marine species that occur along the coast and in inshore waters are highly varied in both their behavioural patterns and in their accessibility to human predation. These species are often very specific in terms of habitat requirements and subject to varied spatial and temporal controls.

Assemblages from other sites in the Western Isles have also been considered and the results of their analyses used for comparison, to support the objective of reconstructing fishing practices particularly during the Iron Age and Norse periods in the Western Isles. These include: Dun Vulan (NF 7140 2980, Parker-Pearson & Sharples 1999), Hornish Point (NF 7583 4720), Bornish (NF 729 302, Sharples 1996 & 1997) and the Udal North (NF 824 785,

In terms of accessibility to human predation, marine resources are equally very variable. Some species, such as marine mammals, form a large, mobile food supply, whose capture may be dangerous and require elaborate 1

The intention of this book is to provide a detailed insight into the strategies and, where discoverable, the tactics used in the fisheries and in related foraging along the coastline by the early coastal inhabitants of the Hebrides or Western Isles of Scotland. To achieve this, the present writer’s approach has focussed on five different aspects of research: fish biology, modern fisheries, ancient fisheries, taphonomy and ethnography.

techniques, transportation and organization. Similarly, free-swimming fish require in most instances the use of boats and equipment such as lines and nets for their capture. In contrast, small organisms living at the shore edge, such as mussels, can be collected without the need of any special equipment or skill. Local spatial contrasts occur in the coastal environment: exposed rocky points, sheltered bays and river estuaries are each characterized by its own community of species. The availability of many species is also affected by temporal cycles including tidal, seasonal and inter-annual variations. These characteristics offer two advantages: first the possibility of reconstructing the prehistoric subsistence economy with some precision; and secondly a measure to help understand the degree to which available resources were actually used and integrated within the subsistence economy. In her doctoral thesis, Perdikaris (1998), points out the basis of these advantages: whilst ‘a zoologist tends to look at faunal remains as biogeographic patterns … a zooarchaeologist sees them as meat, skins, sinew and above all the product of human economic practice and decisions’ (Perdikaris, 1998: 57).

Island South Uist

North Uist Benbecula Lewis

Site Hornish Point Dun Vulan The Udal North Bornish Sollas Rosinish Cnip Loch na Beirgh Galson Beach

Period LIA LIA/Norse LIA/Norse Norse IA LIA/Norse LIA LIA LIA

The combination of fish biology and taphonomy enable the necessary association between modern and ancient fishing traditions to be discerned. A major theme of this research is to understand the role of fishing during the Iron Age and Norse period in the Hebrides, in terms of economic, social and technological factors. Furthermore, it will be contended that the juxtaposition of taphonomy and ethnographical studies forms bridges between the past and the present and allows a more solidly based reconstruction of the island's fishing activity through time. It will also be shown that the combination of archaeological faunal analysis and ethnoarchaeological analysis provide a useful set of data for understanding the character of fishing economies in the prehistory of Greater Bernera and other areas of the Hebridean Isles.

Fish remains Analyst Andrew Jones Ruby Cerón-Carrasco Dale Sarjeantson Claire Ingrem Judith Findlay Dale Sarjeantson Ruby Cerón-Carrasco Ruby Cerón-Carrasco Ruby Cerón-Carrasco

2

procedures. Steps range from the examination of series of modern dissection data to reliance on the complex nature of ‘absolute’ dates that are not always readily available. In the absence of these, the method is also burdened with cumulative bias. Such estimations (numbers 7 and 11 in the list above), were therefore not applied here.

Chapter 2: Methodologies 2.1 The Fish remains: Introduction The methodologies used by a fish remains specialist, in conjunction with the state of preservation of the material, allow a variety of information to be recovered. The analysis of fish bone can offer, depending on circumstances, information such as (after Rojo 1991): 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

8.

9. 10.

11. 12. 13.

14.

2.2 Nomenclature of fish skeletal elements The nomenclature of the skeletal elements of fish has suffered historically from a lack of consistency. This has resulted in years of confusion as researchers in different fields have used different terminologies. Starks (1901) was one of the first to try to provide a standardised list of terms, with their synonyms, for fish skeletal elements. Casteel, in his major contribution to the field (1976), referred to Stark’s pioneering work and made many fish remains workers familiar with it. However, as research into ichthyo-osteology has progressed, Stark’s terminology, is now regarded as ‘old fashioned’ and incomplete; although his work continues to be a valued source of reference material (Wheeler & Jones 1989). Most European icthyo-archaeologists are also familiar with the guidelines put forward by Professor Lepiksaar (1981) who, in a useful guide, Osteologia, proposed a list of terms for fish bone elements, but these names are almost all latinised. His scheme is not as widely accepted by workers used to more standard English terminology. Another example is the introduction produced by Olsen (1968) which includes fine illustrations and puts forward terms for the components of the fish skeleton that are easily recognisable for the purpose of icthyoarchaeological analysis. Based on the above schemes, Wheeler & Jones (1989, 121-125) formulated a more readily comprehensible set of fish bone names. Their nomenclature is now being used more widely, in the English language literature (Brinkhuizen 1993, Lernau 1996a, Lubinski 1996 and Nicholson 1998), and is employed in this work because of its simplicity and because it accords with the attempts to standardise the use of this English language nomenclature world-wide by the ‘Fish Remains Working Group’ of the International Council for Archaeozoology (ICAZ). The same nomenclature has been taken over and reformulated by authors in other languages, for example by workers in Spain (Roselló-Izquierdo 1988 & 1989). The analysis of the fish remains from Bostadh Beach and the other Hebridean sites used by this author here and in other publications, has thus followed the nomenclature as developed by Wheeler and Jones (1989). Recommendations by Wheeler & Jones (1989) were based mainly on works from the German anatomist Dr Wilhelm Harder, whose studies on the anatomy of European fishes was first published in German in 1964 and translated into English in 1975 (Jones 1991). Alfonso Rojo’s Dictionary of Evolutionary Fish Osteology (1991) offers a coherent rationale for understanding the nomenclature of all the skeletal structures of modern fishes. Moreover, it gives a translation of each English term into five major languages (French, German, Latin, Russian and Spanish) used by

Identification of individual skeletal elements. Position of the identified element in the body. Identification of the fish family, genus, species. Calculation of the biological age of the fish at the time of death. Determination of the time of year of its capture (death). Estimation of the total length of the live fish, by means of standard regression coefficients or by other less accurate methods. Estimation of the total weight of the live fish by regression coefficients between bone dimensions and fish weight or simply by comparison with a modern fish skeleton reference collection. Identification of the population in geographical terms, i.e. whether it is native, migratory or exotic and thus most likely imported to the site, for example by trade Reconstruction of the environmental conditions of the area for example aspects of climate, habitat of the fish, etc. Calculation of the numbers of individuals represented by the skeletal fragments either by MNI (minimal number of individuals) or NISP (number of identifiable specimens by fragment count). Estimation of the dietary value of the fish flesh in calories, grams or other specific / standard units. Description and explanation of the post-mortem manipulation of the fish skeleton (butchery, processing, burning, chewing, gnawing, etc). Study of taphonomic processes, i.e. the circumstances that have affected the distribution and modification of the surviving skeletal elements (e.g. weathering, water and animal displacement, etc). Recognition of the nature of the bone deposits, i.e. whether attributable to natural, animal or human deposition.

Obviously, not every fish skeletal element will provide all the information listed above. Moreover, any of the estimations obtained will depend on the state of preservation of the particular fish bone assemblage studied. It is also unlikely that every aspect listed above will actually be achieved by analysing any given assemblage of archaeological fish remains, although most are individually possible to demonstrate. It is this author’s experience that robust assessments of 1-6, 8-10 and 12-14 are in most cases achievable from her analysis of various fish bone assemblages including Bostadh Beach. Estimating fish weight and consequently dietary values from archaeological assemblages are complex 3

osteology of fishes occurring naturally from the Iberian Peninsula. She also produced printed reference material, which includes well-presented and detailed drawings of various skeletal elements. One of the specific objectives of undertaking this task as part of her doctoral thesis was to provide printed reference material for specialists who could not always use complete skeletal collections; Roselló-Izquierdo was also keen to try to speed up initial identifications in the laboratory. Certain families, such as Gadidae, Anguillidae, Salmonidae, Scorpionidae and Scombridae, are well represented in Dr Roselló-Izquierdo’s compilations. Some of these fishes can also be found in the British Isles. Her studies can also be used to confirm identifications made, in particular, from the premaxilla and articulars (these are paired bones found in the interior part of the upper jaw). In the mid-1980s, a systematic review of fish osteology was initiated in Series A of the Fiches d’ ostéologie animale pour l’ archéologie, edited by Drs Jean Desse and Nathalie Desse-Berset (Centre de Recherches Archéologiques du CNRS), in which osteomorphological, and comprehensive series of morphometric data, of several freshwater fish (perch, burbot and the Nile catfish), and marine species (mullet and sea bass) have been published. These publications, however, are not meantime relevant because the series, particularly those with morphometric data, have not so far included the most noteworthy species present in the assemblages analysed by this author. Another work referred to by fish remains specialists is that of Cannon (1987): this contains good drawings that have provided a basis for students to appreciate the differences between four significant fish families: Gadidae, Salmonidae, Pleuronectidae and Scorpionidae. Cannon’s report however, has been criticised for confusing researchers by using non-standard nomenclature (Wheeler & Jones 1989). Most fish remains specialists mainly use a relatively restricted number of skeletal elements such as the dentary, articular, premaxilla, maxilla, quadrate and vomer bones for the identification of species represented in archaeological fish bone assemblages. These elements are robust enough to survive well in most archaeological deposits and are sufficiently diagnostic to ensure correct identification to species or, when this is not possible, identification to family can be attempted instead. Detailed identification to species is easier in the case of bones that hold teeth such as the dentary, premaxilla and vomer. In most such cases, the teeth sockets show differences between species, thus allowing accurate identification. The clearest example of this variation in teeth sockets is found amongst the species from the Gadidae family. Andrew Jones’ doctoral thesis (1991) is an excellent guide which enables the comparison of elements such as dentaries, premaxillae, articulars and otoliths from various species. The contribution of Wheeler and Jones (1989), considered above, also serves as a good aid to the identification of gadoid species in particular. Foss Leach (1997) has produced another excellent guide which furnishes clear, and well- defined drawings of a series of fish bone elements: dentary, articular, quadrate,

ichthyo-archaeologists. Although the focus of Rojo’s work is biological, workers from other disciplines, including zooarchaeologists, can also use it as a guide, and reference has often been made to it in compiling the present study. 2.3 Identification of fish remains Under normal circumstances, bones are the only anatomical parts that survive for a considerable time after the death of a fish (Figures 2.1a and 2.1b). As such they are repositories of an enormous amount of biological and ecological information (Rojo 1991). Retrieving this information is the task of the archaeozoologist, working in collaboration with specialists from totally different disciplines. Biologists dealing with modern fish populations are fortunate in having, in most cases, the required biological information directly available to them. For any given fish, information about the species, age, sex, size, weight, place, and environmental conditions in which they thrive are all easily identified. Archaeozoologists, on the other hand, have to estimate data of the preceding kinds drawing their information from bones preserved in a limited range of archaeological contexts. The first step towards identification is to have access to well-recorded modern reference material. Records, including place and season of capture, measurements of body size and weights (if possible before gutting) are all essential if accurate estimations of the size and age of the archaeological specimens are to be made from the skeletal data. The availability of a reference collection comprising a variety of examples of the same species, but of different size ranges, is an equally important guide. Suitably resourced reference collections, more particularly complete ones, are however seldom available to archaeozoologists. The preparation of well-recorded reference collections is an endless pursuit. It may for example take many years to achieve the goal of collecting specimens at the full range of times of the year. Often, even if such collections do exist, they are unavailable to researchers from outwith the institutions that house them, or they may be difficult to access for other reasons. As one result of the inadequacy of most accessible reference collections, as outlined above, printed atlases have been produced for some considerable time to aid identification. Archaeologists working with fish remains have thus relied greatly on anatomical works such as Gregory’s Fish skulls (1936), which provides the first of many attempts to publish collections of reference material. Lepiksaar’s (1981) Osteologia is well illustrated, with drawings showing the different characteristics of certain skeletal elements for different species. This makes identification of some of the European fish species possible. Copies of Osteologia have however, been only distributed privately to established researchers from the Fish Remains Working Group, and therefore this basic work is not readily accessible to researchers new to this subdiscipline within archaeozoology. Work by Dr Roselló-Izquierdo (1988 & 1989) on the identification of fishes from archaeological sites in Spain was based on the 4

fragile and do not seem to survive in all archaeological deposits that otherwise conserve fish bones. However, when they do survive and retain sufficient diagnostic features to allow comparisons, identification to species should be attempted. The importance of this strategy will become apparent in due course during the discussion of quantification methods.

maxilla and premaxilla. Although referring exclusively to fish from New Zealand, it is a good example of the importance of printed reference material. Moreover, Leach’s guide is a good vade mecum that should inspire experts in other countries to produce similar works. Although vertebrae are also amongst the most robust elements of the fish skeleton, being more robust than the skull, and are generally the best represented element in archaeological assemblages, it is only recently that a guide to the identification of fishes by examining their vertebrae has been produced. This was prepared mainly for zoological reasons by researchers analysing the diets of sea mammals such as seals. The 1997 ‘Guide to the identification of fishes from the North Sea by examining the vertebrae and premaxilla’ by J. Watt and his coworkers is an outstanding publication, which establishes an excellent standard of accuracy in fish bone identifications as conveyed in printed reference material. This publication includes both clear photographs and drawings of elements of different fish species. Most families native to North Sea waters are represented and all elements displayed are helpfully accompanied by comparative measurements. During recent meetings of the ICAZ Fish Remains Working Group (Madrid 1995; Panama 1997; New York 1999; New Zealand 2001; Mexico 2003; Basel 2005), calls have been made for the production of guides to aid identification, especially for vertebrae and in particular for North Sea species. Despite the publications reviewed in this section, there is a continuing need to produce drawings of different sets of bones: these have not been developed so far because authors have mainly relied on the aforementioned skeletal elements, making the task involved yet more daunting. As retrieval methods in field archaeology became more thorough and more care is given to collecting environmental materials, it has become apparent that many more elements from fish skeletons survive in some archaeological deposits. Some remains as delicate as scales are now being recovered in great quantities and the Bostadh Beach assemblage is a good example of this trend. It has been this author’s experience, while working with fish bone assemblages from sites in Scotland, that numerous other elements may survive well in certain deposits. These elements are usually mentioned in the catalogues and are used as markers of taphonomic attributes. It is, however, this author’s opinion that they can also be used in species identification. For example, ceratohyals, posttemporals, pharyngeal plates and hyomandibulars are quite diagnostic for this purpose. Such elements are discussed at length in Section 2.4. A set of drawings illustrating and text describing their particular features, have been produced by this author, to provide support for the use of these bones in species identification (figures 2.4, 2.6, 2.7b and 2.8). They show differences between these elements from native British species of the Gadidae family. Although in some instances the differences are only slight, the distinctions shown should none the less be enough to infer the genus or the species in question. There is a disadvantage nonetheless in the fact that these elements are quite

2.3.1 Accuracy of identification Omri Lernau (1996b) approached the question of certainty in fish bone identification in archaeological collection by making use successively of the following procedures: firstly, the requirement to confirm that the bones are from fish; secondly, to determine which elements of the fish skeleton are represented and thirdly; to determine which taxa the bones represent. These are the logical steps within any archaeozoological identification. He also adds, however, that such steps should, in archaeo-ichthyological material, be accompanied by ‘certainty tokens’ (CT) awarded by the investigator: in other words, the degree of certainty of the identification should be stated in the form of scores. The first digit in a CT (1 = probable; 2 = certain) would thus indicate the degree of certainty in the identification of the family. The second digit would then stand for the genus or the species. 2 would thus mean ‘certain’ (i.e. full confidence) while ‘1’ would mean ‘compatible with’ (limited confidence). Identifications with lower degrees of certainty should then remain unreported (Lernau 1996b). An illustration of this would read: ‘right dentary of Sparidae, Sparus aurata (CT=22). This complete, well preserved bone was found in Rosh-Zavit, a small site in northern Israel (Iron II). It showed a perfect fit with a recent specimen’ (after Lernau 1996b, 50). Lernau developed these principles on material from sites in Israel where taphonomic conditions are totally different from those faced by archaeologists in the British Isles or other countries with different geographical conditions. It is none the less this researcher’s opinion that the ‘certainty token’ approach could also be applied to material recovered from sites in Scotland. In most cases the good preservation of the bone and knowledge of species in the Western Isles enable accurate identifications (i.e. CT=22) and, where they remained only tentative identifications (i.e. CT=11), this is clearly stated. The numerical code proposed in Lernau’s principle has however not been applied explicitly in any of this author’s works. The question of whether all identifiable elements should be identified to species or whether a selection should be made for this purpose, depends on the research questions being investigated. Some elements studied individually may indicate seasonality, for instance the otolith (Mellars & Wilkinson 1980). Vertebrae may also be used for this purpose (Noe-Nygaard 1983). To answer other issues however, such as the processing of fish i.e. drying or salting for example, identification of all elements should be attempted (Cerón-Carrasco 1994; 1998a; 1998b). 5

ventrally and which is equally attached to the posttemporal. The posttemporal is quite distinctive owing to its forked appearance. The most readily recognisable elements of this series are the cleithum, supracleithrum and the posttemporal, all of which can be identified to species level. A further series of bones connects the neurocranium with the four principal jawbones. They include the dentaries, articular, premaxillae and maxillae. Of these, the largest and most characteristic element is the hyomandibular. This guideline is focused more particularly on the posttemporal and the hyomandibular.

The analysis of the Bostadh Beach assemblage and of the other materials carried out by this author, have been based on the identification of all possible elements to family and genus, and to species level whenever possible. This approach is intended to allow questions of human behaviour to be addressed, including the development of fishing strategies, techniques and management of natural resources during the Late Iron Age to Norse period e.g. whether fishing was for domestic consumption or was at some point intended for trade. 2.4 Guidelines for the identification of some skeletal elements of the family Gadidae

The posttemporal (Figure 2.3) This element is frequently recovered in archaeological material and is quite distinctive particularly to family. In Gadids, as indeed in most groups, the posttemporal is Y-shaped or forked (Figure 2.4).

The purpose of these guidelines is to allow the identification of certain elements of the fish skeleton, often found in archaeologically recovered fish bone assemblages particularly from coastal sites in Scotland. The graphics accompanying the guidelines were originally working drawings made by the writer during the preparation of catalogues for several fish bone assemblages she analysed (1998a, 1998c, 1999a). These drawings were further developed during the current project and their effectiveness was tested against the archaeological material from Bostadh Beach. The material selected is based on the author’s own modern fish bone collection and deals only with Gadidae species since they are often best represented in archaeological assemblages from Scotland. These guidelines have been developed as an additional resource to complement the existing guides mentioned earlier. The skeletal elements were selected because they were found to occur in considerable numbers in archaeological deposits and could therefore be grouped into categories to aid quantification of the Bostadh Beach fish bones using the NISP method (as is explained later in this chapter). These bones include the posttemporal, hyomandibular, ceratohyal and the pharyngeal plates. They were chosen rather than either the most common head elements or the vertebrae since guides already exist which assist in their identification (Amorosi 1988, Roselló-Izquierdo 1988, Watt et al. 1997). The illustrations produced by this author are not drawn to scale since greater emphasis was placed upon morphological distinctions than on metric traits. Nomenclature follows Rojo (1987) and Wheeler & Jones (1989).

(a) Cod (Gadus morhua): the body is slightly oblique at the mesial process level. The arch of the inner body forms a sharp, wide-open, V-shape. The mesial process curves to end in a straight line, while the lateral process ends midway along the mesial process also in a straight line. (b) Saithe (Pollachius virens): the body form is quite distinctively oblique at the lateral process level. The arch of the inner body exhibits a wide, more U-shaped form than in cod. The mesial process ends proportionally wider than that of the cod while the lateral process ends midway along the mesial process in a slightly curving form. (c) Pollack (Pollachius pollachius): the body form of the posttemporal in pollack is wider than that in cod and saithe. It extends at the lateral process; the arch of the inner body is generally well rounded ending in a U-shape. The mesial process is proportionately wider than that of cod or saithe and ends in a curved angle towards the centre of the inner body. The lateral process ends at a third length of the mesial process and curves externally from the inner body. (d) Haddock (Melanogrammus aeglefinus): the body form is markedly wide at the lateral process level and is wider than that of cod, saithe or pollack. The inner body forms a wide, open V-shape. The mesial process curves forming an arch towards the inner body. The lateral process ends midway along the mesial process curving slightly away from the inner body.

2.4.1 Pectoral girdle (Figure 2.2) This part of the fish skeleton represents the sector area joining the head of the fish to the vertebral column. In the gadoid skeleton, this is found directly behind the head and is part, and functions as part, of a unit with the head. All the bone represented are paired elements, situated at either side of the head of the fish. The pectoral girdle is formed by the scapula and the coracoid which join the much larger and stronger cleithrum. The cleithrum is the largest bone in a fish and is also one of the elements most easily identifiable to species. The cleithrum is firmly attached to the smaller supracleithrum, an elongated bone which extends

(e) Ling (Molva molva): the body is elliptical, the arch of the inner body is slightly V-shaped. The mesial process ends curving away from the inner body while the lateral process ends less than midway along the mesial process in a straight line. (f) Whiting (Merlangius merlangus): the body is more rectangular than that of cod, saithe, pollack, haddock or ling; it is also wider at the lateral process level. The arch of the inner body has an elongated sharp V-shape. The mesial process widens towards the end where it terminates in a straight line. The lateral process also 6

widens at the lateral point; it terminates at the mid point of the mesial process also in a straight line.

the other three species while the hyomandibular foramen is longer and ends in a curvilinear appearance.

(g) Hake (Merluccius merluccius): the body extends to attain its greatest width towards the lateral process level. The arch of the inner body has a slightly u-shape form. The mesial process narrows towards the end where it terminates in a straight line. The lateral process extends in an almost straight line and also becomes narrower towards the end.

(e) Ling (Molva molva): the point from the pterotic facet and the opercular process forms a short U-shaped curve. The pterotic facet and the sphenotic facet form a wide ridge. The opercular process is wider than that in any of the other Gadid illustrated in this guide. The hyomandibular foramen also extends wider than that of the other species of this group.

2.4.2 Hyoid arch The hyoid arch is the second arch of the viscerocranium, located between the mandibular arch in front and the first branchial arch behind. Its most dorsally located bone is the hyomandibular.

(f) Whiting (Merlangius merlangus): the point from the pterotic facet and the opercular process extends almost in a linear fashion. The pterotic facet and the sphenotic facet form a wide but less pronounced ridge than that of saithe. The opercular process is long and rectangular. The hyomandibular foramen is also quite long and rectangular.

The hyomandibular is the largest and most characteristic of the elements joining the jawbones of the fish to its neurocranium (Figures 2.5a and 2.5b). It has a complex appearance consisting of ridges and articulating surfaces; it also displays at least one hollow process. This skeletal element is often found in Scottish archaeological deposits and is usually only assigned to family level because it seldom survives with all its edges intact as is necessary to allow for a more accurate identification. However, in calcareous deposits such as in machair sand dunes, as at Bostadh Beach, this bone is frequently found almost complete. This guide is designed to aid in its identification to species level (Figure 2.6).

Hake (Merluccius merluccius): the pterotic facet and the sphenic facet form a wide ridge, which joins the hyomandibular foramen. The point from the pterotic facet to the opercular process is shorter than in any of the other species illustrated here. The opercular process extends in a liner fashion and is longer than that of the other species as well. The hyomandibular foramen is short and rectangular.

(a) Cod (Gadus morhua): the point from the pterotic facet towards the opercular process ends in a gentle slope. The point between the pteroic facet and the sphenotic facet forms a wide, curved ridge. The opercular process bends towards the end, whereas the inferior process ends in a sharp edge while the hyomandibular foramen is narrow and quite rectangular; the foramen is then joined by the anterior crest.

Of the elements forming this system in the bony fishes, the ones which are most likely to survive in archaeological deposits are the ceratohyal, epihyal and urohyal (Figure 2.7a). The ceratohyal is also important because it is the place of attachment of the branchiostegal rays. These rays are numerous in the fish skeleton and it is almost impossible to identify if they are detached from other skeletal elements. In archaeological deposits, however, these elements are often found articulated. This guide incorporates observations on both the ceratohyal and the epihyal.

(b) Saithe (Pollachius virens): the point from the pterotic facet towards the opercular process ends in a gentle slope as in cod. The pteroic facet and the sphenotic facet form a wide and pronounced ridge. The inferior process is almost rectangular and extends more prominently than that of cod. The hyomandibular foramen is narrow and quite rectangular and joined by the anterior crest.

The ceratohyal and the epihyal The ceratohyal is the largest bone in the lower section of the hyoid arch. In bony fishes, the ceratohyal articulates with the interhyal; its anterior borders support the branchiostegals. The epihyal articulates with the ceratohyal by a suture in the case of the gadids (Figure 2.7b).

(c) Pollack (Pollachius pollachius): the gentle slope formed between the pterotic facet and the opercular process is similar to that of cod. The pteroic facet and the sphenotic facet form a similar ridge to that of saithe. The opercular process however is sharper than those of saithe or cod, while the inferior process is similar to that of saithe. The hyomandibular foramen is longer than that of either cod or saithe.

(a) Cod (Gadus morhua): the branchiostegal foverae area in the ceratohyal are quite prominent, and the branchiostegal foverae in the epihyal extends towards the interhyal level. (b) Saithe (Pollachius virens): the branchiostegal foverae in the ceratohyal are not as prominent as in cod; it is also more rectangular in appearance. The branchiostegal foverae in the epihyal are also less prominent than those of cod.

(d) Haddock (Melanogrammus aeglefinus): the point from the pterotic facet and the opercular process is wider than that of cod, saithe and pollack. The ridge between the pterotic facet and the sphenotic process is also shorter. The opercular process is also shorter than that of

(c) Pollack (Pollachius pollachius): the branchiostegal foramen is less prominent than that of saithe and its appearance is even more rectangular. The epihyal is also 7

(c) Pollack (Pollachius pollachius): the plate curves at the middle and ends in a sharp edge. The teeth are clustered at the ventral part however with both large and smaller ones covering most of the surface area. The lateral part is less densely covered with teeth.

less prominent than in saithe. (d) Haddock (Melanogrammus aeglefinus): the area of the branchiostegal foveae are shorter and stouter than the ones of cod, saithe or pollack; it also has a more square proportions in comparison to the other species. The epihyal is wider than those of the other species.

(d) Haddock (Melanogrammus aeglefinus): the plate is wider than that of cod, saithe or pollack. Its surface is sparsely occupied, uniquely by large teeth.

(e) Ling (Molva molva): the area of the branchiostegal foveae in the ceratohyal is wide but less so than that of haddock; and the area extending from the branchiostegal foverae towards the dorsal hypohyal and ventral hypohyal is longer than those of cod, saithe, pollack or haddock. The epihyal widens from the interhyal level towards the ligament which attaches it to the ceratohyal.

(e) Ling (Molva molva): the plate is narrow and is similar in form to that of cod, except that it is wider at the ventral part. Its surface is covered mainly by large teeth with proportionally fewer smaller ones than cod. (f) Whiting (Merlangius merlangus): the plate is narrow and its surface is sparsely covered solely with large teeth.

(f) Whiting (Merlangius merlangus): the area of the branchiostegal foveae curves towards the area of attachment with the epihyal; and the area extending from the branchiostegal foverae to the dorsal and ventral hypohyal is short and also curves ventrally. The epihyal is longer than those of the other species.

(g) Hake (Merluccius merluccius): the plate is quite distinct from any of the other species, ending quite narrowly; its surface is covered densely by small teeth only.

(g) Hake (Merluccius merluccius): the whole of the ceratohyal from the area extending from the dorsal and ventral hypohyal curves gently towards the branchiostegal foveae area, this has a long and slender appearance which is quite distinctive. The epihyal is also quite slender.

2.5 Recording the condition of fish bone Recording of bone condition in fish remains analysis is important as it helps in the assessment of taphonomic conditions affecting bone survival. Nicholson (1998) devised a system to record the state of preservation of fish remains from archaeological contexts on two criteria. These are texture and erosion, where both are measured on a five-point scale. The scale points for texture range from 1 to 5 (i.e. from fresh to extremely crumbly) whereas those for erosion, also ascending from 1 to 5, describe none to extreme. The sum of the scores on these scales is used as an indication of bone condition; fresh, undamaged bone scores 2 while extremely poorly preserved bone would score 10. This author has employed the same method in most of her fish remains analysis because of its simplicity and straightforwardness. This approach has also been used to record the condition of the fish remains from Bostadh Beach. In addition, Barrett’s (1997) method of recording the percentage wholeness of the skeletal element has also been incorporated into the catalogue for the analysis of the Bostadh Beach analysis.

2.4.3 Branchial arch: toothed bones of the pharyngeal region Within the throat of fish there is a series of elements formed of cartilage. They form the buccal cavity. In Gadidae, pharyngeal plates form part of the branchial arch, located cranially, in front of the row of ceratobranchials. In most species, these are quite characteristic and are distinctive at species level. Although they are formed of cartilage, they are highly calcified and often survive in archaeological deposits (Wheeler & Jones 1989). Pharyngeal plates These bones are highly specialised depending on the diet of the fish. For example, in the case of the wrasses (Labridae family), their diet of mainly hard-shelled animals has resulted in their having plates with quite specific tooth forms. Even in the Gadids, these plates are characteristic of the family; and even when the teeth themselves are missing, this surviving cartilage plate may be identifiable to species (Figure 2.8)

2.6 Measurement of fish bone elements Fish bone elements recovered from archaeological sites very rarely survive complete. Thus the term ‘bone elements’ in relation to fish is explicitly used here to refer to an identifiable skeletal part, whereas the term ‘bone fragment’ refers to broken unidentifiable fragments which cannot be identified to any particular skeletal part. Fish bone measurements presented by Morales and Rosenlud (1979) seem to have been based on the assumption that most of the points used for measurements would survive in the collections being assessed. This is not often the case in all archaeological assemblages. Although complete elements are recovered from time to time, in most cases our assemblages at best consist of

(a) Cod (Gadus morhua): the plate is narrow, widening at the lateral edge. Towards the edges of the plate larger teeth are accommodated, with smaller ones displayed along the surface of the plate mixed apparently randomly with larger ones. (b) Saithe (Pollachius virens): the plate is wider than that of cod and exhibits fewer large teeth. Smaller teeth tend to cover most of the plate surface. 8

identifiable parts of skeletal elements. Roselló-Izquierdo (1989) created sets of measurement points, more likely to be found on archaeologically recovered fish remains. Jones (1991) concentrated on the most robust parts of the skeletal elements. A more general method for calculating the size of fish from large assemblages recovered at sites in Scotland has been employed mainly for Gadidae species. This approach was initially formulated by this author (CerónCarrasco 1998a, 1998c) and other workers (e.g. Barrett 1992), based on visual comparisons made on modern fish skeletons. This method requires a set of six different sized specimens from the same family. This classification will indicate whether certain elements are from specimens which fall into the following size categories:

lg TL = a+b. log (lgM)

very small = 150 cm total length

Cod: lgTL = 0.95+1.57 (lgM) Saithe: lgTL = 1.08+1.38 (lgM)

In this equation: TL = the estimated total length of the fish represented by the archaeological specimen a = integration coefficient (intercept with the y axis), based on complete reference specimens b = allometric coefficient (slope of the regression line), based on complete reference specimens M = otolith length in the archaeological specimen. Jones (1991) calculated the following parameters of linear regression on the basis of his reference collection for the purposes of size estimation:

Similar equations, although without logarithmetic transformations, have been published by Härkönen (1986: 90, 102). When compared to those developed by Jones (1991), Härkönen’s parameters indicate a reference sample of cod with relatively long otoliths. It thus appears that use of his equation would underestimate somewhat the size of the cod represented by archaeological material (Figure 2.10). His formula for saithe provides estimates largely identical with those derived by Jones (Figure 2.11). Differences in the parameters obtained for cod may be explained by variability in the growth patterns of different populations of cod. Samples of in- and offshore varieties of cod from the Skagerrat did not produce different results: however, the broader geographical uniformity of these parameters had not been tested at the time this data was compiled (Härkönen 1986, 20). The use of otoliths in age determination is a well known method in modern fisheries biology and is used for the demographic assessment of fish stocks (Campana & Casselman 1993; Campana & Cagne 1995) in investigations of the mortality, recruitment and age distribution of commercially exploited fish species. The annual zones in otoliths are also used to separate subspecies by determining the difference between winter and summer zones. This approach has been used, for example, to tell apart different populations of herring in the North Sea (Härkönen 1986).

This method provides an accurate set of data in most cases. A major benefit of the system is that classification into the different size categories defined above can generally be achieved regardless of the condition or fragmentation of the available bone. Data classified to these size ranges in turn allows consideration of the habitat and seasonality of the species present in the assemblage. This method has been applied to all the material from Bostadh Beach. 2.6.1 Otoliths and their use in ichtyological studies Otoliths are found in the inner ear of fish and have been used to determine their ages examining their ring-like structures. The otoliths of the bony fishes are situated in narrow slots in the bottom of the cranial cavity (Figure 2.9). The growth of the cranium involves corresponding growth of these slots and indeed of the otoliths they contain. In most species, however, the absolute size of the otoliths (OT= otolith length) correlates better with the physical size of the fish than with its age (Härkönen 1986). The size category method developed for Gadids, has been correlated with otolith sizes in this analysis. The formulae follow Jones’ 1991 regression equations between otolith length and the total length of fish, established by the analysis of a modern reference collection of cod and saithe. The overall growth of the fish is more prolonged through time than that of the otolith. The latter tends to be already quite large in relatively young Gadids. The resulting change in proportions is size dependent (i.e. allometric) and can best be described by the relationship between the decimal logarithms (lg) of the two measurements. This transformation results in linear equations whose parameters (a and b: calculated from the reference collections) can be used to estimate the total length of archaeological specimens from surviving complete otoliths. This regression formula is as follows:

2.7 Quantification of fish remains A general consensus exists amongst zooarchaeologists that the quantification of archaeo-zoological material will never result in a wholly realistic estimation of the number of animals originally deposited on the site. There are a number of reasons why this should be the case. Even in well-preserved assemblages, huge taphonomical losses occur. Maltby (1985) demonstrated that such assemblages show this loss more clearly than poorly preserved ones do. The question therefore remains: How is an archaeological assemblage to be quantified? The most common techniques used to try to estimate the contribution of animals represented in a faunal 9

The author of this study uses quantification in the analysis of fish remains primarily to assess the importance of certain species in the assemblage. For this purpose she considers NISP the most appropriate method. The method is used here primarily on species of Gadidae, as classified by the size grouping (see above). This approach is aimed mainly at examining seasonality: depending on the species and the different sizesencountered, it is possible to calculate the time of year these fish were caught. By extension, one can assess the fishing technology which might have been used, given the likely location of the fish at that season. The methods listed above contribute, to a great extent, to our attempts to reliably reconstruct the environment exploited and the economic consequences of such exploitation.

assemblage are counting the number of identifiable specimens (NISP) and the minimum numbers of individuals (MNI). The number of identifiable specimens (NISP) is calculated by a simple procedure. Each identified element assigned to a particular species is counted. The resulting figures are considered to bear some resemblance to the number of animals represented by the remains (Chaplin 1971, 64). The reliability of NISP values increases along with increasing sample sizes. However, the underlying assumption, that each fragment represents a different individual, is usually biased. Some of the disarticulated skeletal elements certainly belong to the same animal which will thus become over-represented in these calculations. NISP values may therefore be misleading when taphonomic processes are not taken into consideration. Methods for estimating the minimum number of individuals (MNI) are numerous. The basic method is to count the most abundant single element. Assuming that this element has survived better than others, it is then also assumed that the element is the most representative of the species originally deposited at the site. This method has been the subject of much criticism (e.g. Grayson 1984) and it has thus largely fallen from favour. Archaeo-icthyologists in general are now using the NISP method to quantify their assemblages, the main reason being the fact that fish bones are generally subject to extensive post depositional alteration and decay, rendering the MNI figure almost meaningless (Wheeler & Jones 1989, 151-2). NISP is widely used by faunal analysts; its implications in icthyo-archaeology, however, should be carefully considered. This author prefers to use the NISP method, although differences in bone survival must be taken into consideration. Through a consideration of taphonomy for example, this method allows for an ample assessment of all the fish skeletal element remains available in an assemblage. For some species of teleosts (bony fishes), this method usually produces a clearer picture of the importance of different species in an assemblage. This has certainly been the case with sites in Scotland where Gadidae species usually dominate the assemblage (Barrett & Oltmann 1998, Barrett et al. 1999). Some argue that certain species will generally be underrepresented, for instance cartilaginous fish. Very few elements from cartilaginous fish survive in archaeological deposits (Barrett 1992), but this is a taphonomic fact, which is inevitable, but must be borne in mind. Cartilaginous fishes however have not played as great a role throughout the documented history of fishing in Scotland, compared to species such as cod and herring. This author considers that it is possible to do little more than note their presence in any assemblage. In effect, this can only be done if any trace of cartilage survives, as a mineralised fragment for example. Leach (1997, 9-10) has argued that NISP (number of identifiable specimens) should be referred to as NIF (number of identified fragments), since that is in fact what is quantified by the statistics. However, because the acronym ‘NISP’ has obtained such widespread use, it would be impractical now to change it thereby further confusing matters.

2.8 Identification of marine molluscs Successful identification of marine molluscs depends mainly on the degree of fragmentation of their remains; the more complete they are, the more identifiable. Furthermore, the low numbers of identifiable anatomical elements, the high numbers of species potentially represented, and the differential preservation and fragmentation of molluscan remains in an assemblage will greatly influence the reliability of identification (Moreno-Nuño 1994a). The difficulties encountered in attributing marine mollusc shell fragments to species voiced by Moreno-Nuño were mainly based on the analysis of assemblages from archaeological sites in Spain that may have a wider range of species representation than those found in Scottish sites. However, the same issues apply in both countries. Access to a reference collection of molluscs may be required for successful identification. This collection should ideally include specimens of various sizes belonging to the same species, some of which may therefore need to be collected from different tide levels. For example, limpets (Patella vulgata) have different surface characteristics and width: height ratios depending on their exposure to waves (Jones & Baxter 1985; Holmes 1997). In most cases the majority of the species recovered from archaeological sites throughout the British Isles are still found in modern populations from the locality, thereby facilitating identification and consideration of habitat. There are excellent pictorial guides to molluscs which are very useful for the purpose of identification. They are also good references for checking habitats and the biological trends of the mollusc species in question (Campbell & Nicolls 1989; Tebble 1976). Even when a high degree of fragmentation occurs, identification may still be possible. 2.9 The quantification of molluscs Quantification of shell remains is typically undertaken to reconstruct the environment, to examine site formation processes, or to explore human behaviour. Whatever the purpose, the validity of the interpretation depends on the representative nature of the sample of shells examined. An adequate sample will allow for meaningful counts and 10

extraction of DNA. A general historical survey of strandings in the Western and Northern Isles was undertaken by this author and the results are presented in Chapter 3. The objective of this was to provide background to the likelihood of particular species being represented in archaeological contexts. It is assumed that these creatures were exploited opportunistically when they beached, rather than that they were hunted in later prehistory. This exercise was done in view of the fact that most of the cetacean remains recovered at Bostadh Beach are too fragmentary to allow for species identification. Only one vertebra fragment was tentatively identified as belonging to a pilot whale (Chapter 7, section 7.12).

for measurements to be generated (Claasen 1998). For the two most commonly represented groups of molluscs (gastropods and bivalves), the task of quantifying the remains is simplified by counting individuals according to simple formulae: in the case of bivalves, absolute numbers should be divided by two, but a simple count is used for gastropods. The use of fragment count or NISP seems the most appropriate method for quantifying molluscs and is one that is followed by most researchers (Moreno-Nuño 1994b). This method, however, can only be used for quantifying specimens that have been recovered whole or whose fragmentation is not extreme and thus still allows for the quantification criteria. The problem of quantifying material consisting of small broken fragments of shell requires different procedures. A simple technique to show fragmentation in a scale of 1 to 4 has been developed by the present writer when she has been required to incorporate the examination of masses of broken shell into the overall analysis of the complete or broken identifiable molluscan remains recovered from a given site. The abundance of broken shell is shown in tables by the use of asterisks as follows (e.g. Cerón-Carrasco 1998d):

2.11 Conclusion This chapter has outlined the methods by which the remains of marine organisms recovered at Bostadh Beach, and those from the sites that provided analogous material, have been identified, quantified, recorded and analysed. These assemblages included fish bone remains, marine mollusca and cetacean bone remains. It was obvious from the start of the post-excavation work on the Bostadh Beach Project, that the best represented environmental materials recovered were the fish remains. It is therefore the evaluation of the fish remains that dominates the analyses here, and which lead to a consideration of the ancient uses of marine resources during the periods represented at the site. The proportional composition of the present chapter reflects this imbalance, since more emphasis has been given to the methods of icthyo-archaeological analysis than to the evaluation of marine molluscan or marine mammal remains.

*= rare; ** = occasional; *** = common; **** = abundant The standardised use of this approach would be greatly improved if records of the volumes of soil sieved were carefully made; this would at least allow for an idea of percentages according to the weight of broken shell in an assemblage. As with any other archaeozoological analysis, quantification of the marine molluscs from Bostadh Beach has aimed at assessing the importance of the different species in terms of the economic roles they played. Both methods of quantification discussed will be used for the material recovered at Bostadh Beach. 2.10 The cetacean bone analysis Very few cetacean bone fragments were encountered at Bostadh Beach. Most cetacean remains were furthermore recovered in an altered state, as artefacts and particularly as combs, the majority of such objects appear typologically to belong to the Norse period (Smith 1998), although stratigraphically (Neighbour & Finlayson 1997; Neighbour 2001) these derived from contexts assigned to the Later Iron Age period of occupation at the site. Due to their fragmentary nature, it was only possible to identify a single element of cetacean vertebra to one species. The majority of the non-artefactual bone fragments recovered however were too fragmentary to allow for species or even family identification. Furthermore, it was deemed inappropriate to try to engage in experiments such as testing of DNA. The cetacean bone is extremely spongy and surviving bones do not always yield enough structural material for the 11

construction of the bridge in 1952, this island was reached by boat. Bostadh Beach in Great Bernera is located within what is presently rapidly eroding machair in the western part of the island (Figure 3.2). The shell component of machair deposits has led to an extraordinary degree of preservation of archaeological environmental material, which, coupled with the surviving upstanding architecture within the now-collapsing shell-sand, has provided a rich archaeological source of well-preserved environmental and artifactual assemblages.

Chapter 3: The physical and bio-geographical context of the Outer Hebrides 3.1 Introduction To understand the exploitation of marine resources in the study area one must first have an understanding of its topography, physical environment and bio-geography. Assuming that these factors have remained approximately constant throughout and since the periods involved, and by making use of relatively modern data, one may determine how the species in the archaeozoological assemblage relate to the rest of the marine environment as it can be reconstructed from what is known today.

3.3 Aspects of topography in the Hebridean islands The Outer Hebrides are formed almost entirely of gneiss which is an Archaic rock, nearly three thousand million years old. The Inner Hebrides on the other hand are formed mainly of lava from the Tertiary era, formed only fifty million years ago. Basalt and gneiss therefore form two very different if closely juxtaposed archipelagos (Boyd & Boyd 1996b, Murray 1973). Whatever underlying rock formation is encountered in the Outer and Inner Hebrides, the overlying soils are extremely thin and acid and frequently covered with peat: this combined with exposure to Atlantic winds and particularly the effects of grazing, successfully prevents tree growth (New 1926). However, historical accounts and scientific evidence suggest that some parts of the Western Isles were once covered with woodland, particularly in North Uist and Lewis (Monsen & Smith 1967; Evans 1971; Wilkins 1984; Bennett et al 1990; Tipping 1994; Fossit 1996; Edwards & Whittington 1997; 2003). The present lack of trees in this region is a great drawback to the people, for almost every piece of wood needed now for constructing houses, boats or other purposes, must be imported. In the recent past there was great reliance on what could be recovered as drift from the sea or what may have been buried in the peat. The absence of trees is particularly marked in the Outer Hebrides. Today peat is the dominant soil on the islands (Glentworth 1979). The depths of blanket peat average 1.5 m, but can reach as much as 5 m in parts of Lewis (Goode & Lindsay 1979). Peat bogs have for centuries been utilised as domestic fuel (Boyd 1979), and although peatland is generally unsuitable for agriculture it is used for rough grazing (Glentworth 1979). Calcareous soils (machair is discussed in section 3.8) can be found along the west coast. Inland, the land rises and becomes undulating with peat filled hollows and lochs interspersed with bare rock. The highest peak in the islands is Clisham in Harris (799m high), but most land surfaces in these islands lie less than 50m above sea level (Caird 1979; Barber & Magee 1985).

3.2 Geography Relative to continental Europe, the British Isles have been described as 'maritime' and, when comparing the Hebrides with the bulk of mainland Britain, as 'oceanic' (Boyd & Boyd 1996b). The use of such terms thus stresses the primordial role played by the maritime factor generated by the presence of the North Atlantic Ocean surrounding these islands. The Hebrides are formed of some five hundred islands, stacks and skerries and are the most westerly part of Scotland (Figure 3.1). This lengthy chain of islands forms a barrier protecting the Scottish mainland from the open Atlantic (Murray 1973, Thomson 1994). The islands appear as two archipelagos lying parallel to the mainland coast of Scotland, the Outer Hebrides overlapping the Inner for some hundred kilometres (Murray 1973, 23). The Outer Hebrides consist of a series of islands which lie off the north-western coast of mainland Scotland: they extend over a linear distance of some 200 km and have a combined coastline over 1,800 km long. The most northerly is the island of Lewis and Harris. Lewis is some 65 km long and approximately 20 km to 40 km wide. It is the largest and presently the most heavily populated island in the Outer Hebrides particularly in Stornoway although rural areas continue to be scantily populated. One of its main features is the 'Black Moor' i.e. the low peat lands which form the widespread blanket bog that is prevalent across most of the interior of Lewis. Martin Martin (ca. 1695), suggested that the name 'Lewis' derived from the word Leog which he describes as meaning 'water' but to many this word i.e. ‘leog’ is unknown (Swire 1966, 9). Murray (1973) however, claims that Lewis derives from the Gaelic 'Leogach' which means 'marshy' in reference to the peat lands. The relevance of explaining the possible meaning of the name Lewis in the present context is to stress that environmental attributes influenced most aspects of life in these islands, including language: this aspect is discussed in Chapter 5. Great Bernera on which Bostadh is situated is a small island off the West Coast of Lewis. This island is 7 km long and 3 km wide and is now reached by a road bridge constructed on an artificial causeway across the Atlantic Ocean from the Isle of Lewis, just south of the main set of standing stones at Callanish. Previous to the

3.4 The weather system: some implications for human activity In the British Isles moist oceanic air masses to the west and drier continental air masses to the east generally 12

energy output by muscular activity in the form of shivering which in the cold, can be controlled by increasing physical activity. The problem is that such high-energy expenditure is extra-tiring and only the very fit can maintain it for any length of time. When physical activity slows down, the body temperature begins to drop quite rapidly (Bennett 1983). In extreme conditions, for example in waters at 5°C an unclothed person of average build will become helpless from hypothermia after 20-30 minutes, in waters at 10°C the person will survive unclothed for about one hour and a half (Keating 1969). In the context of fishing from boats out at sea, cold has a limiting effect on fishing activity, particularly in winter. The latitude of the Hebrides also dictates that the hours of daylight are reduced to a brief midday window during mid-winter, while during summer they can last almost till midnight. Such seasonal variations would have formed the framework for much of the economic and social life in the islands from the earliest of times (Armit 1996).

dominate the weather system. Along the western seaboard of Ireland and Scotland, these air masses are in continuous interaction resulting in storm-belts that are quite active over the Hebridean shelf. Rapid changes in the weather can occur in a matter of hours, particularly over the ocean, where fast-moving depressions bring active fronts sweeping across the Hebrides as a result of contacts between air masses at different temperatures (Boyd & Boyd 1996b, 30). The climate of the British Isles as a whole is governed by their situation in the cool Temperate Zone on the western edge of Europe. The principal factors involved are the maritime aspect, the exposed conditions, the Gulf Stream and their northerly latitude. The position of the Hebrides on the far-western margin of Britain therefore means that they experience in extreme form the consequences of the strong prevailing winds from the West bringing rainfall from across a wide reach of sea (Knowlton 1977). The Hebrides lie in a storm-belt of the North Atlantic and as a consequence, are constantly being swept by frontal depressions. These islands are the windiest area of the British Isles. The maritime climate of the Hebrides is notorious for its unpredictability, although the Gulf Stream, which provides it with a warming influence, tempers its northern location. This produces a mild climate in the islands compared to other areas at similar latitude, and although the summers tend to be cool and wet, the winters are not so severe, resulting in a relatively early start to the growing season. The effect of wind, however, remains of particular importance since windchill factors, dependent on the speed of wind, can radically exacerbate the situation in cold weather. Thanks to the effect of the Gulf Stream, January mean temperatures vary from 0 and +5 °C, while July mean temperatures vary from 10 to 15 °C (Boyd & Boyd 1997). However, the stronger the wind, the more it chills the actual temperature. This tendency is shown in Figure 3.3. Table 3.1 shows how windchill temperature (y) can be calculated from actual temperature (x) at various levels of wind speed (Bartosiewicz, unpublished). The increasing coefficients of actual temperature (x) in these equations show that the stronger the wind, the steeper the drop in windchill temperature. A relatively mild, 10 °C temperature thus, may be close to freezing when the speed reaches 30 km/h. During days of strong winds and rain, even in temperatures of around 10ºC, abundant loss of heat by the human body is enough to drive all but the fittest indoors (Boyd & Boyd 1996b). Furthermore, the cooling rate on the human body of a strong damp wind with a temperature falling below 13ºC increases very rapidly; to maintain the balance between normal heat production during exertion, and subsequent heat loss, requires rapid adjustment. The energy loss suffered by people, plants and animals in these islands, particularly in the Outer Hebrides, can thus be greater than the average suggests i.e. 5 to 5.50 C° in January and 13.3 to 13.9 C° in July (Boyd & Boyd 1996a). The effects of cold on the human body are summarized in Table 3.2. This table gives an idea of the body’s initial response to cold conditions. This shows an increased

3.5 The marine environment Seventy per cent of the Earth's surface is covered by oceans; of these some ninety per cent lie at depths greater than 200m (Idyll 1971, Perkins 1974). The area of shallow seas within the 200m (111 fathoms) contour is known as the continental shelf, and is – and historically has been – the site of major commercial fishing and most other exploitation of the sea (Perkins 1974). Ocean waters are constantly on the move. How they do so influences climate and living conditions for plants and animals, even on land. Currents flow in complex patterns affected by a complex range of factors including wind, the water's salinity and heat content, bottom topography, and the earth's rotation. In the Northern Hemisphere the surface currents circulate clockwise. These circulatory movements take place down to depths of 900 m or more, and there are vertical ones also, likewise rotational, with colder water sinking, especially at the pole, and warmer water rising, especially in the tropics (Ommanney 1965). This movement greatly influences the properties of seawater discussed below. The central and northern coasts of Britain, and the Outer Hebrides in particular, are influenced by the North Atlantic Drift, also known as the Gulf Stream, which sweeps moderately warm Atlantic water around the north of Scotland (Figure 3.4). In the Outer Hebrides exposure to waves as well as to winds is also severe. The exposed position of these islands means that long fetches are available in practically every direction for wave generation. Especially in the North of Lewis, where there is no shelter from offshore islands or reefs, the exposure is completely open (Ritchie & Mather 1970). The consequences of these macro-scale features in the environment include impacts resulting in a high biological production of vast stocks of fish and shell fish compared with the slow and reduced growth in terrestrial plant and animal life in the islands.

13

of weather. They also contain the run-off from rivers, causing brackish conditions in the inner recesses of sealochs. The main communities of organisms inhabit different parts of the hydrographic system: ocean depths, the continental slope and the continental shelf with sublittoral platforms in the shallow seas immediately around the islands. None of these communities are selfcontained, all being connected by currents. The waters of the Hebrides are rich in phytoplankton: this is the 'vegetation' which fixes gaseous carbon and nitrogen, and which is grazed by the zooplankton. The zooplankton is in turn eaten by other animals and so the food-chain is begun (Boyd & Boyd 1996b). The growth of phytoplankton, which forms the base of marine food pyramids, is governed by the availability of nutrients and by water temperature (ibid.). The properties of seawater have been discussed above in order to illuminate the immediate environmental context of the edible resources that are particularly present in this portion of the North Atlantic. The variability of these conditions is also significant in regard to the cyclical availability of certain important species. These topics are developed at length below in sections 3.9 to 3.13.

The sea around the islands conditions human settlement in two basic respects: it influences the climate, and it is a source of economically useful plants and animals. The oceans are an open system receiving inputs of water through precipitation, river discharge and, to a lesser extent, direct groundwater discharge. The intake also comprises of solid and gaseous matter in river sediments, from coastal erosion, and in deposition and solution from the atmosphere. The oceans also receive organic matter from the life cycle of marine organisms (White et al. 1992). In the Hebridean region, the increase in sea temperature, particularly marked during March to April, triggers off a reproduction of life so rapidly that in a month a single diatom may have one thousand million progeny (Murray 1973). During the same period most marine animals mate and produce their progeny, whilst fish spawn their eggs. A wide range of Atlantic marine species can be found in these areas (Campbell & Nicholls 1989). Hebridean waters hold a huge variety of species from the common herring to the rarely seen giant squid, as well as a number of marine mammal species (Murray 1973). Those species that were exploited as resources for human consumption will be considered further below. The basic properties of seawater are dependent upon its salinity, temperature and pressure (i.e. depth level). By understanding the dynamics of the sea, it has become clear that the combination of temperature data with salinity, pressure and oxygen measurements provides a more accurate indication of the marine environment and the role it plays in the occurrence of marine organisms and their abundance (Iversen 1996). During the course of circulatory movements by the ocean, cold deeper water, rich in nutrients and salts, comes up against the continental slope and is carried upwards along the slope into the upper layers, and so replenishes the water over the continental shelf (Refer to section 3.5 and to Figure 3.5). Marine habitats are defined essentially by depth ranges and salinity. Seawater salinity is expressed in grams of dissolved solids (salt) per kilogram of seawater and while coastal waters can exhibit a wide range of salinity as a result of freshwater runoff, most of the world's oceans lie in the salinity range of 33.8 to 36.8, a comparatively narrow band. Around the British Isles typical salinity is about 34-35 (Figure 3.6). The impact of these trends in the seas around the Hebrides is to provide the necessary conditions for marine organisms to flourish. Salinity decreases vapour pressure and increases osmotic pressure. Osmosis is the process by which water flows through a semi permeable membrane that blocks the transport of salts or other solubles through it. This osmotic pressure therefore is a fundamental effect in biological life (Lachish 2002). Seawater becomes diluted in estuaries and also in enclosed shallow seas (Miller & Loates 1997). The North Atlantic Drift or Gulf Stream, is the warmest and most saline of the world's oceans, having a mean potential temperature of 5.08 °C and mean salinity of 35.09, compared to the global average of 3.51 °C and salinity of 34.72 (Figure 3.6) Climate in the Hebrides, as previously explained, is greatly influenced by temperate ocean currents. Coastal waters are also mixed by tidal currents and by the effects

3.6 Sea level changes In the British Isles, sea levels seem to have been lower than at present, perhaps by as much as one metre, around 500BC, but rose during Roman times, particularly between AD 200 and 400. Sea level was stationary thereafter for some time but may once more have been a little below the present day level around AD 600 to 800 (Lamb 1988 & 1991; Funnel 1979). Furthermore, studies on inter-tidal and sub-tidal organic deposits in the Uists (Outer Hebrides) indicate that sea level has risen by approximately 5m since the Neolithic. The available evidence from the Hebrides shows that this process had slowed down by the Iron Age (Ritchie 1985). Therefore, sea-level change appears to have been minimal around the coasts of the Western Isles since the Iron Age, the period of direct relevance to this study. The main eustatic rise following the last ice age had ceased some few thousand years earlier and the main isostatic recovery of northern Britain had already taken place. Nevertheless there is evidence of minor changes, in the order of a couple of metres, along some sectors of the coasts of Britain and although these were slight compared with the main eustatic rise, they would have affected the lives of people living in these areas. For instance, if changes in sea level led to the creation of new estuarine mud flats, there would have been additional habitat for a particular range of plants and animals and hence fresh opportunities for gathering marine molluscs and for catching fish. Although Iron Age people would probably not have lived entirely off such resources, they would certainly have made good use of the new land that became available after periods of marine transgression (Turner 1981), especially the extensive tracts of grasscovered shell sand (machair) that are found between coastal dune belts and the peat-covered inland areas of the Outer Hebrides (Ritchie 1979; Ballantyne & Dawson 1997). 14

3.7 Different shore types

3.7.1 The sea shore

The variation in the characteristics of the Hebridean coastal edge is dominated by a striking contrast between, on the one hand, the hardness and angularity of the rocky shores and, on the other, the smoothness and gentle, regular profiles of the sandy beaches and wide extensions of tidal flats. The rocky shores of Lewis include a range of components: bare rock surfaces, weed-covered rocks, rock pools and crevices (Barrett & Yonge 1958). The Gaelic term machair is applied to gently sloping coastal plains formed by wind blown sand mixed with crushed marine shells. This means that this part of the environment is, unusually for Scotland, very alkaline, and therefore ideal for the good preservation of bones. The Hebridean machair is a rich habitat for flora and fauna, since calcium carbonate makes up eighty per cent of its components. It also provides relatively productive grassland and arable farmland (Ritchie 1967), despite the fact that the very alkaline conditions and natural deficiency in organic material are problematic. In the 19th century the machair was used to grow barley, oats, rye, and potatoes, as well as natural grass and wild clover (Caird 1979). Today it is used mainly as unfenced common grazing land, although some restricted areas are still ploughed for potatoes, oats, or other cereals (Boyd 1979; Hudson et al. 1979). The machair landscape consists of open habitats that, due to grazing and cultivation and mainly to their exposure to Atlantic winds, are not masked by trees or tall herbs (Boyd & Boyd 1996b); machairs sustain a rich and varied dune and arable weed flora although there are no species or communities unique to this habitat. The most important plant species found are red fescue (Festuca rubra L.), birdsfoot-treefoil (Lotus corniculatus L.), white clover (Trifolium repens L.), yarrow (Achillea millefolium L.), lady’s bedstraw (Galium verum L.), ribwort plantain (Plantago lanceolata L.), eyebright (Eufrasia sp.), daisy (Bellis perennis L.) and the moss Rhytidiadelphus squarrosus (Hedw.). Machair has a very limited world distribution, being restricted to the north and west of Scotland, and to the west of Ireland. It is defined solely in terms of its topographic position and principal components as shell rich coastal plain. The machair area in the Hebrides demonstrates a close relationship between climate, soils, landscape, vegetation, biota, and the history of human economic activity, settlement and culture (Figure 3.7). By contrast with the interior of the islands regarded unfit for human occupation and restricted largely to the provision of fuel, i.e. peat, and rough pasture, the machair has witnessed a progressive concentration of human settlement indicated by the distribution of domestic sites of various periods. This is particularly marked in North Uist (Crawford 1965; Armit 1996). Machair is the only major habitat universally known by a Gaelic term (Ritchie 1967 & 1979).

Rocks fully exposed to the Atlantic surf may be denuded of both plant life and marine shells. Even in areas of great water movement, however, where there is no seaweed or other algal growth, intermittently-exposed rock surfaces may be covered with animal life. This fauna usually consists of a few species highly adapted to such harsh, exposed environments: these include acorn barnacles, which are permanently attached to the rocks; limpets which are capable of gripping firmly; and whelks which can stand being rolled about without sustaining damage. Weed-covered rocks occur in more sheltered conditions where flora as well as fauna thrive. The species of seaweed that are found vary not only in relation to different settings relative to tidal range on the shore, but also owing to varying exposure to waves and to the presence or lack of fresh water. The zonation of the brown fucoid seaweed found around the Hebrides is very obvious; those highest up the shore have the greatest resistance to the effects of drying but have little tensile strength. Those lowest in the tidal range, where they are fully and continuously exposed to wave action, contrastingly have great tensile strength but cannot withstand for long the effects of drying. From sheltered settings to more exposed rocky shores, one species of seaweed replaces another, while the presence of a stream or even a permanent trickle of fresh water over the rocks, may be shown by a downward extension of the green weeds. These normally live in brackish water high on the shore. A great variety of animals occur on and under such weeds. Whilst the plants provide shelter from wave action and from the drying effect of sun and air, only a few of these animals actually eat weed directly. Thus the correlation between plant and associated animal life is less than totally direct. Many of these species are permanently attached (sponges, hydroids, sea mats, tube worms, sea squirts, etc.); others either hold on firmly by one means or another (sea anemones, periwinkles and other sea snails, crustaceans, etc.) or move restricted distances by crawling about, as do the numerous bristle and other worms. Most of these animals are small: their sizes range from 5-15 cm in height amongst the anemones to 4 cm in length among bristle worms (Campbell & Nicholls1989). Rock pools represent local areas that never dry out and are often the most rewarding environments to examine on the shore. The seaweed and the animals which occur in them include many of those already encountered in the bare and weed-covered rocks and more particularly species that cannot withstand even temporarily being dry, being also inhabitants of shallow offshore waters. Fishes, prawns, sea urchins, starfish and crabs may all be found in numbers in such locations. Crevices amongst shoreline rocks are usually damp and shady, although conditions at the micro-scale vary considerably according to whether they are high or low on the shore and whether they face seawards or landwards; the geological type of the rocks also influences the shape and depth of crevices. 15

The flat wracks found in the upper shore are also found here but are not numerically dominant. The bladder wrack (Focus vesiculosus L.) and the saw wrack (Focus serratus L.) which often bear the white tubes of the worm Spinorbis, replace the flat wracks that are found mainly in the upper shore. The bladder and saw wracks inhabit the more exposed areas within the rocky middle shore, some of which are areas prone to strong currents. In more sheltered sectors of the middle shore the knotted wrack (Ascophyllum nosodum L.) thrives. In the Hebrides, this species presently occupies large areas of the middle shore. There is also a great variety of molluscs particularly adapted to the middle shore. Of these the most common is the limpet (Patella vulgata L.) which successfully inhabits smooth, exposed rocks, where it forages on microalgae and the sporelings of seaweed. The edible periwinkle (Littorina littorea L.) and flat periwinkle (Littorina littoralis L.), contrastingly, are confined to the areas where bladder and knotted wracks upon which these snails feed are dominant. Edible periwinkles are the most common species of the genus Littorina found in the Hebridean Islands, and live on bare rock surfaces often with other molluscs such as mussel and limpets. On sandy and muddy shores in this sector of the coastal edge, the main animal organisms show adaptations to survive diurnal changes of temperature, salinity and sunlight by burrowing. Of these the most important is the lugworm (Arenicola marina L.). On moderately exposed beaches, lugworm and bivalves such as the clam (Cerasoderma edule L.), the urchin (Echinocardium cordatum Pennant) and the common shrimp (Crangon vulgaris Fabricius) are also present. Most of these species are edible while the lug-worm is used as fishing bait.

3.7.2 The zonation of the sea shore This concept serves as a useful frame of reference to describe the limits of settlement of different species and communities of organisms found on or near the seashore. Physical and biological factors create regular patterns in the ecology of the coast. These are displayed as wide bands, each containing specific species. The upper limits of each band are maintained by physical constraints, for example resistance to desiccation and/or hypersaline conditions, while lower limits are set by biological constraints such as competition and predation. These patterns constitute the upper, middle and lower shores (Boyd & Boyd 1996b). Recent exploitation of some organisms, for example certain species of seaweed for feritilizer and other products, has had no significant effect on the overall zonation of other species. For example, the report on ‘Littoral Seaweed Resource Management’ by Environment & Resource Technology Ltd. (1994) reevaluated the potential for the exploitation of wrack (Ascophyllum) resources and assessed the distribution and abundance of other potentially exploitable seaweed species in the Western Isles. While the study found that although Ascophyllum harvesting does alter the intertidal habitat, having a direct effect on other organisms dependent on it, the examination of commercial harvesting practices in Lewis and Harris showed little difference, in terms of the abundance and distribution of dependent organisms, between sites harvested 5-6 years previously and unharvested sites. A similar study done for comparison in Nova Scotia and concerned with the potential impact on fish species showed that Ascophyllum removal had no effects on the abundance or diversity of fish populations.

The lower shore is defined as the area below the mean low tide line, where most inhabitants of the middle and upper shore have either disappeared or been greatly reduced in numbers. It is rarely exposed to the air and when it is, this is usually for relatively brief periods; the lower shore is therefore the easiest zone for marine animals to colonise. Limpets, barnacles and periwinkles are also found in this habitat as well as the large dogwhelk (Buccinum undatum L.), the topshell (Givula cineraria L.) and a number of cowries (Trivia arctica Montagu and Trivia monacha da Costa). The common lobster (Homarus gammarus L.) and the squat lobster (Galathea sp.) are found in the lower shore, where they normally inhabit flooded cavities under rocks. A large proportion of all the bivalves present on the coastal edge in the Hebrides also inhabit this zone (Boyd and Boyd 1996a). Their occurrence relates to the salinity and the proportion of sand and mud in the beach deposits, ideal properties for their survival. Species such as razor shells (Ensus sp.) and venuses (Venus sp.) thrive under such conditions. Many species of fish abound in this high-energy zone. These are adapted to the rapidly changeable conditions that may impact on the rocky, weedy recesses and the shifting sands prevalent in this sector of the shore and the relevant portions of estuaries. Species represented include

3.7.3 A description of the zones of the sea shore (Figure 3.8) The upper shore is defined as the area above mean high tide mark. In the Hebrides the rocky upper shores are dominated by the channelled wrack (Palvetia canaliculata L.), the spiral wrack (Fucus espiralis L.) and by the barnacle (Chthamalus stellatus L.). Where there is heavy sedimentation in tidal and estuarine flats, saltmarshes occur generally in the narrow strip between shore and land. Such marshes are rich in plant and animal diversity, particularly birds: they represent the transition from brackish to freshwater, and from relatively exposed to sheltered sites for example at Luskentyre and Northton in Harris, at Vallay Strand and Baleshare, North Uist, and Iochdar in South Uist. Saltmarshes have been used mainly for fowling and grazing. The middle shore is the area bounded between on the one hand the mean high tide line and on the other by the average low tide mark. In the Hebrides, this is generally a sheltered zone that contains a diversity of marine organisms, although in some areas it also contains a rocky habitat that can be exposed to strong currents. 16

the black goby (Gobius niger L.), common goby (Gobius minutus Pallas), the butterfish (Pholis gunnellus L.) and the 3-spined stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus L.). Flounder (Platichthys flesus L.), eels (Anguilla anguilla L.), trout (Salmo trutta L.) and pollack (Pollachius pollachius L.) also occur here. In large tidal pools and the rocky portions of the lower shore or sub-littoral shore fish species include the ballan wrasse (Labrus bergylta Ascanius) and the conger eel (Conger conger L.). Areas of tidal waters covering sand flats also contain sandeels (Ammodites sp.), as well as the young of plaice (Pleuronectes platessa L.) and dab (Limanda limanda L.). The lower shore is also an area that receives abundant migrant and winter fowl activity. It is also the preferred habitat of the otter (Lutra lutra).

the past are the same as those preferred today (Wigan 1998). The middens consisting largely of shells beside settlements such as those of Mesolithic date from Oronsay and Ulva (Mellars 1978, Russell et al. 1995), and those recently excavated in Skye by the Scotland First Settlers’ Project (Hardy & Wickham-Jones 2000), as well as later settlements such as the Neolithic site of Skara Brae in Orkney, testify to the human use of marine resources from thousands of years BC. The expression that we are best known by our rubbish is supported by the examination of middens; for example, the presence of bones from deepwater fish in debris at a settlement at Cnip in Lewis proves that in 500 AD its inhabitants had sufficient technical skills for fishing at sea (HamiltonDyer 1991; Cerón-Carrasco 1998e; Wigan 1998). None of the other evidence recovered from the examination of this site demonstrates conclusively that its population had recourse to the sea in this way.

3.8 The Fishings of the Lewis (MacKenzie 1919): a survey of the fishes present in the waters adjacent to the island.

3.8.1 The marine food chain 'For he was astonished, and all that were with him, at the draught of fishes which they had taken'. Luke 5:9

The sea is man's most extensive hunting ground. Two thirds of the Earth is covered with water and by far the most important food we get from it is fish (Barrett 1977, Iversen 1996). The Western Isles, at relatively high latitude, have a high-energy weather and hydrographic system. The disadvantages of this can be seen in the relatively slow growth, and reduced range of, terrestrial plant and animal life. In the sea, however, conditions that favour life have been more prolific, with high biological production of stocks of fish and shellfish, marine mammals and plants. The Hebridean Sea is rich in plant life. At sea as on land, the entire animal population ultimately depends for its food on the vegetation. Plants use the energy in sunlight to convert elements otherwise locked in water, soil, and air into the sugars, proteins and starches that animals require for their survival. In the sea, plant life is ninetenths plankton which drifts mainly in the upper 30m layer penetrated by sunlight (Ommanney 1965). Plankton includes both plant and animal organisms, at least threefifths of which are a plant form called diatoms. The Hebridean Sea, being rich in plankton is therefore rich in fish, and also in sea-birds and mammals. Plankton thrives in cold temperate water; in tropical seas for example it is relatively rare (Murray 1973). Plankton flourishes in all the Hebridean coastal waters in spring, just as plant growth does on land in that season. In northern waters this happens during March and April, in both freshwater lakes and rivers as well as on the sea, where a great outburst of plant plankton takes place. The water can become dark green and opaque at that time from the countless millions of single-celled plants floating in the surface. This process continues during the summer months after the hatching of clouds of minute eggs of plankton animals and their growth through young stages into adulthood (Ommanney 1965). In his Western Isles of Scotland Monro (1549) describes Great Bernera or 'Berneray mhor' as 'ane Ile of five mile lang, inhabite and manurit, fertile and frutfull, with mony pastures and mekle store, gude for fishing and fewal'

3rd Fisherman: Master, I marvel how the fishes live in the sea. 1st Fisherman: Why, as men do a-land, the great ones eat up the little ones. (Shakespeare's 'Pericles'). Men have eaten fish since the earliest of times and for centuries they have gone to sea to catch them (Coull 1996). The need for fish in the diet arises in general from the requirement for protein in human nutrition. Protein is needed both for maintenance and growth. Vegetable protein lacks two amino acids present in fish and meat (Cushing 1975). Traditionally, in many environments, fish have been easier to obtain and also cheaper than meat (Coull 1996). Crawford and Marsh (1989) claim that the food people ate throughout 99.8 per cent of history and the foodstuffs eaten today are different in many ways. One exception to this, however, is seafood. The relationship of humans with marine and freshwater food remains close to the notion of the hunter-gatherer, exploiting nature’s bounty. Fish have certainly been a basic element of subsistence diet for coastal dwellers and are regarded as the last major harvest of the ‘hunter-gatherers' and the fisherfolk themselves may be regarded as the last hunter-gatherers (Wigam 1998). The basic data for estimating the scale and importance of fisheries starts with fishing catches and the performance of fishermen. Through modern fisheries biology, the list of 40,000 species of fish available in the world’s oceans and inland waters is being extended. To date, no sea fish has been rendered extinct in modern times although many are potentially less available than they have been in relatively recent times (e.g. cod, herring, salmon). Some species, like the coelacanth (Crossopterygii: Latimeria chalumnae Smith), supposedly extinct for 70-million years and 're-discovered' in 1938, have surfaced again. By and large, the particular species of fish that were eaten in 17

Fish are described as being either 'demersal' (i.e. bottomfeeding) or 'pelagic' (i.e. surface feeding). The latter group includes species which live between the bottom and the surface. Both of these groups are found in waters around the Hebrides.

(Munro 1961, 82), emphasizing that the scope and importance of maritime resources was early identified. As this early quotation demonstrates, waters have always provided a source of food for people living by the sea, who therefore are bound to be familiar with their fish populations (MacKenzie 1919; Harrison-Mathews 1975).

The fish fauna of the seas around the Outer Hebrides is essentially similar to that of other areas around Scotland (Bailey et al 1979). The Outer Hebrides lie in the ICES (International Council for the Exploration of the Sea) statistical area VIa (Figure 3.9).

Modern fisheries studies are concerned with determining as reliably as possible the quantities of fish that are caught, the locations where successful fishing occurs, the most favoured times for fishing, and the best and most effective technologies for so doing (Williams 1977). They thus represent a refinement of the knowledge and lore which was formerly passed from generation to generation of fishermen. Similarly, archaeologicallybased research into fishing has to seek to tackle the same issues and may begin from the reasonable assumption that the exploitation carried out by early populations was based on expertise and not simply on haphazard circumstances. Knowledge of the biology of the relevant fish species is therefore essential to this study, and is considered further below.

3.8.3 Demersal fish species Demersal populations include most of the major species known in Hebridean seas. These species all spawn in spring. Among the demersal fish those listed in Table 3.3 are or have been of commercial importance in the Hebrides (after Boyd 1997a, 1997b). The species mentioned in Table 3.3 are widely distributed in the seas around the Hebrides and many of them move seasonally between offshore and onshore grounds for spawning, nursery phases and feeding. Since prehistory, this movement of fish has supported seasonal, local, inshore fisheries in the islands until the second half of the 20th century (Boyd 1997a, 23). The stocks of most of these species have been substantially destroyed, mainly by over-fishing in the offshore grounds by trawlers and seine-net boats. The most important species of demersal fish in Hebridean waters are described below. The focus is on information regarding their general biology and preferred habitat.

3.8.2 The natural history of fishes This section deals with aspects such as the life-span and growth patterns of fishes, their habitats and migration, with particular attention to the species found in the marine and freshwater of the Outer Hebrides. Regardless of their comparatively small size, most fish in their natural surroundings live for a relatively long time. A life span of 10, 20 or 30 years is common among commercial species such as cod and herring. Herring in the North Sea in the wild probably live for 10-15 years. If fish survive to old age they may become senescent: this means that the life-span of fishes is quite long and some may actually die of old age. For example, lake sturgeon (Acipencer sturio L.) can live up to 80 years and some species of shark can live up to 70 or more years (Swinney & Charlesworth 1991). Most fish eggs are quite small, approximately 1mm across and are usually laid in mid-water. Fish grow quickly in juvenile life but more slowly with maturation and much more slowly during old age. However, unlike many terrestrial species which stop growing at maturity, fish grow continuously and during their period of maturity they may attain sizes many times larger than their juvenile dimensions (Cushing 1975). Most commercial species of fish also migrate over considerable distances. The adults travel between spawning and feeding grounds and back again in a regular cycle. The larvae drift away from the spawning ground to a nursery ground; in the nursery ground they are more or less secure from predation for a year or so while they put on weight. As they mature they move towards the feeding grounds where they are recruited to the adult stock. Depending on species, what constitutes the feeding grounds may be very variable. Some species feed at a restricted range of depths, whereas others are more catholic. Cod, for example, may be found on soft substrates at depths of 1-5 m, but are also to be found much deeper at depths of 600m.

3.8.4 Gadidae species (Figure 3.10) Members of the cod family (Gadidae) are found in the cool temperate waters of the Northern Hemisphere, generally on or close to the continental shelf. Approximately 100 species are known around the world, but only some 30 species live in European waters (Wheeler 1968; 1978). The Gadidae stay for considerable periods at the bottom of the sea, where they seek their prey. They are rapacious, and eat up everything they come across, including molluscs, crustaceans and fish smaller than themselves. These habits explain the methods used to catch them, including techniques such as standing lines and drag nets with which fishermen are able to operate either on the bottom itself or near it. Gadids are generative, which is once every year, when they seek favourable waters to congregate and spawn. At other times they go off singly by themselves to the bottom when this strategy is more advantageous from the point of view of nourishment, and again gather in greater numbers, ready to move elsewhere, only as soon as the food supply becomes exhausted or is less easily accessible. Fishes of this family group normally frequent moderate depths, generally between 46 and 92m (Roule 1933), although as has been remarked above they can be found both in shallower waters and at greater depths. Given the number of species represented in this family, the following discussion is focused on those species 18

Immature fish then move offshore and continue to live near the surface for a further 1-2 years. Saithe feed on small crustaceans, sandeels, herring and other smaller fish. They may reach about 100cm in length by their eleventh year (Wheeler 1969, Smith & Hardy 1970). This fish was once important to the people of the Hebrides; the oil extracted from its liver was used in lamps, whereas the flesh was eaten fresh or dried for winter. Saithe abounds throughout the coastal waters around the islands of Scotland. This species reaches maturity between the ages of 4-6 years.

within the Gadidae apparently present in the core archaeological assemblage from Bostadh Beach. Cod (Gadus morhua L.) is one of the most important species of the Gadidae family. Present knowledge of the biology and population dynamics of the cod is the outcome of almost a century of research by scientists from various disciplinary backgrounds (Garrod 1977). This species lives at considerable depths in the cold northern waters of the North Atlantic and Arctic. Popular belief claims that the colder the water the better is the quality of the fish (Ellis 1996). Its latitudinal boundaries lie between 40º North in the West Atlantic and 45º North in the East Atlantic. These boundaries follow the SW to NE trend of the hydrographic regime as indicated by the oceanic drift.

Pollack (Pollachius pollachius L.), also known as lythe, or green cod because of its greenish color, is mainly an inshore fish found in the proximity of rocks. This is a common fish found in western coastal waters. It has been estimated that it reaches 13-17 cm in its first year, 26-31 cm in its second year (Wheeler 1969) and may attain a total length of between 80 and 100 cm (Ellis 1997). The Sound of Harris and its vicinity is a noted pollack area (Robinson 1970).

Cod has been one of the most important food fishes of the British fish fauna, exploited ever since fishing began in the seas around Europe. Cod was one of the species present in the fish bone remains recovered in the mesolithic sites at Crowling Island and Raasay in Loch a Sguirr, Isle of Skye, Inner Hebrides (Cerón-Carrasco 1999). Its value as a prime quality food is enormous. For example its firm flesh allows for its preservation as 'stock fish', dried, smoked or salted, for winter consumption or trade (Wheeler 1978). The cod's growth rate varies with the specific environmental conditions of its different populations. In the North Sea this species can grow to an average of 18 cm in their first year, 36 cm in their second year, 55 cm in their third year and 68 cm in their fourth year. A mature cod can reach 150 cm in length and weigh up to 40 kg (Wheeler 1978). Cod is found in a great variety of habitats: only immature fish however tend to live close inshore. Cod spawns between February and April at depths of up to 200 m (111 fathoms). Adult fish undertake considerable migrations to reach their spawning grounds. Cod in the North Atlantic exist as a number of more or less isolated populations (Gulland 1977, Garrod 1977). This species has spawning grounds on the Hebridean shelf (Bedford 1966, Boyd 1997b, 61) where they feed largely on sand eels (Ammoditae). The sea areas around Cape Wrath to the Butt of Lewis and North Rona are still abundant with cod over half a metre in length: in these areas sand eels are found in large numbers throughout the year but especially so during the summer months (Rae 1966, Boyd & Boyd 1996b)).

Haddock (Melanogrammus aeglefinus L.) is a fish of the North Atlantic, a very important commercial species which is eaten fresh or smoked. It lives very near the bottom but large shoals are occasionally found in midwater i.e. the water that is well below the surface but also well above the bottom. In the North Sea, spawning takes place from late February to early May. In maturity, the haddock attains a length generally of c. 76 cm. The largest recorded haddock was caught off the coast of Iceland and was 122 cm long (Wheeler 1978). Haddock spawns in almost any area of the North Sea, as well as all around the western coast of the Hebrides (Fisheries Research Services 2000b). Spawning occurs to the west of the Hebridean islands from March until May. After spawning the adult shoals spread out. As the year progresses haddock tend to concentrate around the Orkney and Shetland Islands to feed. Northerly and easterly return movements start in November to enable populations to reunite in their spawning grounds by December (Fisheries Research Services 2000b). The size and quality of haddock vary with location, the best fish coming in the main from deep water according to fishermen from the East Coast of Scotland. This however may be disputed by fishermen from Orkney where the Westray haddock is famous in the Northern Isles for its exquisite taste. Haddock is at its best from October to January. It needs to be handled well and is generally gutted at sea; the skin is kept on to avoid tearing the soft flesh. It does not take salt as well as cod: for this reason it is mainly cured by drying and smoking (Lockhart 1997).

Saithe (Pollachius virens L.), also known as coalfish, is a common fish in northern inshore waters that usually forms small shoals. Saithe spawns offshore at 100 to 200 m depths off the north-west of Britain and in the northern North Sea. Spawning takes place between January and April near the edge of the continental shelf to the north and west of the Western Isles (Fisheries Research Services 2000a). The eggs (1mm in diameter) float in the upper 30m of the open sea for some 6-9 days before hatching. The young fish move close inshore by midsummer (Smith & Hardy 1970). For the first two years the immature fish live near the surface. Their annual growth averages 15cm for each of their first three years.

Ling (Molva molva L.) is essentially a deep water fish occurring in water 300-400 m deep. It breeds between March and July: most of its spawning grounds are north of the British Isles. Ling can attain a total length of 200 cm. Walker's reports of 1764 and 1771 (McKay 1980) describe a prolific fishery for this species along the East Coast of Lewis at that time, when they were also preserved by salting for export. 19

have large scales. Some display the most brilliant colours of any fish in the North Sea. Species in this family are commonly known as wrasses (Lythgoe & Lythgoe 1971). Ballan wrasse (Labrus bergylta Ascanius) are common in northern Scotland and are found primarily in rocky substrates mainly close inshore from 2-3 m depth but also at depths down to 200 m (Wheeler 1978). This species attains up to 28 cm in total length and spawns during April to August (Miller & Loates 1997).

Rockling (Gaidropsarus mediterraneus L.) may reach up to 50 cm in length, it is found amongst rocks, and in tidal pools at depths of less than 30 m. Tadpole fish (Raniceps raninus L.) is found below the low-tide mark to depths of about 100m. It may reach up to 30 cm in length. Poor cod (Trisopterus minutus L.) is found close inshore; small individuals can be very numerous in shallow water, especially off rocky coasts. It may attain up to 20 cm in length.

Elasmobranchii are a sub-class of cartilagenous fish (Chondrichtyes) including skates, rays and sharks (Lythgoe & Lythgoe 1971). The rocker or thornback ray (Raja clavata L.) is the commonest ray in shallow waters around the British Isles and is found in a variety of substrates, from sandy to gravel and muddy grounds. It may attain up to 82 cm in total length and is caught mainly by line from boats (Wheeler 1978).

Norway pout (Trisopteus esmarkii Nilson) is found often in large shoals in depths of 100-200 m and may reach up to 20 cm. 3.8.5 Non-Gadoid demersal fish species (Figure 3.11) Fish in the family Sparidae live mostly in warm waters and are rarely found in northern European waters. They are most common in the Mediterranean Sea. Their scientific classification relies strongly on the form of their teeth (Lythgoe & Lythgoe 1971). They are discussed here, however, because their remains have been recovered from excavations on sites in Northern Scotland, in assemblages from sites dating from at least the Neolithic to the Norse period. Although their presence has not been as significant as other species such as cod, saithe or herring for example, non-gadid species have been nonetheless quite consistently represented in assemblages from archaeological contexts of different dates (Barrett et al 1999). The red sea-bream (Pagellus bogaraveo Brünnich) is described by Couch (1877) as a species common in Mediterranean waters but which is known to have been caught as far north as the Firth of Forth. Modern trawlers have rarely caught this fish in their nets when in Hebridean waters and this species is not included in the lists of rare and exotic species recorded in Scotland (Rae & Wilson 1953-1964). Wheeler (1978) however notes that red sea-bream are found sporadically in the North. Red sea-bream spawn between August and October mainly in the southern waters of the British Isles. They grow up to 70 cm in length (Miller & Loathes 1997). Their rate of growth is unknown and indeed little is known overall about their biology (Wheeler 1978). Red sea-bream are found in a variety of habitats according to age: as young fish, they occur mainly close to shore among rocks down to depths of 40 m; as adults they usually inhabit deeper waters from about 150 to 500 m (Lythgoe & Lythgoe 1971; Wheeler 1978; Bauchot & Pras 1993). The conger eel (Conger conger L.) of the Congridae family, is a large marine eel. It is a common fish on rocky shores which is also found offshore and which may be caught by line. It may grow to over 250 cm in total length (Wheeler 1978).

3.8.6 Pelagic fish species Pelagic species feed exclusively on plankton and are found in the upper layers of the sea. They tend to be more mobile than demersal species, usually swimming in large shoals (Coull et al 1979). The pelagic species found in Hebridean waters are herring (Clupea harengus L.), mackerel (Scomber scombrus L.), sprat (Spratus spratus L.), Norway pout (Trisopterus smarkii Nilson) and sandeels (Ammoditae). The life cycles of herring and mackerel are well-known. Herring (Clupea harengus), a member of the Clupeidae family, has been one of the most important species in Scotland's fishing history (Mitchell 1864, Coux 1881, Samuel 1918, Jenkins 1921, Coull 1983 & 1996). The migratory habits of the herring are unusual and Scotland is particularly fortunate in relation to their movement. Herring are found along the West Coast in winter moving towards Shetland in the spring and summer. A different stock moves towards the East Coast from over-wintering grounds near Norway, while the West Coast islands and mainland benefit from a different variety derived from the Atlantic sources during the winter months (Gray 1978). Herring grow up to 45 cm in length. The herring caught around the Outer Hebrides are mainly drawn from the stock which spawns in the autumn off the West coast of the Outer Hebrides and off the coast of Ireland. In general spawning occurs from late August to early October (Bailey et al 1979). Loch Roag in Lewis is a sea-loch open to the waves from the Atlantic. Even before the mid 1700's, it was well known for its herring fishery (Mitchell 1864, 58). Since at least the 16th century fishing for herring has been done close inshore using trap nets (also known as stakenets or herring baulks) or weirs (as were used in the Baltic regions); close inshore one boat with net would have been sufficient to ensure a good catch. Offshore herring fisheries on the other hand would require at least two boats with nets, known as drift-net fishery (Jenkins 1921).

Members of the family Labridae are common fishes found in shallow waters in northern European waters. Their characteristic teeth are highly developed and most 20

usually in late July or early August. Spring runs, however, do occur, when salmon, after having spent two or more winters at sea, enter fresh water from early winter until late spring (Campbell & Williamson 1979).

Besides herring, mackerel (Scomber scombrus, Scombridae family), are a common fish in Hebridean waters, being found near the surface of the sea in large shoals. they are also caught seasonally close inshore all around the British Isles (Nixon 1972). Mackerel spawn between May and August and may attain a maximum length of 66 cm. Walker's 1764 and 1771 reports (McKay 1980) inform us of large quantities of mackerel reaching the Lewis coast particularly during the month of August. The Outer Hebrides benefit from a stock which spawns to the south-west of Ireland, although landings of this species have historically been rather small when compared to those of herring (Walsh 1977).

Sea trout and brown trout are the same species: Salmo trutta. The sea trout is simply a brown trout which is migratory and goes to sea in the spring of the year as a smolt where it feeds and grows to a larger size than it would had it remained for a similar time in fresh water. Unlike the salmon (Salmo salar), it does not travel long distances while at sea and may return to the river a number of years in succession to spawn. The brown trout remains in freshwater and occurs in various colours and sizes in clean burns, streams, rivers, lochan and lochs in Scotland (Mills 1980). Brown trout (Salmo trutta) are found in peatland lochs, machair lochs and brackish lochs throughout the Outer Hebrides (Campbell & Williamson 1979). In Great Bernera, lochs where trout are found include: L. Geal, L. Ionail, L. na Ceannamhoir, L. Barabat, L. nan Geaddraisean and L. na Muilne. They also inhabit the Kirkibost lochs including L. Gobhalach (first loch), Middle loch (unnamed on maps) and L. Craoibhaig (Third loch) (Macleod & Young 1993). All these lochs are in close proximity to Bostadh Beach and could have been readily exploited by its inhabitants.

3.8.7 Freshwater fish species (Figure 3.12) The distinction between saltwater and freshwater fisheries must be explained in order to understand the habitats and mode of exploitation of different fish populations since the archaeological fish bone assemblages including that from Bostadh Beach discussed later in this volume,, contain both marine and freshwater fish remains. Some freshwater fish species were originally marine fish which were trapped in freshwater settings at times of significant environmental change (Maitland 1994). For example the powan (Coregonus lavaretus L.), is a type of herring found in Loch Lomond; these were originally sea-swimming fish that got trapped as ice-sheets retreated and adapted to freshwater survival. Other species, including anadromous fish such as the salmon (Salmo salar L.) and the European eel (Anguilla anguilla L.), use both sea and freshwater at different stages of their life cycles. Other species commence life in brackish waters, near the shore in estuaries, seaweed beds, etc. and then turn seawards to salt water environments (Tate-Regan 1911, Wigam 1998).

A study by Nall (1930) concluded that there were probably two types of sea trout (Salmo trutta) populations in the Outer Hebrides. Although this author could not find further references to this study, it is nevertheless worthy of comment since the availability of Salmonids in the Western Isles has in the past been as abundant as in the rest of Scotland. It was also noted (by Nall 1930) that worthwhile runs of sea trout in fresh water there did not begin until mid-July. However, these fish were also found in estuaries, tidal pools and in shallow tidal waters from February. It was therefore concluded that sea trout, unlike salmon, spend a considerable time feeding in shallow coastal waters. To support the conclusions of this study, the analysis of sea trout stomach contents from this area has revealed that these fed mainly of sand eels (Ammodites spp.) (Campbell & Williamson 1979). Sand eels are found exclusively in shallow coastal waters.

The Outer Hebridean fresh waters contain only six indigenous freshwater species. These are: salmon (Salmo salar), trout (Salmo trutta L.), charr (Salvelinus alpinus L.), three-spined stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus L.), ten-spined stickleback (Pungitius pungitius L.) and freshwater eel (Anguilla anguilla) (Campbell & Williamson 1979). People in the Outer Hebrides as elsewhere in Scotland have exploited salmon and trout in particular. These species, however, have not played a great role in the economy of the islands in the past probably due to the variety, abundance and availability of marine species (ibid.). This is quite obvious when looking particularly into the importance of herring and cod in the economic and social history of Scotland from at least the 15th century.

Adult salmon and sea trout are particularly simple to catch at the time of their regular migrations to and from the sea. Reference is made in the New Statistical Account of Scotland (1845) to the catching of salmon from streams at spawning time with small nets. There is also reference to the use of tidal fish traps (Gaelic = crocach) in South Harris to catch salmon and sea trout. These traps were built across narrow estuaries and the fish caught were for domestic use (Calderwood 1906). Two species of freshwater stickleback occur in the Outer Hebrides, the three-spined stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus) and the ten-spined stickleback (Pungitius pungitius) (Campbell & Williamson 1979). The tenspined stickleback is one of the smallest fishes in British waters (Couch 1878). The three-spined stickleback inhabits both freshwater and salt water. These are very

Throughout the Outer Hebrides salmon (Salmo salar) are present in all the larger streams and associated lochs. Records from the first part of the 19th century show that salmon were very plentiful (Fisheries Board Report for 1885). Grisle (i.e. offspring that return for the first time) come back from the sea to ascend into fresh water from early summer onwards, peaking in Hebridean rivers 21

The forms and habits of the various classes of molluscs vary greatly. Their shells have been used to provide chronological indications in radiocarbon dating and protein decay techniques (Classen 1999), and for interpretations of climatic change, environment and seasonality of site occupation. They also give evidence of ancient diet and ornamentation. Marine molluscs develop different shell shapes, even within the same species, according to their environment. For example limpets (class Gastropoda) have a different shape depending on the location of their habitat within the tidal range. Limpets on the lower shore are more exposed to waves than those on the upper shore. A flatter shell has a smaller wave impact area than a more conical shell and is thus less likely to be knocked off the substrate if it has the more streamlined shape (Jones & Baxter 1985). In general, the more conical its shell, the further up the shore a given limpet lived.

small species measuring less than 10 cm in length and are of no economic importance. Freshwater eel (Anguilla anguilla) occur everywhere in the North Eastern Atlantic from the North Cape of Norway to the Azores. In the British Isles it is a common fish along all coasts and enters estuaries, freshwater rivers and lakes (Horne & Birkie 1969; Nixon 1972). The breeding ground of the European eel is in the Sargasso Sea. Hydrographical data from the Sargasso Sea indicate that spawning takes place at a depth of 100-200 m during early spring till summer (Forrest 1976). Larvae of 7-15 mm float at 200-300 m from the surface. These grow rapidly reaching an average 25 cm in their first summer, after which they start their journey to Europe. Eels can be found in every European river. Their distribution is solely dependent on ocean currents (ibid.). The entire drift across the Atlantic takes two or three years (Lythgoe & Lythgoe 1971; Nixon 1972). The freshwater eel is probably more widespread than brown trout in the Outer Hebrides in terms of the number of water sources it inhabits (Campbell & Williamson 1979). Martin Martin (ca.1695) noted that eels were quite abundant in the freshwaters of Lewis.

3.9.1 The molluscan species present in the Bostadh Beach assemblage (Figures 3.13 and 3.14) 'Should the strongest arm endeavor; The limpet from its rock to server; Tis seen its loved support to clasp; With such tenacity to grasp; We wonder such strength should dwell; In such a small and simple shell.' (Wordsworth).

3.9 Molluscs Fish is but one potential marine food resource in the Hebridean Islands environment; abundant molluscan populations also exist along their shores. Molluscs are invertebrate animals. Most possess a calcium carbonate exoskeleton called shell. This important group of invertebrates is probably the second largest phylum in the animal kingdom, the anthropods being the largest. Most molluscs are aquatic, and many of them are marine, although a few species (the terrestrial snails and slugs) have conquered land. As has been noted above, the shore is an environment subject to constant change, being neither land nor sea, but a transitional zone between the two (Pollard 1996). Different species of molluscs have adapted to different zones within the coastal edge and to significant ecological diversity marked by variation in salinity, water pressure, and cognate features. Within the marine habitat different dwelling and habitat zones are found such as sub-littoral and intertidal zones (again cf. terminology used above). Marine mollusca of the same species can develop different shapes of shell as an adaptation to environmental factors, such as their position within the tidal range.

The remains of marine shell were also abundant at Bostadh Beach. Their taxa are discussed at length below: The common limpet (Patella vulgata L.) is a Gastropod mollusc that lacks a spiral to its shell which may be up to 7 cm long. When the water covers it, the limpet moves out from its hollow in the rock and feeds, using its finelytoothed radula to scrape minute, encrusting algae and other small seaweeds from the surrounding surface. When a limpet moves from the hollow to start feeding, it leaves a small, inner depression in the rock that exactly fits its shell. This depression, or 'limpet scar', is the limpet's home, to which it must return before the falling tide uncovers it (Reynolds 1974; Bouchet et al 1978). The limpet (Patella vulgata) is a species of major importance in quantitative terms on most littoral shores and in shallow waters (Branch 1985). It is present on all rocky shores from the most sheltered ones dominated by the algae Ascophyllum nosodum L. to the most exposed, mussel- and barnacle- dominated types (Campbell 1989). Growth rates of limpets vary considerably, although studies in Orkney have shown that rates of growth in that environment are consistent from year to year (Baxter 1982). Characteristically limpet growth rates are fastest in the first year, ranging from 5-15 mm, declining by their third year to a growth rate of 3-10 mm. The growth rate then tends to remain relatively constant for several years before its virtual cessation.

The coastline of Western Scotland, including that of the Outer Hebrides, provides a great range of habitats for colonisation by rocky shore organisms. Shores of all exposure grades occur in many different places supporting a rich and varied molluscan fauna (Crothers 1982). There are five classes of molluscs that have external shells. Of these the most common in British archaeological contexts are the univalves or Gastropoda (e.g. snails, whelks, limpets) and bivalves or Bivalvia (e.g. clams, oysters and mussels).

Edible periwinkles (Littorina littorea L.) are found on rocks, stones and seaweed on the middle and lower shores. Their shell may be up to 2.5-cm high. Although it 22

forces selectively influence the shell shape of dogwhelks: wave action and predation.

has been demonstrated that a variety of environmental factors can influence the shells of certain other molluscs, studies done by Hylleberg and Christensen (1977) on edible periwinkles suggest that there are no significant allometric differences in Littorina littorea shells attributable to their recovery from different environments.

Crothers (1982) studied the distribution of variations amongst the shell shapes of dog whelks from the West Coast of Scotland. He demonstrated that, even in small isolated inlets, large colonies of barnacles and dog whelks were supported and that dog whelks have shell characteristics appropriate to those shown by Kitching and co-workers to typify examples that inhabit sheltered environments.

The common European oyster (Ostrea edulis L.) is found in shallow water down to 80 m. Its shell may grow up to 10 cm in length. The 'Portuguese oyster' (Crassostrea angulata) is also found in shallow waters on rocks and stones around the Hebrides. Its shell may grow up to 15 cm in length.

Other non-edible marine molluscs were the tiny Cingula cingulus Montagu, and Rissoa parva da Costa (these are of a maximum size of 4 mm). Like Littorina littoralis, they live attached to seaweed and could have arrived on site so attached. Similarly, Spinorbis borealis L., Serpulidae family, which are tube-dwelling polychaetes, are also found attached to sea weed.

The great scallop (Pecten maximus L.) is found on sand and gravel usually in quite deep water. Its shell may grow up to 15 cm long. Common mussel (Mytilus edulis L.) is found on stones and rocks in estuaries and on exposed shores on rocks. It often occurs in extensive beds where it is associated with barnacles. Its shell may attain 10 cm in length.

Also present amongst the non-edible mollusca from Bostadh Beach, were the top shell and European cowrie shells. The top shell (Gibbula cineraria L.) is found on the lower shore on clean surfaces, rocks or weeds. The European cowrie (Trivia monata da Costa) too lives on the lower shore on rocks. The distribution of these species includes Western Scotland.

The common cockle (Cerastoderma edule L.) is found on the lower shore, burrowing in sand, mud or gravel. Its shell may grow up to 5 cm in length. The above are the most common edible molluscs and most can also be used as fishing bait.

3.10 Cetaceans

The non-edible molluscs present at Bostadh Beach were the flat periwinkle (Littorina littoralis) which is found on seaweed, particularly on Focus vesiculatus L.and Ascophyllum nodosum L., on the lower and middle shore. Its shell may grow up to 1 cm in length.

Whales, porpoises and dolphins are known collectively as Cetaceans. Their range of sizes and shape is enormous. As is well known, they are homoeothermic, viviparous mammals, breathing air and being rather closely related to humans. However, owing to their external features analogous with those of fish (especially sharks), their capture is traditionally referred to as a ‘fishery’, not least because of the techniques involved.

The dog-whelk (Nucella lapillus L.) was also present in the Bostadh Beach assemblage and is here presented as a non-edible species because this author has found no evidence for its being used as either food or fish bait at the time of the later prehistoric coastal settlements in Scotland. This species is found in a variety of habitats, including rocky shores. It covers a wide range of environmental conditions to which, like the limpet (Patella vulagata), it is locally adapted. The extent to which the species Nucella lapillus is capable of adapting the shape and the weight of its shell to enclose a given volume in a given space enables it to occupy a wide ecological niche (Kitching 1985). The correlation between the aperture width of the shell and the strength of wave action in its vicinity has been confirmed in studies by Crothers (1973) and by Kitching (1977). Studies on dog whelks from Loch Ine, Co. Cork, Ireland, (Kitching et al 1966; Kitching 1985) concluded that dog whelks from sheltered locations have thicker shells. The study also suggested that shells with a wide aperture, such as those found on more exposed open coasts, can accommodate a larger foot, and are therefore capable of adhering on tightly in rough seas. The combination of a narrow aperture and thick shell, found in sheltered situations, is better for resisting predation particularly from crabs (Kitching et al 1966). That is, two strong

There are two suborders of whale, the Odontocetes, or toothed whales, and the Mystacocetes, which have plates or baleen of whalebone hanging from the upper palate. Toothed whales include species such as the narwhal (Monodon monoceros L.) and beluga (Delphinapterus leucas Pallas). All the dolphins and porpoises are also included in this group as well as the sperm and beaked whales. The Odontocetes feed mainly on fish, squid and other marine mammals. The baleen whales include most of the larger whales, such as rorquals, right whales, and the Gray whale. These feed on shrimp-like crustaceans and small fish (Calwardine 1996). Cetaceans potentially available to the inhabitants of Bostadh Beach have been sub-divided into two groups from a technical point of view: coastal and offshore species. A brief description of the external characteristics and behaviour of these animals is followed by tabulated summaries of their main body dimensions (Boner 1989; Carwadine 1995 & 1996; Buttler & Levin 1998). The mean body lengths of newborn and mature individuals for the Cetacean species described below, 23

of the way down the back, is small and curved. It is found singly or in groups of up to 10. It is seen in coastal waters during May to October. This is the smallest of the toothed whales and is also now the most abundant.

both coastal and offshore, may be visually compared in Figure 3.15, Tables 3.4 & 3.5. 3.10.1 Coastal Cetaceans in the Western Isles (Figure 3.16 Table 3.4)

Long-finned pilot whale (Globicephala melas Traill) has a chunky body with a blunt bulbous head and no beak. The dorsal fin is long and rounded backwards. This whale is found in groups of 10-50.

For a Cetacean, the Harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena L.) is very small. It has a dark grey back and brown flanks. It occurs around the Hebrides between March and April and again from July to November in groups of twenty or more; but sometimes solitary examples can be seen.

3.10.2 Deep water/offshore Cetaceans (Figure 3.17, Table 3.5) This group of offshore, deepwater cetaceans has been incorporated in this study because most of them have been recorded as stranded species on the Scottish islands (Table 3.6). General features, for example size ranges, of these species should be understood if they are to be considered an ‘opportunistic asset’ during the protohistoric periods of the Western Isles represented at Bostadh Beach.

Bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus Montagu) is dark grey in colour with paler flanks and white undersides. It occurs around the Western Isles throughout the year, but in coastal waters it is to be found mainly from July to October in groups of two to twenty or more. Common dolphin (Delphinus delphis L.) has a distinctive hourglass pattern of yellow on the side of the body becoming pale grey behind the dorsal fin. It is found in coastal waters from May to September in groups of ten to several hundred.

Humpback whale (Megaptera novaengliae Borowski) is a slow swimmer and is a highly inquisitive whale that shows little fear of boats. Its dives may last from 3 to 9 minutes. It is usually found in groups of three but can also be found in groups of up to 20 individuals if feeding and breeding areas are in good condition.

Risso's dolphins (Grampus griseus Cuvier) are rotund individuals with a blunt rounded head and no beak. The dark grey back and flanks lighten with age until they become almost white. Risso’s dolphins can be found in coastal waters from May to September, usually in groups of 6-30, but sometimes this species can be seen in groups of hundreds. Striped dolphin (Stenella coeruleoalba Meyen) has a dark grey back with light grey on its flanks. It also has two characteristic dark lines which run from the eye, one extending to the flipper and the other to the tail. These dolphins have a slender, curved fin. This dolphin is found in deep coastal waters between July and December in groups of 10-500.

Sperm whale (Physeter macrocephalus L.) remains almost motionless at the surface and will swim leisurely but if alarmed is capable of high speed. This is a toothed whale, but like the baleen whales it has a huge head. It is usually found in large groups of up to 50 individuals but larger groups of up to 150 can also occur. Sei whale (Balaenoptera borealis Lesson) is smaller than the blue or fin whales and prefers cool waters, avoiding however the coldest oceans prefered by the others. Their name derives from Norway, where this species used to appear off the coast at the same time as the saithe i. e. sei (Pollachius virens), hence the association. It can be found in groups of up to 5 individuals.

White-beaked dolphin (Lagenorhynchus albirostris Gray) is a short, white dolphin with a stumpy beak with a large, thick, very curved fin. This dolphin is found in groups of 4-10 generally in deeper waters in both the central and northern North Sea, but it also occurs in the Atlantic.

Fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus L.) is the second largest animal on Earth (after the blue whale) weighing up to 80 tonnes. It can be found in groups of up to 3 to 5 individuals but 100 or more may gather at good feeding grounds.

Atlantic-White-Sided Dolphin (Lagenorhynchus acutus Gray) has a black back and a large centrally-placed, curved dorsal fin. This dolphin is generally found in groups of over a hundred offshore. In coastal waters it is found from July to September.

Blue whale (Balaenoptera musculus L.) in the Northern Hemisphere may weigh up to 120 tonnes. This is the largest creature in the world, but appears to be even larger in the Southern Hemisphere. However, a female caught near the south of the Shetland Islands in 1926 was reported as extending to 33.27 m in length; a male measuring 32.64 m was also taken at the same time and near the same place (Bonner 1989). The implication here is that these are the biggest blue whales reportedly caught in Northern Scotland.

Killer whale (Orcinus orca L.) has a characteristic black and white colouration with white patches and a grey saddlepatch behind the dorsal fin. It has paddle shaped flippers. It travels in groups of 2-10 or more. Minkie whale (Balaenoptera acustorostrata Lacèpéde) has a pointed head, triangular and deeply ridged. Its back is grey or black with a pale underside. The flippers have distinctive broad white bands. The fin, situated two thirds 24

3.10.4 Records of stranded cetaceans in the Western Isles

3.10.3 The stranding phenomenon amongst cetaceans Stranding is a natural phenomenon which seems to have occurred since time immemorial and which remains one of the greatest unsolved phenomena of the animal kingdom.

Continuous records of stranded whales, porpoises and dolphins have been kept since 1913. All the information reported has been housed at the Museum of Natural History in London and the National Museum of Scotland, Natural History Section in Edinburgh since 1913. In Scotland all cetaceans which are 25 or more feet long (7.6 m and over), other than Pilot whale and Bottlenose dolphin, are Royal fish and therefore the property of the Crown, except if they appear on coastlines where the right to them passes to the Lord of the Manor. This means that the Crown, through the Receiver of Wreck, is responsible for the disposal of carcasses rather than the local authority, although in practice the latter usually organises it. All written records of stranded cetaceans quoted in this research were examined at the National Museum of Scotland. From these a table has been prepared, in which information on the recorded strands for the Western and Northern Isles has been tabulated (Table 3.6). Unfortunately information about strandings in the Western Isles is rather scant when compared to the Northern Isles and mainland Scotland. Fewer cetacean strandings have been reported there since recordings began in 1913, but this may not reflect the real frequency of such events in the Hebrides. Although the records of stranded cetaceans are incomplete for the area of study, they will give a general idea of the species found stranded or washed up along the coasts of the Western and Northern Isles, and will in turn shed some light on the archaeologically recovered whale bone. In general it may be assumed that larger whales are more likely to be reported than the smaller dolphins or porpoises.

Some strandings are easily explained: animals simply dying at sea are washed ashore with the tides and currents. Live strandings are more mysterious however and several hypotheses have been formulated to explain them, such as the effects of changes in the Earth’s magnetic field affecting the sense of direction of the animal. Cetaceans are believed to have an extra sense called 'biomagnetism'. This enables them to detect the magnetic field which they may use to navigate. As the magnetic field is always changing, this may result in their confusion and consequent stranding in the shore. Alternatively, drastic weather conditions such as storms may induce the animal to panic, or simply a brain infection that would result in disorientation could cause the animal to beach. Strandings may be of a single individual, or the phenomenon can affect groups. Where large individuals are stranded, the species is often the short-finned pilot whale or the long-finned pilot whale (Soper 1974). This appears to be the case for the Northern Isles as seen in the records for 1983: on the 12th of May, 30 long-finned pilot whales were reported stranded on the same beach in Westray, Orkney; while on the 16th December that year, 28 individuals of this species were stranded at Eday. Records for the Shetland area show that on the 19th of October in the same year, 32 long-finned pilot whales were stranded at Hillswick. Seven individuals of this species were recorded stranded at Lewis in April 1992. Whatever the reasons for this phenomenon, cetaceans have been found on shores where people at one time or another would have made use of the flesh, oil and bones. Groups living by the sea have probably exploited whales since before history (Schäffer 1972). Dead whales would have been washed ashore, and occasionally people would have been confronted by the mysterious phenomenon of whale strandings, in which for reasons unfathomable the animals beached themselves and died. Blocks of blubber cut from such lucky finds would have provided fuel for heat and light. The meat may have been eaten if the whale was not too long dead and the bones used for manufacturing artefacts such as pins and combs, or for equipment such as fish hooks, as well as heavier equipment discussed below. Aside from these implements, analogous with those made from ungulate bone or antler at inland sites (MacGregor 1974), some special whale bone tools were also developed. They include ‘blubber mattocks’ from North Uist (Clark 1947) and shovel blades as well as peat spades or oar blades (Crawford 1967, MacGregor 1974). Many such artifacts would have taken advantage on the large dimensions, unique to whale bone, coupled with the general weight versus strength characteristics of such bone.

3.11 A note on seals Seals have also provided an important marine resource to the islanders. Their use as food and to make sealskin clothing as well as to provide oil for light is well established. They have been easily exploited since these sea mammals are rather vulnerable at breeding time. In the British Isles there are two native species of seals, the grey seal (Halichoerus grypus Fabricius) and the common seal (Phoca vitulina L.). In the Western Isles, the grey seals breed between September and November. Females stay ashore with their pups during the nursery period. The common seal breeds between June and July. Unlike the grey seals, the common seals’ pups are born with their natal coat called lanugo, which requires to be shed before the pups are ready for swimming (Boyd & Boyd 1996c). In the Outer Hebrides, seals frequent the quiet eastern rocks and bays, or the sounds between islands, but these species are also found on the west side in sheltered places (Murray 1973).

25

3.13 Conclusion

3.12 Other marine resources: the seaweeds of the Outer Hebrides

This chapter has attempted to demonstrate that the availability of fish, molluscan and cetacean species is dependent on a variety of factors, all of which are linked and that affect conditions for the reproduction of organisms forming the food-chain. These factors range from weather systems, to oceanic current systems, to geological factors, to the properties of seawater, and to the physical characteristics of geographical locations. Taking proper account of all these factors has helped in one way or another to give rise to successful human settlement underpinned by the availability of food for subsistence and in some cases for development and expansion in the form of trading during later periods not included in this study. A survey of the marine fauna of the Hebridean islands with particular attention to the West Lewis region has also been made. This approach is considered essential both to understand the nature of the resources available to the inhabitants of the settlement site uncovered at Bostadh Beach in Great Bernera for their subsistence. It is clearly insufficient in an analytical work simply to state that certain fish, molluscan or cetacean species are present, and are likely historically to have been present in a particular area. It is also necessary to understand as far as is feasible the whole natural process behind the existence of this marine fauna and hence their potential availability and accessibility to humans. Understanding the processes of geography and biogeography represent the first steps to understanding how the environment in the area of study influenced people to settle and organise into settlement sites and how the availability of particular natural resources may have moulded their very existence.

Although this thesis is concerned with animal marine resources, it was considered that a short introduction to the types of seaweeds found in Hebridean waters and their uses should be composed, since reference to them has been made throughout this work. Norton & Powell (1979) name some 264 species of seaweeds in the Western Isles. Two physical factors largely determine the species and zonation patterns: these are the degree of exposure to wave action and the nature of the substratum (rocks, boulders, shingle, sand or mud). Around most of Lewis and Harris the coastline is relatively steep, the littoral zone narrow and mainly rocky, and the 10 fathom (20 m) line lies fairly close inshore. The large brown seaweeds grow luxuriantly in the Outer Hebrides and have long been used there by man as a fertiliser of the thin soil and a source of certain chemicals. The two species which flourish particularly well there are the intertidal Ascophyllum nosodum, found mainly in the sheltered sea lochs, and Laminaria hyperborea (Gunnerus) which grows all around the islands but particularly in West Coast locations with extensive shallow subtidal rocky areas. For many centuries these species have been used extensively in the Western Isles as an important organic fertiliser. The intertidal weeds are cut and gathered directly and the subtidal weeds (Laminaria spp.) are collected as drift on the beaches after storms. Large tonnages of seaweeds are cast upon the West Coast beaches particularly during the autumn, winter and spring (Norton & Powell 1979).

26

4.2 Taphonomy in archaeozoology

Chapter 4: Taphonomy: fish bone and molluscan assemblages at Bostadh Beach

Taphonomy has become increasingly important in archaeology as archaeozoologists have attempted not only to describe what they have found in an animal bone assemblage but also to understand how the material arrived or was deposited at the site. Taphonomic factors begin acting as soon as an animal is slaughtered, or a fish is caught. These processes include butchery practices, as well as the effects of cooking and ingestion. Factors that affect what is available to be recovered also include the consumption of meat beyond the limits of the site (leading to off-site discard), the consumption and removal of bones by other animals for example dogs, and the human use of the bone as raw material for craft or other purposes. This is followed by the weathering of bone exposed to the elements, possibly movement by water or as a component of soil, and deposition i.e. burial in archaeological layers (Wheeler & Jones 1991). The taphonomy of bone is further influenced by the physical and mechanical characteristics of the environment within the deposit (acidity or alkalinity [pH] of the soil) and the rate of decomposition of the surrounding animal soft tissue. In addition to taphonomic factors related to the deposition of the material, it is widely acknowledged that the process of excavation and the associated methods of recovery also influence what is available to study. The accumulation and survival of marine mollusca on archaeological sites is also of paramount importance in this study since large amounts of marine shell were also, unsurprisingly, recovered at Bostadh Beach. Taphonomic processes at work on shell here are interesting to comprehend how the deposits were created. Information on cultural processes that transform shell into sedimentary particles may help to explain certain formation processes such as the accumulation of shell middens. Taphonomic processes in archaeologically recovered shell include all modifications of individual shells, for example, fragmentation, perforation, abrasion, encrustation, dissolution, heating and burning. All these processes would have, furthermore, produced disarticulation, transportation, concentration and burial (Classen 1998). The major task of archaeozoological analysis is to reconstruct the environmental and cultural circumstances under which animal bones have been deposited on a site. Therefore the taphonomic process must be understood before other issues are tackled. There have been a wide range of studies on mammal bone modifications in archaeological contexts (Andrews 1995; Binford 1981; Bonnichsen 1989; Gifford 1981; Lyman 1994; and NoeNygaard 1977), and a growing literature in which fish bone taphonomy is examined is also now available (Butler 1993; 1996; Colley 1984; 1986; Nicholson 1996b; Steward 1994; van Neer & Morales 1992; and Zohar et al. 2001; Zohar & Belmaker 2005). Studies on molluscan taphonomy have been focused mainly on site formation processes (Bobrowsky 1984; Waselkov 1987 and Carter 1990). These have demonstrated that there are different types of settings for

4.1 Introduction Archaeological excavations produce a variety of different artefacts and ecofacts including bones. All these remains of material culture have suffered a series of changes and losses prior to recovery. The reasons for this attrition may be socio-cultural, depositional, post-depositional or archaeological. The latter includes the accidental results of the techniques employed during excavation and recording. All these factors may be explained in terms of taphonomy (Kobylinski 1999). Taphonomy (taphos=burial, nomos=law) is a concept first introduced in palaeontology (Efremov 1940). It has been aimed at understanding post mortem changes in animal remains from the time of deposition until immediately prior to excavation, thereby helping the critical assessment of such recovered data for the reconstruction of a living animal community (biocoenosis) from the consideration of the remains of a ‘dead community’ (thanatocoenosis), as initially defined by Wasmund (1926), who first developed these concepts in aquatic ecology. In recent years, much attention has been given to taphonomy in archaeology. The fundamental difference in this application is that, in contrast to palaeontology or ecology, archaeological applications must also consider past and even present-day human activity as a taphonomic factor. These human processes relate to the natural processes as shown in Table 4.1. Of the processes listed in Table 4.1, it is the sociocultural aspects of biostratonomy that distinguish traditional taphonomy from its form applied to archaeozoology, where human intervention cannot be discounted. In addition to the obvious interest in reconstructing ancient ways of life implicit in the material recovered in archaeological fieldwork, the impact of secondary, archaeological loss in this material during the process of recovery has been increasingly recognised. No matter how careful and extensive the excavation may be, it is never possible to recover all the materials originally deposited at a site. An unknown quantity will always remain uncollected or may simply not have survived deposition. Furthermore, the loss and damage occurring during the excavation and handling of the finds, as well as such post excavation procedures as for example sieving for the recovery of environmental material e.g. macro-botanical remains, bone, mollusca, etc., will also influence the characteristics of this 'missing fraction'. In recent years much attention has been paid to this 'missing quantity'. In archaeology, this concern has evolved into a field study in its own right: taphonomy. Recent work in zooarchaeology has stressed the importance of understanding the processes which influence bone survival and much experimental work has been done to examine what happens to bones under controlled conditions (e. g. Walters 1984; Jones 1984 & 1986; Noddle 1985; Payne & Munson 1985; Child 1995; and Nicholson 1996a). 27

clavata) are sometimes removed using carpenter's pincers but more often only the wings of the fish are landed, the rest of the body being discarded at sea. Such practices obviously have a bearing on which skeletal elements may end up in archaeological contexts from which they can be recovered. After the initial treatment of making the flesh easier to handle, fish may be consumed fresh. Much of the catch, however, is processed by smoking, drying or pickling and eaten later. Fresh or preserved fish may be decapitated, gutted or filleted, all of which may leave butchering marks on the bone. Occasionally, cut-marks on the head bones will suggest how the fish was decapitated and whether the skeleton was filleted. Among the fish remains from Bostadh Beach, only a few large Gadidae skeletal elements display cut-marks. They are all derived from Context 112. This is the only excavation context which belonged to a particular single 'phase', distinct from both the Late Iron Age settlement and Norse period structure. Context 112 has thus been described as a 'squatter phase' (Neighbour 2001), which means that at some point after the later Iron Age settlement and before the Norse occupation, this part of the settlement had been inhabited, albeit apparently in a temporary and rudimentary fashion. Amongst the material, a branchiostegal fragment bore a cut-mark which could have been inflicted during gutting (Colley 1989). A posttemporal also displayed cut-marks possibly created by chopping off the head of the fish (Colley 1983). Five vertebrae also displayed cut-marks which could have been made during filleting (Figure 4.1).

shell-bearing sites and that the characteristics of surrounding soils play an important part in the survival of mollusc shells. 4.3 The taphonomy of fish remains Fish bones are generally denser than and mechanically different from other types of bone. Fish bone is also more easily fragmented than bird or mammal bone (Jones 1991). Two principal factors influence whether fish remains (i.e. bone elements, otoliths and scales), will survive in an archaeological deposit. The first is the nature of the material forming the hard tissue in question. The second is the treatment or treatments the carcass received between the fish being captured and its remains studied. Some types of hard tissue found in fish are more resistant than others. Different fishes produce skeletons of different material (Bond 1979; Bone et al. 1995); this depends primarily on the class to which the various species belongs. Agnathans (jawless fishes, for example lampreys) have rarely been recorded in archaeological deposits despite the use of fine-mesh sieves. Cartilagenous fish, contrastingly, are usually represented by dermal structures (denticles and teeth) or by the centra of vertebrae which have been mineralised in the sediments. In cartilaginous species (sharks, skates and rays) for example, most mineralised cartilage does not persist in a recognisable form in the soil. These elements break into small, prismatic particles that end up resembling sand grains once the collagen and other organic material have been destroyed (Wheeler & Jones 1989). Among the bony fishes, contrastingly, not all species contain the same number of skeletal elements. Moreover, some have extremely fragile bones, whereas others have more robust skeletons. The latter include pike as well as species in the salmon (Salmonidae), carp (Cyprinidae) and cod (Gadidae) families, whose bones all survive well in archaeological deposits. There is also considerable variation in the robustness of elements within a single species, related to the functions the various elements within the fish skeleton. The taphonomic process is also influenced by biogeographical conditions: local fish populations are formed of many different species, and different technologies with different impacts are required to obtain them. Some of them live close to the shore and may be caught by line or traps; fish living in deeper waters may be targeted by hook and line, while others living close to the surface may be landed using nets. When fish are caught, their bones may be fractured accidentally, although such unhealed trauma is unlikely to be noticed in the archaeological material.

4.3.2 Consumption of fish Eventually fish are eaten, often at a settlement site. It is at this stage, at the place of consumption, that some of the most important agencies affecting fish bone survival operate. Here the fish was probably prepared for consumption, during which de-scaling, gutting, butchery and cooking took place. Fish may be cooked whole, filleted or cut into small pieces. If filleted, the skeleton may be discarded and trampled onto the floor, whilst other bony elements may be swallowed and passed with faeces. Some may have been thrown onto rubbish heaps where dogs, pigs and other animals could have chewed/masticated or ingested them. Discarded fish remains may be trampled, churned up, and even thrown into moving water or pits, all of which would have resulted in the abrasion or even loss of bones (Jones 1991). Burnt bone in archaeological deposits may be the result of roasting, or disposal in a hearth. It ranges in colour from white through gray and blue to black, depending on the completeness of combustion. The destruction of the organic material in bone as a result of burning makes the bone brittle and shrink by 5-10% in size. A weight loss reaching 50% was also observed (Wing & Brown 1979). Cremated remains, for example, are usually highly fragmented and often much of the bone thus calcined is white in colour, suggesting complete oxidation. Charring

4.3.1 Processing fish on land What happens to fish from the point of landing is influenced by many factors. Procedures may include deliberate de-scaling, although scales may also fall from the body while handling. In Britain today, for example, the large dermal denticles of the thornback ray (Raja 28

of bone during roasting is confined to the exposed ends, not protected from the fire by meat; the bone will then appear partially blackened (ibid.). Shipman et al. (1984) proposed a series of stages by which the temperature of burning could be recognised from bone colour, mineral crystal size and surface morphology. They studied mammal bone using the scanning electron microscope (SEM). Nicholson (1996) went further by investigating whether the changes in colour and surface morphology recognised for large mammal remains can be observed on other vertebrate bone, for example those of fish, and if so whether modifications occur to fish bone at the same temperatures as had been determined for mammal bone. Her experimental work suggested that the various stages of burning described above, based on burnt colour (Wing & Brown 1979), could frequently be recognised on archaeological fish bone. The colour of bone (while showing a gradual progression from its natural appearance through brown, black, grey to white as a result of heating), however, varies considerably between bones subjected to the same temperature for the same length of time. This evidently is thus a complex phenomenon to study, even in modern bone. Nicholson's experiments therefore, made it clear that the colour of burnt bone can, at best, only provide a general guideline to the temperature that the bone has been subjected to. She also warned that there are indications that postdepositional staining may confuse interpretation. The relevance of burnt fish remains (whether burnt in situ i.e. during the cooking process, or later as rubbish put on the fire), to this study therefore is that such bones provide direct evidence that such fish had been used by humans as food.

4.4 The taphonomy of marine molluscs Taphonomic effects on marine shell begin under water and include perforation, abrasion, encrustation, and fragmentation. All of these would eventually lead to disintegration. Conversely, however, once humans have removed these organisms from the sea, they would also have stopped the effects of boring and eroding aquatic fauna. Once on dry land, shells would mainly suffer from the effects of dissolution and chemical change (Classen 1998). 4.4.1 Types of natural taphonomic processes in marine molluscs Numerous aquatic animals require hard surfaces to support their skeletons, and shells are often used for this purpose. Encrustations by barnacles for example, but also by bryozoa, corals and algae, are common and are found on both live and dead molluscs. Perforation is induced by animals boring into living shell to extract their calcium or to reach the soft tissue inside. Such boring organisms include sponges, foraminifera, bivalves, barnacles, gastropods, worms, octopods, and others. Perforation will also increase the chances of shell fragmentation. In calcareous soils, fragmentation will often occur rather than disintegration since the surrounding soil reaches calcium supersaturation (Carter 1990), thereby causing preservation of shell. Furthermore, chemical change involves different chemical components in molluscs, depending on the soil in which they have been deposited. In alkaline soils, as in Bostadh Beach, recrystallisation would follow (Classen 1998; Kent 1988), rather than disintegration.

4.3.3 Post-depositional changes 4.4.2 Cultural taphonomic processes in marine molluscs

Finally bones are buried. Within such buried deposits, fish remains may be relatively safe from further destruction. Buried remains, however, are subject to fossil diagenesis, during which a number of factors further modify them. It is clear that the bones that survive in archaeological deposits are likely to be a small and biased sample of those originally brought onto the site. The natural factors and their interactions may be schematically summarised in Figure 4.2. Soil pH is probably the major factor influencing the survival of bone in buried contexts. Soil acidity is invariably detrimental, while neutral and alkaline soil conditions (such as those at the Bostadh Beach settlement) will aid preservation. Child (1995) showed how alkaline soils would buffer microbial acids and inhibit the dissolution of bone minerals. Conversely, acidic soils will tend to promote bone decomposition, although this is only a generalisation. Alternatively fish remains may be subject to chemical or mechanical erosion. Chaplin (1971) tried to demonstrate that within a single assemblage there are often marked differences between the preservation of skeletal elements from different parts of the same site, so local are the impacts of the factors affecting survival or destruction that are at work.

Processes of cultural taphonomy begin once the molluscs have been removed from their natural habitat and transported to a site for consumption or processing (for example as bait for fishing). Heating the shell physically alters the crystalline structure and compromises its internal cohesion. Burnt shell fractures more easily, and weighs less than does unburnt shell (Classen 1998, Spennemann & Colley 1989). The higher the temperature, or the longer the exposure to fire, the more easily most shells fragment. For example oysters (Ostrea), with their lamellar structure, exfoliate completely upon extended contact with fire (Classen 1998). 4.5 The fish bone and marine mollusca recovered at Bostadh Beach After deposition, the greatest disturbances suffered by archaeological bone are in fact the excavation and postexcavation procedures that it has to undergo. Most of the fish and related remains recovered at Bostadh Beach were retrieved by sieving bulk soil samples through a 1-mm mesh sieves in the environmental 29

'external' deposits. All contexts identified as layers, occupation horizons or surfaces within a building were classed as 'internal', including hearth deposits. The 'external' group included all contexts described as rubble, fill, tip and midden even if they were found within a structure (Figure 4.3). This was done as it is unlikely that such deposits would relate to the occupation of the structures, but rather that they accumulated after the initial function of the building had been abandoned (after Nicholson 1998). Middens may grow out of simple activity areas (Kent 1984) within a broader economic unit such as a household, or result from patterned rubbish disposal practices in a settlement (Simpson & Barrett 1996). Middens are likely to produce abundant fish remains from a variety of individuals of different sizes. It is only in medieval fish middens, however, that in research conducted to date one can find evidence for the representation of waste from cured fish, processed for trade (Bigelow 1985; Morris et al. 1992; Cerón-Carrasco 1994; 1998a; Perdikaris 1998; 1999; Barrett et al. 1999; Barrett et al 2004). Hearths in the Northern and Western Isles of Scotland were traditionally incorporated into the household floor. They were constructed from stones embedded into the earth floor and covered over with clay (Fenton 1978, Colley 1986). Most domestic rubbish was disposed of in the fire and eventually thrown onto the middens. From here, it may subsequently have been dispersed, for example as fertiliser. The floors of the post-medieval Black houses, for example, were often made simply of bare earth. A ‘blackhouse’ is the term for the traditional Hebridean building that was generally oblong, often with one or more additional buildings laid parallel to it. The walls were made from an inner and outer layer of unmortared stones, the gap between them filled with peat and earth. It had one door and generally no windows and it is thus tempting to assume that the term ‘blackhouse’ refers to the windowless darkness in which people would have lived and/or the peat smoke. The floor of the living area of the blackhouse would usually be flagged. The animals would be at one end of the house, and in the byre area there would be earth flooring, usually with a drain for some of the animal waste. Part of the blackhouse would also be used as a barn for storage and processing of grain and other products. The roof was thatched secured by an old fishing net or by twine, attached to large rocks whose weight held everything down (Fenton 1995; Thompson 1997). It is therefore assumed here that such was also the case for the Iron Age houses. If the soil became damp, it would then be scattered with stones (Thomas 1866). It is assumed that household rubbish, including fish bones, would also become incorporated into such floors. Within habitation layers it is unlikely that large fish bones were deposited: contrastingly, smaller bones from smaller specimens however, may also have been trodden into the floors. Other context types, such as fills, are less likely to contain remains of major help to the archaeozoologist in interpreting fishing activities.

laboratory at the Department of Archaeology, University of Edinburgh. A small quantity of fish bones and shell were also hand-retrieved during the excavations themselves. Taphonomic interpretations of the fish remains from Bostadh Beach have been based on the analysis of the Iron Age settlement contexts for Houses 1, 2 and 3. A fourth house was only partially excavated, uncovering only some of its structural components. The contexts removed from this limited excavation, however, were too few to allow for a comprehensive and comparative analysis of the nature of this building and its contained deposits. The remains from House 4 therefore have not been included in this analysis. The Norse period deposits, for which only the midden deposit had sufficient fish remains to allow for a comparative taphonomic analysis, have not been included in this analysis either. The Norse midden material was however incorporated into the analysis discussed in Chapter 7, Section 7.7. A comparative study of deposits within the Later Iron Age Houses 1, 2 and 3 was considered sufficient to give significant results, due to the variety of context types available for detailed analysis. The level of fish bone preservation was consistent throughout the site, in terms of fragment size and condition. Most skeletal elements were 40-90 % complete. Their condition score was generally in the range of 6-8, indicating relatively well preserved to poorly preserved bone (after Nicholson 1998). Preservation was also favourable among the gastropods (limpets and periwinkles), although some of the more fragile, lamellar structured shell, such as mussel, survived in less well-preserved condition. Oysters, however, which also have a lamellar shell structure, survived well particularly in the Norse midden (this is discussed at length in Chapter 7, Section 7.10). 4.5.1 Description of contexts types The greatest density of bone accumulations occur generally towards the center of settlements, with less material being recovered towards the periphery (Coy 1987; Maltby 1985; Wilson 1978). Bone concentrations are typically associated with houses and hearths on less structurally differentiated sites, like rural Iron Age settlements (Coy 1981; Maltby 1985). The locations of houses and hearths may determine the spatial variability of the bone spread. Dense debris may be associated with certain types of features, particularly but not invariably pits. Large ditches on the other hand, such as those surrounding enclosures, appear in most instances less frequently associated with bones than hearths and houses. The fish remains from Bostadh Beach, an open coastal settlement site, were recovered from a variety of context types. For this taphonomic analysis, the contexts from the Later Iron Age settlement at Bostadh Beach were grouped into eight main types that include midden deposits, hearth and ash spreads, sand-filled deposits, pit fills, post hole and wall core deposits. These groups were then further classified into 'internal' (i.e. within a building), or 30

House 2: External deposits Midden deposits Vertebrae were the most abundant element in these deposits. Table 4.9 and Figure 4.8 give the species representation for House 2 Midden deposits. The dominant species was saithe, followed closely by herring. Consequently, the Gadidae family (including saithe and cod) is best represented here.

Figure 4.3 shows the context descriptions and context types for Houses 1, 2 and 3. 4.5.2 Fish variability

bone

survival

and

inter-contextual

The question of inter-contextual variability is closely linked to that of differential preservation. This study of fish remains derives from the evaluation of skeletal elements and species representation. The first analysis focused on skeletal element representation in general, taking into account all the identified and non-identified element units. The concentration of fish bone per litre of soil sieved from these contexts in the three houses is also given in the corresponding Tables 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4. The second analysis is based on the representation of species in the different contexts. The resulting data are treated in detail below in the succeeding sections of this Chapter.

Sand-filled deposits. Vertebrae were most abundant in these contexts, while scales were the second most common, followed by spines; these elements, however, were not used for estimating species or family representation. Saithe was the main species present, followed by the Sparidae family, of which red sea-bream was the only species definitely identified. Herring was the third most common species in this group of contexts (Table 4.10 and Figure 4.9 Pit fills, post-hole and wall core deposits. The main element recovered from these deposits was vertebrae, although large numbers of branchiostegals were also found. The main species encountered was saithe but the entire family, Gadidae, was well represented (Table 4.11, Figure 4.10) . Internal deposits Hearth and ash spread deposits Mainly vertebrae were recovered from these deposits. These were again burnt in a range of colours (white, grey, black and blue), while others displayed no signs of burning. The main species recovered from these contexts was saithe (Table 4.12 and Figure 4.11).

4.5.3 The Bostadh Beach Iron Age settlement deposits (Figures 7.1 and 7.2) House 1: The External Deposits Midden deposits Vertebrae were the main element recovered and the dominant species was saithe. Table 4.5 and Figure 4.4 show the species representation and the number of elements from the middens (only species represented by over 5 fragments were included in the graph). Sand-filled deposits Vertebrae were the most abundant skeletal elements of fish recovered from these deposits. Scales were also rather abundant. The main species was saithe. The second most abundant species was red sea-bream, which explains the massive presence of its scales, since these are quite large and robust and the sand would have preserved them rather well. Scales were therefore not used for estimating NISP because factors of preservation would bias the results unduly. Only the vertebrae and head elements were therefore counted for species representation. Table 4.6 and Figure 4.5 show the species representation.

House 3: External deposits Midden deposits These deposits yielded mainly vertebrae, but large numbers of teeth and scales were also recovered. Table 4.13 and Figure 4.12 summarise the species representation for House 3 context groups. Saithe is the most common species (making Gadidae again the best represented family), followed closely by herring. Sand-filled deposits Most elements of the fish skeleton were present in these deposits. The most abundant was vertebrae, although large numbers of scales, fin rays and otoliths were also recovered. Saithe is the best represented species in this context group (Table 4.14 and Figure 4.13).

Pit fills and post-hole deposits The main species was saithe, with the second best represented species being cod. Red sea-bream and its family, Sparidae, make up the next major group. Vertebrae were the most abundant elements recovered from these deposits which also showed the least variability of skeletal elements. Table 4.7 and Figure 4. 6 show the species representation.

Post-holes, pit fills and wall core deposits The most abundant element from these deposits were scales. Large quantities of vertebrae, as well as fin rays and spines, have also been found. Scales, fin rays and braanchiostegals were not used for the estimation of species representation. The main species represented in this context group is red sea-bream and its family, Sparidae (Table 4.15 and Figure 4.14).

Internal deposits Hearth and ash deposits The main species in this context group was saithe (Table 4.8, Figure 4.7). These types of contexts produced mainly vertebrae. Many of the bones unsurprisingly were burnt, demonstrating a range of colours: white, black, black/blue and grey. Some, however, showed no signs of burning although they appeared to be covered by a whitish grey, dusty material.

Internal deposits Hearth and ash spread deposits The main element recovered in these deposits were vertebrae, while scales were also found in significant 31

Kent (1990) analysed the relationship between architecture and the use of space in terms of different settings: according to space and the activities carried out, probably organised not only in space but also in time. Rapport (1990) considered the 'environment' as consisting of fixed feature elements: furnishings, interior and exterior, of all sorts. His conclusions were that behaviour is contained loosely by architecture where space may serve for different settings and that activities occur not in architecture but in systems of settings, which include outdoor areas. Moreover, activities are organised not only in space but also in time. Ultimately, all activities are an expression of culture. They may involve the activity itself, the way it is carried out and is associated with other activities (i. e. combined into activity systems) as well as its purpose. A tangible example is cooking and how cooking is associated with other activities.

numbers but these were not used for estimation of species. The bones were burnt black, white, gray, blue and partially burnt examples were also recognised. Some of the burnt bone was also warped, while a few elements showed no signs of burning. Saithe was the best represented species (Table 4.16 and Figure 4.15). 4.6 Taphonomy, activity systems and use of space Human activities are a direct expression of lifestyle and it can be argued that the wide range of human activities appear to be significantly more limited than the large variety of environments that have been created for them (Kent 1990). An example of this is cooking: all people cook, in fact Lévi-Strauss (1970) regards cooking as a major difference between human and non-human, since only humans transform raw food into cooked food. The ways people cook, i.e. transform food are already extraordinarily varied. How cooking is associated with other activities varies even more. Furthermore, the meaning of cooking, its social or ritual significance, tend to be even more variable. There are certain specifics of activity systems related to cooking that may be recognisable in the archaeological record. Particularly in archaeological assemblages according to their contextual relationship, for instance in what order or sequence activities occurred (e.g. butchery, cooking), the nature of these sequences (e.g. processing for preservation or immediate consumption), how they are linked or separated, who was involved or was excluded (what gender was involved in preparation of food for cooking), where and when they occurred (what activities were done inside a dwelling or outside and when). By looking at the taphonomy of the Bostadh Beach fish bone and marine mollusca assemblage, it is hoped that some activity systems may be recognised in the analysis of this material within the description of context type available (Neighbour 1999; 2001; forthcoming).

4.6.2 Internal settings: cooking and related activities at Bostadh Beach House 1 settings for cooking activities (Figure 4.16) House 1 contained a possible hearth (C. 450); however, no associated ash deposits or other evidence for burning were apparent. A sub-rectangular hearth (C. 289) was located close to the entrance to the building. Its primary fill was a mixed deposit of peat ash (C. 749) and above this another peat ash deposit (C. 748); this layer was in turn sealed by a later in situ hearth deposit (C. 744). This tertiary fill also included C. 737. The mixed ash deposit C. 749 contained the remains of burnt fish bones; these were black in colour. Context 748, the secondary ash deposit, also contained remains of burnt-black fragments of fish bone. Context 744 contained a single fish vertebra that had not been subjected to burning. Likewise, Context 737 contained several fish vertebrae that had not been burnt. Another hearth included Context 745 and an associated stone-lined post-hole (C. 727) that was also rich in bones. This context contained several fish vertebrae none of which displayed signs of burning. A rectangular hearth Context 715 was also found at the centre of the house. The open-end of this rectangular hearth faced south. Peat ash filled this hearth (C. 738), most of the fish remains recovered in this fill were vertebrae that had been burnt white and a few fish bone fragments (splinters) that were burnt black. Fill C. 738, merged with contexts 751 and 753, contained large amounts of fish remains that were almost entirely vertebrae, apart from a few unidentifiable splinters of bone. Most were burnt black, and some were burnt white, blue and gray. Hearths 715 and 745 appear to be contemporary (Neighbour 2001). Interesting evidence also emerges from the non-edible marine mollusca recovered from the interior of House 1. In particular, the evidence from Contexts 749 and 751 (within Contexts 250 and 252) is noteworthy. In both contexts large quantities of molluscan remains that had been burnt black were found. They included flat periwinkle (Littorina littoralis), rough periwinkle

4.6.1 Possible systems of activity and use of space at Bostadh Beach: the contextual evidence According to Hodder (1987), understanding the object is achieved through placing it in relation to the larger functioning whole. When surviving material culture data are sufficiently networked, it is possible to identify their variations by measuring the different contexts: the network itself was an attempt by past people to achieve order. Hodder attempts to answer the question, whether the cultural world is ordered. If so, how is it ordered? Where are the boundaries connected and what dimensions are brought into their construction? An example of this notion of 'order' is the boundary between domestic and wild, which could initially have been the house wall, and which may later have been extended to a settlement fence. Hodder argues that archaeology (and anthropology) are able to approach such questions because the need for cultural order is universal, and it is argued that the methods of achieving order are the same in the present as in the past. 32

A further petal-shaped hearth in the same part of the building was formed by five edge-set slabs. It was set into a circular cut (C. 352). The primary fill of this hearth was mainly peat ash (C. 866) and sand (C. 867), which had been blackened by heat. Both contexts contained fish vertebrae that had been burnt black (Figure 4.19). At the centre of the same building, a small rectangular hearth (C. 258) was discovered (Figure 4.18). This hearth was once again formed by three edge-set slabs and had an open end facing south. A dump of ash (C. 361) sealed this hearth. This ash deposit (C. 361) has been interpreted as a deposit that was used to level the floor of Structure H at a point when the hearth was no longer in use. No fish bones were recovered in any of these hearth deposits. However, Context 164, a possible floor surface in Structure H, contained large quantities of large, robust scales identified to the Sparidae family. A total of 234 scales were recovered in Context 164. This may also have been part of the levelling material. Their presence indicates that the de-scaling of red seabream (the only Sparid species identified at Bostadh Beach), was carried out probably within House 3, prior to cooking, as has already been suggested for House 2. A further three contexts in this building, including (C 234) a floor deposit, and two wall core deposits (Contexts 620 and 660), also contained large amounts of Sparidae scales. Finds from these contexts amounted to some 1.385 fragments of scales, most in good condition (between 60-90% complete). Because of the nature of the contexts from which this material was recovered, i.e. their components had been used as filling material for walls and leveling floors, it is unclear whether all the de-scaling would have been done inside the house, prior to cooking or also outside the building. In the latter case, it is likely that the scales were mixed with sand and other materials there for construction purposes.

(Littorina saxatilis), large quantities of the tiny species Cingula cingula and Margerites helicicus as well as remains of Spinorbis borealis (Serpulidae tube-dwelling polychaetes); all these species are found attached to seaweed (Fucus vesiculosus and Ascophyllum nodosum). If seaweeds were used as manure, could they have also been used for fuel? It could be argued that since peat supply would have been plentiful, this would be unlikely. However, seaweeds could have served other purposes, one of, which would include the use of their ash instead of salt for preserving fish, meat and also some dairy products, for example cheese. Martin Martin noted these practices during his tour of the Outer Hebrides in the 17th century (Martin 1695). Since both contexts were also rich in burnt fish remains, it is possible that some of the hearths were used in other activities. In this particular case, the use of the hearth fire to heat containers with fish livers to extract their oil is a strong possibility since immature saithe were traditionally used in the islands for this purpose and most of the fish bone components were recovered from this species. House 2 settings of cooking activity (Figure 4.17) A rectangular hearth (C. 525) came to light in the centre of this house. It had been built with three edge-set slabs and with an open end facing south. The hearth was filled with peat ash (C. 567), but contained no fish remains. Two contexts, 526 and 530, representing floor levels in the house interior, however, contained large amounts of fish remains. The elements recovered were mainly scales identified to the Sparidae family. Whether the act of descaling fish took place inside or outside the house is unclear from these contexts since masses of scales seem to have been accidentally incorporated into the fill during the levelling of floors. The primary activity of de-scaling nevertheless denotes what could be regarded as a preliminary part of the cooking process, and the implication of this must have occurred inside or near the house.

4.6.3 External settings Some fish remains were also found in contexts outwith the buildings that formed the principal focus of the building. Outside Structure K, part of House 1, Context 471 described as ‘interdigitating layers of sand and organic material’ (Neighbour 2001), contained large amounts of burnt tiny, non-edible mollusca. They included Cingula cingulus, Rissoa parva, Margerites helicicus and the small tubes (rolled in clockwise coil) of the bristle worms (Polychaeta) Spirorbis borealis. Since all these species are found attached to seaweed, particularly on the fronds of Fucus and on Laminaria, it is assumed that seaweed had been burnt in this area to be used as fertiliser and/or in the production of seaweed ash salt.

House 3 settings of cooking activity (Figure 4.18) A central hearth was found in House 3 (in the component labeled Structure L, Phase IV). This central hearth (C. 362) had originally been rectangular in form and consisted of three stone-defined sides with an open end facing south, towards the doorway. This hearth was filled with peat ash (C. 889) that contained non-burnt fish vertebrae. A circular pit (C. 890) was also found; its fill probably represented a deposit made prior to the construction of the central hearth; this pit contained a few fish vertebrae which were not burnt. Contexts 885, a sub-circular pit cut through the central hearth (C. 362), and Context 884, an oval peat cut, contained large amounts of tiny marine mollusca that were burnt: these were black and grey. These small molluscs live attached to seaweed. It is suggested therefore that seaweed-ash salt was produced in this house probably to use in preserving food. In another component of House 3, Structure H, Phase II, Context 870 has been described as a probable hearth, although no edge stones defining this feature were found. No fish remains were recovered in this context.

4.7 Conclusions This analysis has indicated that it is possible to incorporate aspects of archaeozoological research into an investigation of the structure of society. The overall pattern of skeletal element representation in the fish bone assemblage at Bostadh Beach is similar for the context groupings from the three Iron Age houses studied. Most 33

of the variation is considered to be a result of differential preservation of the various types of fish bone elements and fish scales. The most commonly represented skeletal elements in the archaeological samples are those which occur in largest numbers in the fish skeleton, such as vertebrae, branchial bones and scales. Midden deposits from the three houses have the highest concentration of fish remains. Contexts grouped into sand-filled deposits have the highest overall concentration of fish bone fragments (i.e. unidentifiable splinters of fish bone). On the other hand, fish remains found in deposits described as wall cores, pit fills and post-hole fills have an equal concentration of recognizable skeletal elements and broken, unidentifiable fish bone fragments. By looking at the taphonomy of the fish remains and, in some cases also that of mollusc shells from Bostadh Beach, it has also been possible to identify certain systems of activity and setting. This part of the analysis was based on the presence and condition (i.e. whether burnt or not) of skeletal elements, as well as types of nonedible marine mollusca that were also present. These studies have indicated that by looking at taphonomic processes, certain ancient activities can be identified. Conclusions may be based on the relationship between specific material groups, in this case fish and molluscan remains, and domestic furniture settings such as hearths. This means looking at the relationships between the environmental and architectural remains. This approach may reveal evidence for the preparation, cooking and preservation of food, as well as other domestic activities such as securing fuel for lighting by processing fish liver oil or extracting seaweed salt. The taphonomic analysis of fish and marine molluscan remains has clearly outlined the importance of understanding how these remains were deposited and preserved in different contextual units on the site, and their subsequent survival. Taphonomic studies demonstrably contribute substantially to our understanding of past societies, in terms of subsistence and the management of natural resources.

34

animal exploitation may be translated into socio-cultural meanings thereby contributing to the theoretical background for the in-depth analysis of archaeozoological data (c.f. Binford 1967). Ethnoarchaeology uses analogy as an interpretative tool and for developing appropriate research strategies in archaeology (Belcher 1994). It ‘investigates aspects of contemporary cultural and sociological behaviour from an archaeological perspective. Ethnoarchaeologists attempt systematically to define relationships between behaviour and material culture not often explored by ethnologists, and to ascertain how certain features of observable behaviour may be reflected in remains which archaeologists may find’ (Kramer 1979). Ethnoarchaeology is extended to include the other form of actualistic research, ethnographic experiments, in which behaviour is manipulated in a field setting. Cultures with some historical relationships to archaeological cultures of the same region frequently form the focus of ethnoarchaeological studies. Watson (1979) has noted that ‘where cultural continuity is great, then ethnoarchaeological research is bound to be highly productive’. Ethnoarchaeological research, however, potentially triples the hermeneutic system by imposing cultural filters between the phenomena and the observer of archaeological as well as ethnographic ‘facts’ and between the interpretations of chronologically and geographically distant examples (Bartosiewicz 1997). Fortunately, at Bostadh Beach, fishing tradition can be studied locally, in an environment that was also available for the ancient community. In the harsh environment of the Western Isles, the limited variety of subsistence potential further narrows the error margin of analogies. On the other hand, functional parallels based on technology used in the same environment cannot always be taken as proof of cultural continuity: cognitive aspects of exploiting the same marine environment may vary considerably between cultures. The use of analogy in this study therefore takes the form of cross-cultural analogy.

Chapter 5: Aspects of harvesting marine resources in recent centuries 5.1 Archaeology, ethnohistory and ethnology as interpretative tools Primary data for archaeological analysis consist of the material remains of past cultures within their spatial and environmental contexts. However, most archaeological writing relies on the use of additional data sources, used to test hypotheses and thereby interpreting and explaining this primary database. Studies of human history as well as actualistic research extend this potential source. Actualistic studies include the use of ethnographic parallels and experimental archaeology. Ethnology and ethnohistory are most frequently used in the reconstruction of past social behaviour, while controlled experiments are of help in understanding technical parameters of relevance to archaeological research. In both cases, our ability to transfer the abundant information from its original framework to archaeology is of critical concern. It is to this domain, the zone of transfer and contact between disciplines, that archaeologists should direct their attention. 5.1.1 Analogy Like most archaeological research (Wylie 1985), this study greatly relies on analogical reasoning. Analogy in archaeological interpretation means ‘assaying any belief about non-observed (archaeological) behaviour by referral to observed behaviour which is thought to be relevant’ (Ascher 1961, 318). Two different types of analogy are recognised in archaeology: 1. Formal analogy meaning that if two phenomena have two or more attributes in common, they probably share other attributes as well. This type of analogy is often applied in absence of historical documents in the reconstruction of (especially prehistoric) processes based on their material correlates in modern populations. The pitfalls of formal analogy include anachronistic reasoning.

5.1.3 The ethnoarchaeology of fishing in the Western Isles

2. Relational analogy is based on inherent linkages between attributes and thus constitutes a more robust type of analogy (Wylie 1985). In Old World archaeology this latter is reinforced by the ‘folk culture approach’ (Archer 1961), since the long time spans examined encourage the idea of a substantial measure of continuity from archaeology into history.

It is important to consider the elements of the complex ethnographic/historical record that were potentially available to the early fishermen of Bostadh Beach. In the quest for evidence of fishing in the prehistory of the Western Isles one would expect to find materials such as catching equipment in the form of boats with gear, lines, sinkers, floats and hooks, fish weirs and traps. The presence of fish remains is also among the primary evidence for fishing. Whether this evidence is recognisable depends on two factors, fundamentally taphonomic in nature: the probability of preservation and the rate of discovery. With regards to find preservation, expectations must be low. In a land with a high degree of humidity, wood, ropes, nets and other organic materials decompose rapidly. Depending on the soil matrix, the rate of decay

5.1.2 Ethnoarchaeology The notion of ‘ethnoarchaeology’, rooted in late 19th century evolutionary theory, has been developing for at least four decades. Kleindienst and Watson (1956) proposed the study of ‘action archaeology’ of living communities. This type of enquiry can provide an interpretative/contextual framework within which relationships between humans and animals in ancient 35

Orkney. References to studies on fishing practices in mainland Scotland are also made (Martin 1981; Lockhart 1997; Wigan 1998). Documents and recordings compiled by the School of Scottish Studies of the University of Edinburgh were also used as a body of reference in developing these analogies.

might be retarded. Unfortunately, this has not been the case for fishing equipment. The general scarcity of materials such as wood and fibres for rope in the Scottish Islands may have necessitated thrift with the result that many articles were probably reworked and re-used in another capacity and are therefore unrecognisable for any particular period (Goodlad 1971). Survival of inorganic material in recognisable forms is much more frequent although this is often qualified by a change in use or re-use at a later period. If fishing was a major activity, stone may have been used as sinkers and metal as hooks. There is no evidence for iron hooks until the Viking period but this may be due to the general scarcity of metal until that time.

5.3 The people, their language, the weather and the sea in oral tradition Oral tradition provides a valuable source of information about historical settings far back in time, a fact that has gained increasing recognition in some areas, although archaeologists have given minimal attention to this form of data. In North America, for example, the interpretation of oral documents as relevant links to written documents, as well as the concept that oral and archaeological records describe a shared past, are being increasingly put into practice (Echo-Hawk 2000, Mason 2000).

5.2 Ethnographic studies and observations in Greater Bernera, Lewis, Western Isles In his chapter on ‘The Fishings of the Lewis’, MacKenzie claims that ‘fish is to Lewis what the Nile is to Egypt. Without the Nile, Egypt would be a dreary desert; and without fish Lewis would be a perennial problem. The prosperity of Lewis is built upon a foundation of fish’ (MacKenzie 1919: 69).

5.3.1 The weather lore of the Hebridean Islands In the open boats, the difference between good and bad weather in terms of wind and fog was often the difference between life and death. It is against this background that humans, as part of a network in the natural habitat, became dependent on the sea for their very existence. To the prehistoric inhabitants of the Hebridean islands, the sea must have appeared as an infinite world of wonders, a life giver, abundant in nourishment and raw materials, as well as a life taker. Respect and knowledge of its greatness modelled the nature of the Hebridean inhabitants who, from the beginning of human settlement, relied on marine resources as a major component to their existence. Traditionally, the Atlantic coast of the Hebrides has been favoured for settlement, with the long strands of machair encountered there contrasting with the more inhospitable, rockier coast of the Minch (Armit 1996). In the past the sea has been one of the main tools for weather forecasting. Its sounds and movements would foretell approaching changes and people in the islands were able to forecast the weather ‘with the same accuracy that the man in the city read the barometer’ (MacGregor 1925, 113-114). This was of particular importance when fishermen were dependent on sail and oar before steam and motor power were introduced during the late 19th century (Martin 1981). The trends of weather conditions were ‘read’ in the sky, wind and in the movement of the sea itself. The fishermen of the islands certainly knew what weather to expect depending on their observations of the sea; the gair nan tonn (the laughing of the waves) or gair na mara (the laughing of the sea) was a term used in irony when a storm had endangered the lives of those at sea. On the West of Lewis, a wave known locally as tonn na creagan (wave of the rocks), was considered to be a warning of an approaching storm depending on its roaring sound (MacGregor 1925). In his accounts of fishing and fishing lore of the island of Great Bernera, MacLeod (unpublished) describes different ways Bernera fishermen used to foretell weather

This author has focused on ethnoarchaeological observation as part of her analysis of the fish bone assemblage from Bostadh Beach, Greater Bernera (Isle of Lewis), to assess the relative importance of the fish remains with particular functional loci within the site. Primary information was also sought by interviewing retired fishermen from Great Bernera. These fishermen had sailed in the small open boats as young teenagers, like their fathers before them, prior to the introduction of steam vessels. It is necessary to note that fishing communities, until recently, were singularly close-knit: the sons of fishermen would almost invariably become fishermen themselves (Martin 1995). For generations fishermen have toiled all around the British coast. Many methods of catching fish have been employed and many different types of fish caught (Festing 1977). Additional details on the history of fishing on the island of Great Bernera derives from manuscript sources housed at the museum of the Comunn Eachdraidh Bhearnaraidh (Bernera Local History Society). Much of the information written here is also based on the accounts and descriptions made by the late George Macleod of Breaclete, Bernera and Stornoway. His handwritten work on the fishing lore, methods and practices of fishing in the island of Great Bernera are considered by the local community 'a heritage and a gift of knowledge of past generations'. Without Mr. Macleod's detailed work, much of this history would have been lost forever. Reference is also made to ethnographic accounts from the Northern Isles, of Orkney and Shetland and, where appropriate, analogies will be drawn between these distinctive and strategic areas where people's language, lore and daily subsistence can still be seen to be part of a rich archaeological heritage. For this purpose reference is made to work done by Goodlad (1971), Fenton (1978) and Colley (1983) on fishing practices in Shetland and 36

would be thrown over the mouth of the tabh. When the young saithe gathered around the bait, the tabh would be lifted with the haul of fish trapped in the frame net. The same frame net was in use in Orkney. The 'poke-net' or 'sillock-pocks' was made in the form an umbrella suspended at the top of a long pole. In Orkney such nets ranged from 2.5-3 m in diameter. The poke-net would be used in water less than two fathoms (1.8-3.6 m) deep. Bait, mainly of pounded limpets, would be thrown over the net to attract young saithe (Fenton 1978). Rock fishing with rods was also practised. The rock fishing rod or slap creagach was used mainly for catching smalags (second year saithe), sillock (third year saithe also known as saoidhean), and large sillock (fourth year saithe also known as saoidhean mòr or black sillock saoidhean dubh). Other species caught by using these methods included lythe, mackerel, wrasse and codling. Minced bait would be thrown off the rocks to attract the fish (biodhadh-na-creageige). The bait used for rock fishing was mainly whelks, mussel, lug worm, herring, mackerel, crab and crushed shellfish (soll).

conditions: the noise of the sea breaking on the shore, particularly in calm conditions, foretold a change of weather. A heavy swell (muir-dona or droch mhuir), even in good calm weather, indicated a change to bad weather. If the swell was heavy, a Northerly gale was predicted. Sudden calm during a storm denoted a shift of wind (grad fheadh), which would blow with renewed force from the new quarter. A green sky, if seen in the morning or evening, foretold strong winds (adhar-maine). Wind backing against the sun NW to S or by E to N (ghoath ag atharrachadh na greine) was used as a warning to a change of weather for the worse. Wind veering with the sun in S to N by the W or N to S by the E (ghoad ag atharrachadh leis a ghrein) was considered a sign of better weather approaching. A phosphorescence glow in the sea on a dark night denoted a change for the worse with rain (losgadh na mara). 5.4 Fishing methods Fishing consists of two phases: the detection of prey and the actual capture. Detection is often the harder and more time-consuming. In most waters fish are hidden from view if they are but a few metres beneath the surface, especially when they are some distance ahead of the boat. Until recently, a sharp eye and knowledge of other predators, such as sea mammals and sea birds, were the fisherman’s main tools of search (Idyll 1978). In Great Bernera, fishermen could locate herring shoals, for example, by noticing certain characteristics in the surface of the sea. During daylight these included an oily surface, a milky-whitish colour, while at night, a glow in the sea or a lot of phosphorescence as well as a dull whitish bank below the boat would indicate that shoals of herring were present. Herring shoals also produced a smell of fish in the air and swarms of birds would also give the location of the shoals, particularly if gannet (Morus bassanus) or solan geese (Sula bassana) were seen diving in to the sea (after MacLeod). Methods of capture remained unchanged in Lewis until the 19th century, when steam auxiliary motor poweredboats were introduced (Geddes 1955). Steam trawlers seem to have been the major contributors to the decline of fishing in the islands. In Colonsay for instance, retired fishermen describe how cod and flounders disappeared during the early 1910’s once steam trawlers were introduced in the area (Carmichel 1979a, 1979b). Against this background, and depending on the fish sought, several types of fishing methods were being practised by the inhabitants of Great Bernera until the mid-twentieth century.

5.4.2 Fishing at sea A fisherman has to master two trades. He must know how to handle his boat and be a seaman first; then he must know how to handle his gear and where to look for fish. Fishing from boats at sea involved several methods. There were two types of long-line fishing: the small line method (‘sma line’) and the big or great line. The small line was carried out using small boats of under 20 feet keel (6 m). Lines consisted of lighter strings (in weight) than those used for the great line fishing (see below). Small lines generally consisted of horsehair snuids. The small line was 150 fathoms (ca 275 m) long and had 250 baited hooks suspended from it by snuids or ‘tippins’. Bait used for the small line were shellfish (maorach), mussel (feusgan), limpet (barnoch, bàirneach), lugworms (lugaidh), sandeel (siòl-ghaineamh, sìolag), herring (sgadan), mackerel (rionnach) and crab (crùbag). The fishes caught with the small line method included haddock (adaig), whiting (cuiteag), gurnet or gurnard (cnòdan ruadh), coddling (bodach-ruadh), thornback ray (sòrnan), plaice (lèabag-bhreac), flounder (leàbagghlas), sole (leabag-thuathat) and dogfish (biorach). This type of fishing was almost wholly given up in favour of seining or trawling, introduced during the 1940’s (Martin 1995). Small line fishing was a winter and spring activity, frequently continued into the summer and often worked consecutively with great line fishing. At the beginning of the season, boats would remain close inshore (within a mile) but as the season changed the boats went further offshore. By May they would be 8-9 miles, ca 1500016000 m, out. Great line fishing, referred to as Pios-lin-mhòr was carried out using boats of up to 35 feet keel (11 m). The lines were formed by seven strings of 60 fathoms each (110 m), making the great line an average length of 420 fathoms (770 m). Each line carried approximately 168 hooks. Stones called ‘fearg’ were used to sink the great lines to the bottom; the bait (or biodharh) used for great

5.4.1 Fishing from the shore Rock fishing was an important method, usually carried out with a frame net, known as tabh (Figure 5.1). The fish caught with the tabh were mainly young saithe which, according to size and age, were called cudaigh or ‘cuddy’ (first year saithe), ‘smallag’ (second year saithe) and saoidhean (third year saithe). Minced shell bait would be put into the mesh bag, the tabh would then be sunk below the surface and more bait 37

ponies. Black and grey hair made better fishing lines. The hair was washed and kept to dry at a certain temperature: too wet hair would make the lines too tight and too dry, too springy. The horsehair line was called sròd, and fishing from rocks or boats the types of fish caught included the ‘silver haddie’ or carbhanach, probably meaning the sea bream (Pagellus sp.), whiting (Merlangius merlangus), cod (Gadus morhua) and saithe (Pollachius virens) (Henderson 1968). Before the midnineteeth century, nets were made from hemp (Cannabis sativa). After that date, cotton nets had trebled the catching capacity of hemp nets (Wigan 1998). The use of hemp for fibre has been traced to the Bronze Age in Scotland (Ryder 1999). Fishermen also produced their own netting-needles made from wood or animal bone (Martin 1981). Deep-sea fishing with ripper dorgh mòr or dorgh (Figure 5.3) was another method used from boats. This method of fishing was referred to as dorobhaigh. The dorgh was made by casting approximately 7 lbs (3.5 kg) of lead into a sand mould or into a circular hole in the ground. It was then polished and one end flattened, three holes were then drilled for the ‘snuid’ (i.e. the snood), and one hole was made in the flat end. Prior to use, the dorgh would be scraped with a knife to make it shiny (after Macleod). The dorgh would be let down the boat until it touched the bottom of the sea. It would then be hauled back approximately 1 fathom and worked up and down at that depth. No bait was used as the shining would attract the fish, usually cod, which would jump at it and would thus get hooked. Other fish caught with the deep-sea ripper dorgh were coalfish, turbot and halibut (ibid.). A hand-line dorgh (dorgh-beag) (Figure 5.4) was used to fish from boats inshore. This hand dorgh consisted of a weight of approximately 4 lbs (2 kg), a wire with 4 to 6 snuids or ‘snoods’ with hooks, and a hand line of approximately 60 fathoms length. The fish caught with the hand-line dorgh were the same as those caught with the small line. This fishing tackle was used inshore and the hooks were baited. The dorgh would be let down and the moment of catch would be felt on the hand line which would then be used to haul the fish aboard (ibid.).

line fishing was conger eel, haddock, herring, mackerel and occasionally squid. Deep sea fishes caught with great lines were ling (langa), cod (trosq), tusk (traille), turbot (turbaid), halibut (leobag balkann), conger eel (easgann mara), hake (falamair), dogfish (biorach), sea angler (cat-mhara) and blue shark (tarbh-dallaig). 5.5 Fishing implements 5.5.1 Buoys used in great line fishing The great line buoys were made of sheepskin. They consisted of a circular wooden head, a wooden-lying cleat with a hole at the ‘head’ for filling with air. The skin was then plugged when in use (Figure 5.2). Similar buoys were used in other areas of Scotland until the beginning of the 20th century (Martin 1981). In West Coast fishing communities, sheepskin buoys were made by soaking the skin in water until all the fleece had been shed. The maker would then gather the edges of the skin and fold them about the base of a wooden stock, and lash them with marline, a light, tarred rope, made of two strands. The skin would then be inflated and judged by the roundness until the intended shape was achieved. The skin would be covered repeatedly with marline, tightening it firmly. When thoroughly dried, a mixture of tar and linseed oil would be spread inside the buoy, soaking the interior and thus making the buoy waterproof. The skin was kept soft and pliable so that it would not crack during warm days (ibid.). In the East Coast dog skin and pig bladder were used for making buoys (Martin 1981; Wigan 1998), while cattle bladders were also used in some areas (ibid.). The use of dog skin for fishingbuoys in some of the fishing communities throughout Scotland has been poorly recorded. Sheperd (1979) described the preparation and use of these buoys, called ‘bows’ or ‘bowies’. He also recorded these as being used probably until the 1920’s in Eriskay in the Western Isles. 5.5.2 Fishing lines and nets Lines made from hemp or horsehair had snoods (i.e. baited hooks) that would usually be attached to them at 6foot (1.8 m) intervals. A line would be hauled from 30-40 fathoms (55-73 m) of water. Great stamina and strength were needed for such an arduous task. As a line was hauled, another fisherman would unhook the fish while separating them by species and size. Lines were cleaned during the afternoons, hooks would be replaced and lines cleared of other organisms such as starfish and seaweed. Each fisherman would take his own line home for baiting. In the islands, fishermen made fishing lines from twisted horsehair. Ropes were made of heather and hay. Accounts of how these were made can be found in the archives of the School of Scottish Studies. The process of making lines and ropes, mainly by twisting and plaiting, are similar throughout the Northern and Western Islands (McLean 1955; 1958; SA 1968a & 1968b; MacDonald et al. 1971; Carmichael 1979). The hair used was from stallions and geldings, never from mares. The preferred hair for the manufacture of fishing lines was that of

5.5.3 Boats Maritime technology has been vital to the basic subsistence of the Scottish Islands, where the surrounding seas have been fecund in contrast to the agriculture potential of the land, limited by rigorous climatic and geological factors (Morrison 1992, Jarman et al 1982). Boats were developed when there was a need for them. Rixson (1998) speculates on the possibility that the first boat types in the Hebrides were equivalent of sea-goingboat shaped ‘currachs’, or coracles. They became then essential for people to survive. People did not take to the sea unless the benefits for subsistence were considerable (Greenhill & Morrison 1995). If the land alone could not support the human population, men took to the sea for food. Thus, boats developed and time, work and scarce raw materials were put into making them.

38

during autumn. Hand lines, long lines and nets would be used (Kolsrud 1984). Kolsrud's description of this fishing community can serve to give an indication for understanding the organisation of fishing in a small open boat in conditions similar to those encountered by fishermen in the Scottish Islands. The outline of the traditional fishing boat (Figure 5.6) shows how the different tasks were carried out and where the orders derived from. The task of the man in the second position was to hold the boat in place with the oars, his instructions came from the skipper who sat at the stern, in position 1. The skipper put the line over at the same time as he took the fish and threw it to the third man, position 3, who assisted by distributing the catch into the holds. This ethnographic description shows how the crew’s tasks were organised. Kolsrud also points out the egalitarian nature of fishing communities where equal sharing was practised. And this is best perceived in the nature of the skipper's role: he got his crew to work not because he owned the boat but because of his proficiency in knowing where to look for the catch, and how best to secure it. All boats, even those that work well offshore, depend on having a refuge that can be reached in bad weather. This may be a harbour or even a beach if the boat is the right shape (McKee 1983). Shingle beaches were favoured by fishermen because this facilitated the task of beaching the boat. Any culture is a mixture of old and new, and traditions endure when they can function under new conditions. In the fishing community 'new' elements consist in the introduction of motorised and larger boats, particularly after the First World War (Kolsrud 1984). Stone anchors, called cruaidh in Lewis have been used until recently. This was especially the case when anchoring the boat to a rocky bottom. The simplest form of cruaidh was the stone tied to the end of a rope. In the western mainland coast of Scotland stone anchors were called ‘killicks’ (Lethbridge 1952).

Boats evolved in different ways and at different speeds throughout the world. Their development was conditioned by the geography of local waters, climate, and purposes for which the boats were needed as well as the availability of raw materials (Wilson 1965; McKee 1983; Osler 1983; Greenhill & Morrison 1995; Tanner 1996; and Rixson 1998). Against this background, the islands of the Hebrides have a long tradition of seafaring in small open boats, using sail and oar power to get to and from the fishing grounds, and for transporting people, animals and goods around the islands. These boats were a part of everyday life. In Lewis the ‘yole’ or ‘geola’ was used for inshore fishing while the 'sgoth' (skiff) was a larger, sturdier vessel used for deep water fishing for cod and ling. The sgoth fishermen used long lines to catch cod and ling over the winter months from fishing banks extending from northeast of the Butt of Lewis to opposite Stoer Point on the east side of Minch (Miller 1999). The sgoth, was the Hebridean open, sail-powered, wooden boat of over 30 feet (9.15 m). It originated in North Lewis and could take a crew of six to seven. It was famous for its excellency in sailing the hostile waters around these islands. The long lines were baited and set for up to 48 hours, fixed with anchors. Each sgoth carried a fire kettle, a three-legged iron pot with burning peat inside (Miller 1999). The sgoth (Figure 5.5), had to be light enough to be operated from open beaches but strong enough to withstand the rough Hebridean Sea (Tanner 1996). Before the commercialisation of fisheries, many people living on the coast were crofters as well as subsistence fishermen, catching only enough fish for their own needs, using small open boats. White fish (e.g. saithe and cod) and herring taken by line were caught only in sufficient quantities to satisfy local demand (Wilson 1965). Small open boats of under 20-ft (6 m) keel (geola) were used for the small line fishing in Great Bernera as in the rest of Lewis. Two men would work from these small boats. The Small-Line was 150 fathoms (275 m) and had some 250 baited hooks suspended from it by the snoods or ‘snuids’. The bait was mainly lugworm for flatfish, while mussel and limpets were used for haddock and whiting. The catch was mainly used for local consumption and/or as bait for lobster creels. Lines were baited on land before the fishing, traditionally by women, children and older men. Larger boats, sgoth, of up to 35 feet (11 m) keel were used for the great line fishing. In Great Bernera three to four men would operate and work from these large boats. Primarily ling was caught with conger eel as bait. These boats could go to sea from Monday mornings to Friday evenings. Cod flesh would be used as bait on Fridays to catch saithe, which would then be used as bait on Saturdays to catch conger eel. Fishermen in the Lofoten Island, northern Norway, used a similar type of boat for fishing in coastal waters. These were open boats of about 30 feet long (9.15 m) with a crew of two or three. They were mainly used for catching cod, particularly in late spring (when young cod started to leave the fjords for deeper waters) and also for fishing

5.6 The use of landmarks and fishing-marks Landmarks were an essential source of knowledge for fishermen before the use of the compass, although their use still continued even after its introduction. Fishingmarks were used to find particular places that certain fish populations were known to frequent and, similarly, to avoid areas where good fishing was unlikely (Eunson 1961). Some of the fishing grounds may have been close inshore, the majority situated between 1.5 and 5 meters from the shore, and the farthest distance for fishing was no more than 10 meters. Time and tide were the most important elements in fishing. Time and weather were never far from the thoughts of fishermen in the past (ibid.). Landmarks were physical features on the land or in the sea: headlands, prominent rocks, islands, and even houses. These 'marks' also enable the fishermen to know the position of the boats and relate it to the different fishing grounds. The landmarks became so standard in Lewis through the years that they governed the areas fished from different fishing villages in the island, i.e. the landmarks defined 39

Records from the 16th and 17th centuries show that although bread made from barley was eaten in winter, fish and milk were the bases of the summer diet (Brand 1701) and dried fish was used instead of bread particularly by poorer folk (ibid.). In Walker's report (McKay 1980), the late 18th century traveller met a man in the island of Rum, who did not taste bread till he was 50, and for the remainder of his life, (he lived till 103), never ate it from March till October, but only took fish and milk like most people on the island. Till well through the 1900's fish, fresh or preserved, was very much a substitute for bread or other cereal products for half or more of the year (Fenton 1992). With the introduction of the potato, the diet became more reliable, but the catching of young saithe, and in some areas of dogfish, remained a regular activity that provided food and also oil extracted from fish livers. The gills, guts and liver of saithe would be removed, the fish would be soaked overnight in salted water and then hung to dry in the wind or in the smoke of the fires inside the houses (Fenton 1976). When the fish were quite dried, they would be stored in baskets or sacks till needed for cooking. The dried fish would be soaked in warm water before cooking, until the skins were removed. Dried fish were often boiled with potatoes but also eaten raw between meals as snacks (Firth 1920). Saithe were also, of course, eaten fresh, often fried after being dipped in oatmeal, sometimes also baked whole, without being cleaned, in the coals of the house fire (ibid.). Fish, particularly nutritious, was also very popular. Liver bannocks were bannocks (flat unsweetened oatmeal or barley cakes) baked with fish liver, forming a kind of sandwich (Edmondston 1866). The liver-cup or 'kroos', was a kind of pie, sometimes made of scooped up mashed potatoes filled with livers. It was covered with strips of dough, and was then placed upon the hearthstone and baked (ibid.). ‘Liver-flakies’ were two half-dried young saithe filleted, with livers between them and roasted on the hearth (Fenton 1976), while ‘liver-kǿdes’, ‘kǿthes’ or ‘liver-piltocks’, also known as ‘krampies’, were fresh saithe roasted on a fire with the livers inside (Jakobsen 1866; Saxby 1932). 'Liver-head' or ‘krappit heed’, was the head of a cod or ling stuffed with livers and boiled (Spence 1899, Saxby 1932). 'Liver-muggie' or ‘krappit muggie’ was the liver, sometimes mixed with flour and spice, and boiled in the stomach of a cod (Hibbert-Ware 1822, Saxby 1932). The 'livery-fole' was a thick cake made with oatmeal and livers, and boiled with fresh fish (Wright 1902). ‘Stapp’ was a dish made of livers and the softer parts of the head of the fish boiled, carefully mixed with seasoning, baked and served hot (Edmondston 1866, Saxby 1932). Fish roes were another component used in recipes. Fish roe would be beaten with a spoon till creamy, flour and salt would be added, and the mix then shaped into balls and dropped into hot water and boiled. The balls once cooled were sliced, fried in butter and eaten hot (Edmondston 1866). Fish heads or small fish were rolled in a cloth and kept in a crack in the wall until they acquired a 'gamey' flavour,

the fishing grounds exploited by different settlements in the island. In Great Bernera, the inshore winter and spring mark was SgeirRhudha (Figure 5.7 & 5.8) which is an area of rock and coral stretching north westerly out from Gallow Head for approximately 5 meters. This was a good winter and spring fishing ground for ling, cod and skate, particularly in the area of Bealach Skipedail, a low lying hollow between Ard Mòr Magersta and Eilean Molach. Fishermen became familiar with the type of sea-bed from what came up on the hooks. Shalow spots were discovered when the line was suddenly caught on the bottom. When the lines came up badly twisted, it usually meant that they were caught up in a swift flowing eddy or current. Treacherous sea-bed which could mean the loss of fishing lines, was often marked by swift dangerous currents on the surface (Eunson 1961). The great line technique could not function in the type of hard ground known as Sgeir Rhudha (after MacLeod n/d). The boats would run out to sea from the point of an 'outgoing mark' until they reached a 'cross' or 'tangent side mark'. In this way fishermen could trace the marks if the lines broke. For the great lines, the Great Bernera fishermen took their marks off the Flannan Islands. Macleod gives two reasons for this, the fishing grounds of the Great Bernera fishermen were always located to the East and North East of the Flannans and secondly, these islands would be in sight even if the inner land mark was totally obscured. 5.7 Traditional elements in the dietary usage of fish in the Scottish Islands The study of alimentation is of basic importance in ethnological studies. Food serves not only physiological purposes but also marks traditional preferences, dislikes and taboos that persist for very long periods. Furthermore, the ceremonial or symbolic function of food, also related to status and to hierarchy, appears to be deeply rooted and a worldwide part of human nature (Fenton 1992). Fish has played an important part in the domestic economy of most coastal communities through time in Scotland, particularly in the islands. Early use of marine animals for food was probably greatly underpinned by the necessity of eating any protein rich food available (Firth 1969). Before the introduction of the potato, saithe was one of the main elements of the diet, in particular before harvest. At least two documents dated to 1697 describe the potato being grown in Scotland (Lowlands); these however derive from a gardener’s diaries and mainly mentioned as a curiosity or a vegetable rather than a field crop (Alan Fairweather pers. comm. 2002). Several authors date the introduction of the potato in the Scottish Highlands, as a crop, from the 1770s (Devine & Hutchison 1988; Symon 1959; Devine 1988). Devine & Hutchison date this introduction for the Western Isles to the 1740’s, while Fenton (1978) dates to 1743 the first cultivation of the potato in South Uist and Benbecula, it is assumed that the crop spread over the rest of the Hebridean Islands during that decade. 40

fish for drying or sell it fresh. This type of household production remained dominant until line fishery was replaced by trawling and seining in the 1880s and later by the mid-twentieth century (Thomson 1985). The type of line fishing here described was in decline from the end of the 19th century owing to the impact of steam trawling; although ground seining appeared in the West Coast from World War II onwards (Prof J. Coull pers. comm. 2002).

then cooked and eaten with butter and potatoes (Saxby 1932). Herring was another favourite fish food, eaten particularly during harvest time with new potatoes. It was eaten fresh or dried, as well as salted later in the year (Fenton 1976). Dogfish and skate were also eaten, although there was some prejudice against these species, particularly in Shetland (ibid.). In the Hebrides dogfish was common and it was usually consumed after it had been dried (Buchanan 1793). In the coastal areas fish remained the main source of nourishment. Even as late as the 19th century, summer was often a breadless period, and other foodstuffs, particularly cereal products, were of limited availability.

5.10 Shellfish as bait and food in the Western Isles based on ethnographic accounts and observations Molluscs have served humans in a variety of ways for thousands of years. Shells in archaeological sites attest to the use of their flesh for human consumption and for bait. This account based on ethnographic materials will help to illustrate the importance of molluscs to coastal dwellers in particular.

5.8 Traditional fish by-products in the Scottish Islands In the Hebridean islands an early form of open oil lamp or cruisgean, was lit using a dark, thin oil. This oil was procured from the livers of different kinds of fish caught, mainly for domestic use. On coming home from the beach with creels of fish, women had the task of gutting them immediately and throwing the livers into a pot or a craggan. The livers were then boiled down to a liquid state, and set on a slow fire till completely dissolved. The liquid resulting from this process was a thin oil that was stored in the craggan (McGregor 1880, Cheape 1988). Cod and ling have been traditionally used for this purpose in Scotland while young saithe was the most important source of fish liver oil (Smith 1984). In the Northern Isles young saithe (particularly caught during the months of June, July and August) were highly appreciated; their livers were also removed to extract oil (Fenton 1978).

5.10.1 Shellfish as food From early historical accounts it seems obvious that coastal dwellers did not eat shellfish as a preference but as a necessity in times of hardship (Day 1918; Fenton 1984; Martin c. 1695). Shellfish of numerous types were used as food, but there is considerable regional variation in the consumption of different shellfish in Scotland. This topic, however, requires in-depth research of its own merits, for this plentiful natural resource gave rise to changes in social patterns within coastal settlements at least during the early 19th century (Fenton 1984). This study, however, is concerned primarily with evaluating shellfish as part of a wider exploitation of marine resources in the Western Isles during later Prehistory. Ethnographic analogies based on the wider repercussions of their value in later periods will nevertheless help us understanding their possible prehistoric uses. In the Western Isles mussel, limpets, whelks (Buccinum undatum L.), pecten, cockles and oysters have been used as food. The relative importance of these species in the archaeological record remains unclear but if the inhabitants of the Western Isles were using them for nourishment in times of scarcity, they must also have been an important supplement to the diet of prehistoric settlers. In North and South Uist, cockles would be gathered each summer, and eaten alone or boiled with milk (NSA 1848), while limpets and mussels were also eaten during times of scarcity (NSA 1845). Day (1918) describes how in Sollas, North Uist, after the potato famine, more than a hundred families lived for weeks off shellfish collected from the shore. Such accounts demonstrate that the farther back in time, the more emphasis there was on shellfish as an element of diet. Archaeological evidence seems to suggest that this might indeed have been the case (Pollard 1996), though perhaps not for every type of shellfish. Ethnographic accounts usually describe shellfishing for food as performed by women habitually, by children usually and by men only occasionally (Waselkov 1987). The regular contribution by women to subsistence diets is

5.9 Division of labour in fishing communities Fishing has commonly been considered as a man’s work. In most fishing societies the division of labour by gender and age indeed tends to be quite sharp. The masculine image of the industry, however, conceals the reality of this occupation: removing men to sea, makes them particularly dependent on the work of women and children ashore (Thomson 1985). The conventional image of fishing as a male occupation has thus grossly undermined and undervalued the real part played by women in the industry: women, in short, have almost everywhere made a central contribution to fishing through providing logistical support on land, both before and after fishing. Work ashore in preparation for fishing and disposing of the catch was left entirely to the women or shared with them. Work at sea, however, was reserved for men. This feeling is so strong that in many places women would not be allowed on a boat about to set off to sea. Furthermore, in many places the presence of women on vessels was considered a bad omen (Anson 1952, Thomson et al 1983, Thomson 1985). In most communities the men caught the fish and they normally relied on women both in preparations on shore, and still more generally in disposing of the fish caught. For example, the inshore line fishery relied on women for the gathering of bait, and cleaning both bait and lines. After the catch was landed, women would either split the 41

Lug-worms would also be used as an alternative bait: these were collected from the beach. Barnacles were collected for bait as well. Mussel was another important shellfish bait, gathered from ‘scalps’ (i.e. mussel beds) that dried at low tide and then used on hooked lines. They were mainly utilised in small lines fishing for catching whiting, haddock and cod. Fishermen on the Scottish coasts (Bertran 1885) considered the mussel the best type of bait. The hard task of gathering mussel fell mainly on women and children, who often had to trudge a distance of 6-7 km. When their creels were filled, they had to walk back with their heavy loads, after which the lines had to be baited (ibid.). Clams were used for catching haddock, and provided bait for 9-10 months each year, except during spawning time in May-June (Fenton 1984).

in this case too often undervalued. It is the widely recognised identification of women with shellfishing that is greatly responsible for the common reputation of shellfish as a low priority food-stuff in ethnohistoric and ethnographic accounts (Classen 1991). While most shellfish are lower in calories than other animal foods, many mollusc species are however rich in protein and essential minerals, rivalling other sources of meat for nutritional benefits (Classen 1991). This underlines the fact that women have contributed greatly to obtaining animal protein through their dominant role in the exploitation of shellfish. 5.10.2 Shellfish as bait It is worth repeating that women do most of the shellfishing in societies where shellfish is used for food. Archaeologists thus often assume that shellfish was solely for food, harvested and processed mainly by women. In fishing societies, however, there is an important place for shellfish as bait. Recognising that molluscs are used in significant numbers as bait has a profound impact on our reconstruction of the diet, site function and occupation, and even our consideration of gender assignments in shellfish gathering (Classen 1991). Fishing techniques depended greatly on the availability of fish species, and of equipment, but also importantly on the seasonal availability in the different types of bait (Fenton 1984). Limpets were gathered from rocks on the shore and since they cling on tenaciously to rocks, special implements were required for removing them. During the late 17th century, Martin Martin (c. 1675) describes the usage of limpet-hammers. In the Western Isles, Carmichel (1971) provides an account of the use of a 'limpet pick' (ordbhairnich) to remove shellfish from the rock to be used as bait. Fishermen from Great Bernera gathered limpets and periwinkles for bait from the middle shore. The limpets would be shelled and put directly on hooks, others would be chewed or part-boiled and used for fishing from the rocks with lines or with the 'tabh' (or poke-net). Crushed limpet, referred to as 'soll' in the Western Isles, were used in specific fishing locations from rocky areas. Limpet holes or 'leepits' would be carved off rocks to keep a supply of soll during rock fishing. Spence (1899) describes these as ‘cup holes’ in Shetland, where they were connected to ‘craig’ or rock fishing for saithe and the purpose of these was for holding ‘rooder for soe’ i.e. lure or bait. The bait used for catching young saithe off rocks in Shetland, as in Lewis, was mainly limpet, prepared by chewing. Spence also points out the possibility that the cup-marks were also intended as a sign of proprietary right to particular craig-sittings that may also have been passed on from generation to generation. In Lewis, limpets were principally used for catching saithe, cod and haddock. The ethnographic evidence shows that limpets have been mainly used for inshore line fishing.

5.11 Whaling and sealing Stranded whales have supplied food, oil and 'whalebone' for as early as mesolithic times (Martin 1995, 23), although it was not until the beginning of the 18th century that harpooning of whales in Scottish waters begun as an important industry (Martin 1995). Even before that date, however, whales are known to have been hunted in the Northern and Western Isles although opportunistically. Whales were so abundant in Loch Carloway at Kirkwick, that it was also known as the ‘Sea of Orcs’ (a 16th century term for whale from Latin orca, perhaps from Greek orux) during the 17th century (Martin Martin c.a. 1675). In the past the name Loch Carloway was given to all the sea from Gallan Head to Europe Point, whereas now a large part is made up of Loch Roag (or Loch Rogue, as mentioned by Martin Martin). He also described how in this little bay whales were so plentiful that they seriously interfered with fishing, though the ambergris found on its coast was welcomed. Ambergris (ambre gris, i.e. ‘grey amber’ in French) is a wax-like substance consisting mainly of cholesterol, secreted by the intestinal tract of the sperm whale and often found floating in the sea. It is used in perfumes. It is also said that the first man to find ambergris in Lewis lived on the small island of Little Bernera. He put the ambergris in his lamp but the fumes and strong smell made him ill, and so the qualities of the substance were discovered and became a valuable treasure-trove (Swire 1966, 34). However, whales were mainly hunted or stranded individuals, butchered for their oil and flesh (called 'seapork'), as well as the bones used for the production of artefacts, essentially as a substitute for wood. Whales were particularly abundant where herring shoals were present. They were then hunted from open boats: one whale would be targeted and hand-harpooned in the hope that once wounded, it would drift ashore followed by the rest of the school ready to be slaughtered by the shore. Martin Martin (c.a. 1695) describes how one year up to fifty whales were reportedly, slaughtered in this manner at Loch Carloway in Lewis. There is therefore sufficient evidence to assert that even if whales were hunted in early historical periods, as

42

(1701) also describes the skin-boats made with seal skins used by ‘Finnish men’ (probably Inuits) around the coasts of Orkney. Seal meat was also eaten by the poor during Lent instead of fish (Martin Martin c.a. 1695, 136). He also describes other techniques of catching seals in the Western Isles. One such way was to stretch horsehair nets across narrow channels. Before 1850 there was more emphasis on the grey seal as a natural resource for local inhabitants in the Western Isles. After 1850 the emphasis shifted to the conservation of the grey seal, but it took about a century to see the end of seal hunting in the Western Isles (Summers & Harwood 1979).

ethnographic records suggest, this activity was of an opportunistic nature, i.e. if whales appeared offshore, they would then be driven aground to be slaughtered. Alternatively, some whales simply stranded themselves and were preyed upon by humans. Martin Martin (c.a. 1695) also describes the strandings of some one-hundred and sixty small whales in Tiree. In those days there was great scarcity in the island and its inhabitants took the meat, which they regarded as highly nutritious and as tasty as beef, with relief, Seals have been hunted all around the Scottish coast, particularly in the Northern and Western Isles (Martin 1995). The earliest written records of seals in the Western Isles are also of seal hunts. The skins, oil and meat were probably an essential part of economy. In 1549, Monro (1774) describes the island of Haskeir in the Outer Hebrides as ‘ane isle, callit Haysker, quherin infinit slaughter of selchis (seals) is’. MacGillivary (1842) also gives detailed accounts of grey seal hunting at Haskeir where, at the beginning of November, a large boat filled with men would leave North Uist by night. Armed with clubs they would separate into two groups: one would attack the seals upon the rocks, the other would cut off their retreat to the water. Most seals were killed by repeated blows about the root of the nose, their most vulnerable spot. Seals were hunted annually: the numbers of seals killed could be as many as 120. Overall, however, the numbers of grey seals taken in the hunts were probably few since exposure to swell made landings difficult, but also because most boats were small, and therefore the risks great (Boyd 1963). Sometimes seals were taken in the same opportunistic manner as whales, particularly grey seal and common seal, since they congregate on shores and islands to breed. They were usually clubbed to death, their oil extracted and meat eaten. In Martin Martin’s description (c.a.1695), the yearly ‘fishing of seals’ in the Western Isles was held at the end of October (MacGillivary 1842), the breeding season of the grey seal. The meat of pups was preferred for eating because of its tenderness. It was, however, reputed to have been less palatable than whale meat, and was only taken by the poorest folk at the time (Martin 1995). By the age of 3 weeks a grey seal pub will yield, in addition to 12 to 18 kg of meat, some 20 to 30 kg of blubber (sometimes up to 60 kg). Therefore pursuing seals at the breeding season was more advantageous (Clarke 1946). Like fishing therefore sealing was incorporated into a seasonal activity cycle. In most places the right of sealing belonged to farmers on lands adjacent to the seals’ breeding rocks. In Shetland, seal oil was used for collie lamps. The skin was removed first and used for rivlins (i.e. leather waterproof) which was softer than cow-hide particularly in dry summer weather. Bradt (1701) describes the use of seal skins for clothing by the inhabitants of the Northern Isles. The blubber had been removed and melted in the open air. Although the smell was quite overwhelming the oil, once hot, would not smell so strongly. The meat and the skins would be preserved by salt (SA 1974). Bradt

5.12 A note on the uses of seaweed Communities exploiting seaweed may collect the cast as drift weed, generally thrown on shore by storms, or by cutting the weed from rocks at low tides. One of the major uses of seaweed in the Scottish Islands has been for fertiliser (Fenton 1986), but it was also consumed as food. The earliest recorded use of seaweed as animal feed is by Linnaeus who, in 1745, observed the mixing of boiled bladderwrack with bran to feed pigs, on North Ronaldsay, Orkney. There blackfaced sheep were pastured during the lambing season, but for at least ten months a year were fed entirely on seaweed (Round 1973). In Lewis, seaweed fodder was stored in a small hut, the tigh-an-fhaomainn, or seaweed house (Fenton 1976). In addition to seaweed serving as fertiliser and fodder, Martin Martin during his tour of the Outer Hebrides recorded that the ashes of ‘sea-ware’ (seaweed) were used for salting seal meat. He went on to comment that in St. Kilda burnt ashes of ‘sea-ware’ were used instead of salt to preserve cheese (see 4.6.2). 5.13 Conclusion This chapter has summarised ethnographic patterns of fishing practices, particularly in the island of Great Bernera and elsewhere in the Hebrides prior to the early 20th century. The vital importance of understanding one’s environment in ancient times has again been stressed. The chapter greatly relied on this author’s observations as well as on accounts by retired local fishermen interviewed by her, in addition to the written records made by the late George MacLeod (c.a.1969) whose hand-written accounts on fishing lore of the island of Great Bernera are housed at the Bernera Community Museum. References were also made to accounts from retired fishermen from other parts of the Hebridean Islands as well as other areas of Scotland, based on recordings housed at the School of Scottish Studies archive at the University of Edinburgh. Old ethnographic records, such as Martin Martin’s documents, were also addressed. Accounts from the Northern Isles were included as well for purposes of comparison where required (Fenton 1978, Goodlad 1971, Colley 1983 & 1989).

43

This chapter focused on the direct interaction of the people of the islands with the sea. It has attempted to expose the close relationship the inhabitants of such remote areas had with their environment, even language itself developing according to observation by people of their surroundings. Fishing methods were described as well as the different implements required for catching different species. Types of man-powered boats and the use of natural landmarks for directing the crews to and from the shore to the fishing grounds were also described. This review further stresses the close interaction between people and their environment, before any technology helped fishermen to either venture out to sea safely or return to the safety of the land. It has also been stressed that an activity as fishing in particular, requires organisation and knowledge of the natural environment which is being exploited. Fishermen must know where and when to find the fish (i.e. what time of the year) and how to catch it. Species identified among the archaeological fish remains from Bostadh Beach have been analysed (Chapter 7) against the ethnographic background in this chapter, in comparison to fishing practices used in the island before the introduction of steam-powered boats. Interpretations of the molluscs and marine mammals in the assemblage have also been considered in this manner.

44

common, but least understood, artefacts. The poor survival of skins suggests that they were oiltanned or smoked, rather than vegetable tanned. Furthermore, there are suggestions that vegetable tanning was a Roman introduction as leather finds in Roman sites are quite common throughout Southern Britain (Haslegrove et al. 2001). The reason for this may also be that soils in Scotland are generally more acidic than those of England. The chalk soils of southern England are very alkaline due to the neutralising influence of calcium carbonate. This may greatly influence the survival of leather found on Roman sites in England, where leather is not attacked by acids in the soil because they are generally neutralised (Adrian Tams pers. comm. 2002). Metal is usually considered as either non-ferrous and ferrous. Ferrous metals include all forms of iron,iron alloys and these have a higher possibility of preservation than the non-ferrous types. Non-ferrous metals are composed primarily of elements other than iron; amongst these non-ferrous metals the most common in prehistory are copper, bronze and lead.

Chapter 6: A preliminary overview of fishing artefacts in the Scottish archaeological record 6.1 Introduction Since fishing is one of the major themes of this work, at least an outline assessment on fishing technology through time was considered necessary. Due to the lack of consistent data concerning prehistoric on-site fishing implements from Scotland, as opposed to fish remains, accountability for fishing gear leads here to issues of possibility and conjecture. This chapter has therefore been developed as a preliminary overview of fishing gear. It was also necessary to draw parallels from other known sources worldwide, both archaeological and ethnographic. It must therefore be stressed that the scope of this overview is limited, i.e. it is by no means a complete survey of fishing implements recovered from archaeological sites throughout Scotland. The material here discussed was compiled by looking at selective museum collections, including those on display at the National Museum of Scotland in Edinburgh, the Shetland Museum, the Local History Museum in Great Bernera and the Scottish Fisheries Museum in Anstruther, Fife. Research was also undertaken to find as many artefacts as possible in publications such as the Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland and Antiquity. Some of these findings are listed in Table 6.1.

6.4 The beginnings of fishing Fishing, a form of primary production, is older than agriculture; the history of fishing, including that of fishing methods and pertinent artefacts, is as old as humankind. Fish bone was discovered along with hominid remains in Olduvai Gorge, northern Tanzania (von Brandt 1984). From prehistoric times until the very recent past, fish constituted an important and apparently inexhaustible source of food. Ancient kitchen middens have yielded bones of many species from both fresh and sea water. The artefacts of the earliest civilisations reflect the extent to which the sea and its resources were incorporated into the subsistence of ancient peoples. Fishing implements have formed part of the material culture of most people. For the prehistoric fisherman, as for the small-scale fisherman at present, a basic knowledge of fish behaviour combined with the simplest gear, would be sufficient to secure a catch. Although fishing gear appears to have evolved into different types, their creation, growth and distribution remains rather obscure (von Brandt 1984). Fishing developed from the idea of capturing fish to the benefit of humans. While the basic concept is simple, it is generally unknown for many regions whether fishing evolved locally or whether it spread there by diffusion. The relation between these two possibilities depended on the interplay between geography, the animals targeted and cultural tradition. Freshwater fishing in isolated areas was more likely to develop relatively autochtonously compared with the exploitation of fish along major rivers or along exposed sea shores. Particularly in marginal environments, humans often invented similar solutions for exploiting their scarce resources, which may have lead to purely functional similarities between fishing gear, for example from Greenland to Tierra del Fuego. It may be hypothesised that the nature of the prey also had an influence on the development and distribution of

6.2 Artefacts in context Artefacts are multi-dimensional objects which can be understood at different levels. They provide information about the context and the site where they were found, as well as data about the phases of occupation of a site, from the time of production to the object's discard. These dimensions, however, may only be comprehensible in terms of a wider regional study (Haslegrove et al. 2001). 6.3 Function and materials For many artefacts retrieved in archaeological contexts function remains a mystery. A general lack of research and analysis directed at the use of artefacts may be partly to blame. Furthermore, the value of local ethnography should also be better appreciated and applied to such studies. Traditional ethnographic haunts such as the Northern Isles (Fenton 1978) contribute a wealth of information and the means to construct analogies. And while ethnographic analogy is an indication of possibility rather than certainty, local parallels would logically have more validity than ‘exotic’ ones, though when necessary these should also be taken into account. Organic materials (e.g. bone, antler, skins, fibre, wood) must have been extensively used for the production of artefacts during prehistory, but they suffer from poorer preservation than do inorganic items. These latter (e.g. stone, metal) tend to survive better. The difficulties of identifying the functions of bone and indeed of stone tools are a key obstruction to reconstructing lifestyle and site function, as they represent some of the most 45

of the line wedged it across the gullet of the fish, which could be then pulled in. At Clickhimin broch in Shetland, fish gorges made of tin and bronze were also recovered. The gorge would have been attached to a handline of animal or vegetable material and used mainly from a boat. The practice of attaching the line to a rod, which could have been made from a branch or stick, made it easier to catch fish from the shore. The gorge is certainly older than the curved hook. Of all fishing gear, however, the most familiar is the fish hook. Depending on the rate of decay of the materials used, fish hooks made of stone and metals would have had better chances of survival than those made from wood, shell, bone or horn. Wood rots and, depending on soil conditions, even shell, bone and horn deteriorate more rapidly than stone or metals. There is good reason to believe that the first fish hooks were probably made of wood. A branch with twigs sticking out at suitable angles would make a relatively good hook. Fishermen in the British Isles have used plants with natural thorns such as the hawthorn (Crataegus sp.) as hooks. From Wales to the Thames, such thorn hooks were used to catch flounders up to 1895. They were sticks with a point or a barb made harder by baking (von Brandt 1984, 71). This type of fish hook advanced into a pointed or barbed stick made by joining two pieces of stick together to form a compound wooden hook (ibid.). Up to the end of the 19th century, Sami (Lapp) fishermen in Norway used wooden fish hooks in the great cod fisheries in the Lofoten Islands (Hurum 1977). The Makah people, who inhabited the Olympic Peninsula along the Northwest Coast of the USA, were great halibut fishermen. Their wooden hooks were made of yew (Taxus sp.), fir (Abies sp.), spruce (Picea sp.) or hemlock knotwood (Tsuga sp.). They were U-shaped, steam-bent hooks, whose flaring, curved back tip ensured that the fish took the baited part carrying the barb (Stewart 1982). Traditional cod fishing by the Tlingit, Haida and Tsimshian, inhabiting the Pacific Coast of Canada, also made great use of bent-wood hooks. Unlike the aforementioned Mekah tradition, however, the bentwood fish hook style was abandoned in the area of the Canadian coastline by the historic period (Croes 1997). Two wooden gorges recovered at Milton Loch Crannog in SW Scotland (Piggott 1952-53), have been described as gorges used for catching cormorants, rather than fish, because of their size. With the development of metals, the fish hook was probably one of the first tools made. Hooks were attached to a handline of animal or vegetable material, a method that is efficient only when used from a boat. Tying the line in turn to a rod, at first probably a stick or tree branch, made it possible to fish from the bank or shore and even to reach over vegetation bordering the water. In Norway, finds of bone material, included equipment for hunting and fishing for the early prehistoric periods (Hurum 1977). It has been suggested that if hooks were made from bone in prehistoric Scotland, their survival in the archaeological record may be minimal since bone, when used for hooks, has a tendency to break (ibid.).

fishing methods and fishing gear. Scavenging on stranded whales required little beyond household tools. Similarly, exploiting localised stocks (e.g. inshore fishing or mollusc gathering) could also be carried out with simple, ad hoc gear (or even by hand). Tools for such purposes had more chance of remaining localised types. For example, the ‘Obanian culture’ has in part been defined on the basis of ‘limpet scoops’ (Bishop 1914; Bonsall 1996; Griffiths & Bonsall 2000) which, if they were indeed used in this local gathering activity, would be a typically non-diffused type of gear. Humans, however, had to develop equipment that was most efficient for preying upon the type of creature pursued. This contributed to diversity in the inventory of implements. Such artefacts were more likely to cover long distances during use, and thus be exposed to other communities and even traded. The emergence of seafaring communities evidently accelerated the diffusion and exchange of many objects, ideas and techniques, including those of fishing. Although large amounts of fish remains have been recovered from excavations throughout Scotland from the Mesolithic period onwards, relatively few artefacts of fishing gear have been found. Sites such as Sand, Crowling 3 and Toscaig in Skye, dated to the Mesolithic period, have yielded large quantities of fish remains with a variety of fish species represented (Cerón-Carrasco 2000). Neolithic sites such as Geirisclett Chambered Tomb (Cerón-Carrasco 2003) in South Uist and Loch Olabhat (Cerón-Carrasco 1998f) also contained considerable amounts of fish remains. However, no fishing implements (weights, harpoons, fishing points or gorges, fish spools and hooks, etc.) were recovered from any of these excavations. The main reason for the apparent lack of fishing gear in the archaeological record may be due to poor preservation of the materials used for making these implements. Another factor may be the misinterpretation of certain artefacts. For example net weights made from stone are often identified by comparison with other, similar, ethnographic objects. There has been a common practice among artefact specialists to refer to most stone artefacts bearing holes as 'loom weights'. Only a very few of them have been described as line-sinkers. For example at Jarlshof (Shetland), only one such artefact has been so identified, after comparison with a modern leaden object (Curle 1934). Harpoons, although suggesting fishing activity, can also be used for hunting land game (Choyke & Bartosiewicz 1994). Fish ‘spools’ (fishing weights) have sometimes also been interpreted as spindle whorls (MacGregor 1985). 6.5 Fish hooks and gorges (Figures 6.1 and 6.2) The danger that fish may let go of the bait and escape drove humans to devise artefacts that prevented its release by the prey. One of man's earliest tools was the gorge (predecessor of the fishhook). This simple fishing tool was originally made of wood, bone or stone of ca. 2.5 cm in length, pointed at both ends and secured off-centre to a line. The gorge was covered with bait and when the fish swallowed it, a pull 46

However, whereas poor bone preservation in acid soils may be responsible for the lack of this type of evidence, one would expect to find at least fragments of possible bone hooks, or at least debris of bone hook carving, particularly in well-protected alkaline shell middens. Remains of bone hooks should be found along with tens of thousands of surviving tiny fish bones. The chief reason for their ansence in this author’s opinion is that fish hooks are typically used and lost off-site, so that short of discovering a workshop, they will always be rare on settlements. Excavations at Torrs Cave in Kirkcudbright, SW Scotland, (Iron Age) produced several artefacts made from bone, amongst which was a fish hook. There were also bones with holes pierced through them (Morris 1937). Two fish hooks, one carved in bone and another made of shell, were found on the island of Sanday in Orkney (Farrer 1864).. However, they were surface finds of uncertain date. At Bostadh Beach, one large bone hook was recovered, broken in two (Figure 6.2). Although no parallel is known from Scotland, this author considers that this item was used for fishing. This hypothesis is strongly supported by the presence of large cod bone from individuals that would have measured well over 150 cm in length in nearby deposits. At Jarlshof, Shetland, an iron fish hook was recovered, but this disintegrated shortly after retrieval and only a drawing of it survives, iron boat rivets were also recovered here and a tablet from a slab stone depicting the drawing of a Viking ship (Curle 1934). Hamilton (1956) reported that a further fishing hook made of iron was recovered at House 3 of the Viking and Later Norse Settlement excavated at Jarlshof. This hook, approximately 10 cm long, had an attachment loop and a barbed point. At Culbin Sands inMoray, NE Sutherland,, poorly preserved iron fish hooks, associated with Medieval pottery, were recovered (Black 1981). They measured 5-8 cm in length and were very similar to those still used in the area at the time of the excavation. Excavations in the fishing town of Eyemouth, Berwickshire, (Dixon 1986) produced several metal fish hooks, dated to the 14th-16th centuries. They had barbed ends and flattened heads for attachment to the line. The size range of these hooks was 44-60 mm (Ford 1986). At the medieval site of Finlaggan on Islay, Inner Hebrides, an iron fish hook was also recovered. While Finlaggan is an island settlement in the middle of a loch with plenty of salmon, trout and eel available, only large amounts of cod bones were recovered there. It was concluded that this high status household was supplied with fresh marine food and the fish hook recovered has also been used at sea (Cerón-Carrasco 2001). At Dundrennan Abbey, in Dumfries and Galloway, Scotland, a similar fish hook was also retrieved from a deposit dated to the 16th Century (Ewart 1999). Fish bones recovered at this site included the remains of large cod and haddock whose capture would have required such hooks (Cerón-Carrasco 1996).

6.6 Harpoons and spears The spear is, in its simplest form, one of the most primitive items of fishing gear. It was developed, like the hunting spear, to extend the reach of the human arm (von Brandt 1984). Using a spear is not as easy in water as it is onland, and requires careful calculation of the light refraction in the water: due to the refraction of light by the water surface, the fish appears to swim higher and further away than its actual position (Figure 6.3). Fishing spears have been known for over 10,000 years and such spears can be found in all fisheries around the world. Unfortunately, in archaeological assemblages they are difficult to identify as whether they were used as fish spear, hunting spear, combat weapon, agricultural tool or even as a ceremonial artefact (ibid.). Fishing with spears must be performed in calm and shallow waters and the fish to be caught must be lying still for some time and in the same place, unless it is found in large shoals. The main differences between harpoons and spears are that harpoons could be either hurled or used to stab fish while spears were only used for stabbing (Figure 6.4). Harpoons were also longer and more strongly built than spears. They were therefore used to catch larger species of fish. The native peoples of the Northwest Coast of America devised different types of harpoons for specialised fishing. Various fish species required different harpoon types. Changing water conditions also required specific harpoon types as was the case with salmon catching in clear rivers or streams, or in bays and inlets (Figure 6.5). The spearing of flounders in sandy substrates also required different types of harpoons. Harpoons were also made from a variety of woods (Stewart 1982). British fish spears have been classified into two groups: the first group consists of 'transfixing spears', with one or more barbed with which the fish is pierced and secured. Such spears were chiefly used in catching salmon, flounders, pike, in fact most of the edible fishes inhabiting shallow waters (Green 1948). The second group of spears found in the British Isles consists of eelspears, which were mainly made of iron (ibid.). In Scotland fish-spears or leisters (Fenton 1969) were commonly used for catching salmon. Spawners were speared in the gravelly shallows at night, ‘aided by a great torch, or blaze as it was called, consisting of dried broom or fir tops, fastened round a pole’ (Martin 1995, 43). In a study of Scottish salmon fishing spears, Fenton (1969) analysed their history in relation to their dialect names. He concluded that the Norse element in the terminology suggests that the fishing spear, ‘leister’, or its form was influenced by the Vikings, although it is likely that such equipment were known and used before the arrival of the Norse. Eel-spears have been described in detail by Green (1948). These are different from other fishing spears, such as salmon spears, flounder spears, or to pike spears. Eel spears consist of flat strips of iron, usually with rounded ends, set close together. These function to trap or ‘jam’ the eel between the tines, otherwise the fish would be ruined (Green 1948). 47

boat on the other hand uses frames, and thus appears to represent one of the stages leading to the later Norwegian boat. The distribution of log dug-out boats in Scotland includes examples mainly from central and southern Scotland, with clusters of finds in the Firth of Clyde, Dumfries and Galloway (Mowat 1996). As in Norway, they appear to be associated with inland waters and the best available timber resource. Almost all of them appear to be medieval, rather than prehistoric (Sayce 1945; Maxwell 1951; Mowat 1996; Cheape 1999). The earliest securely dated human presence along the West Coast of Scotland is the Mesolithic site at Kinloch on Rum, Inner Hebrides (Wickham-Jones 1990) an offshore island which could have been reached by boat.. There is no direct evidence of boats from that period, but there can be little doubt that they offered the easiest and quickest method of travelling until recent times. The coracle is a roundish boat of waterproofed hides stretched over a wicker frame, called a curach in Scotland. It was used for fishing, ferrying and for timberfloating in the Highlands of Scotland. Its survival has also been investigated in detail by Fenton (1972). This type of boat, however, appears to have been used mainly in inland waters, lochs or rivers. Obvious similarities between the Highland galleys and Norse longships could lead to the conclusion that no seafaring practice developed in the Western Isles prior to the arrival of the Norse. However, references exist in Irish annals that appear to incorporate entries from lost Iona chronicles. A document known as the ‘Senchus fer n’Alban’, dated to the 10th century AD, but possibly originating from as early as the 7th century AD, details the levy or boat service arrangements to Dalriada (i.e. Scotland). Furthermore, the cross-slab from Cossans, Angus, East Scotland, gives a Pictish representation of a boat (Figure 6.9). The hypothetical importance of boats in fishing is supported by the recovery of iron boat rivets. At Smoo Cave in Sutherland, boat rivets characteristic of the Norse period were recovered. Lumps of iron ore and the waste products of smelting, including slag, strongly suggest that rivets and boat nails were manufactured within the caves (Pollard 1996). The discovery of a Viking boat burial at Scar, Sanday in Orkney revealed a pattern of iron nails and rivets which once fastened planks of wood (oak with a washrail of Scots pine). Over 300 iron fastenings were found, demonstrating that this was a clinker-built with overlapping planks (Allen 1999) (Figure 6.10). The keel of the Scar boat measured approximately 7.15 m (Owen 1999).

Harpoons recovered in Scottish archaeological deposits dated to the Mesolithic period, were made mainly from bone, for example those found at Druimvairgie rockshelter and at the MacArthur Cave, both in Oban (Breuil 1921). Another example came from Cnoc Sligeach in Oronsay (Breuil 1921), (Figure 6.6). A bone harpoon, also described as a fish spear, was recovered at Foshigarry (Callander 1931) (Figure 6.6). It had a barbed point and a socket bored in the opposite end and measured 4-eighteen inches (12 cm) in length. At Dun Beag, Skye, an almost 4 inches (10cm) long, spear-like object made of iron was recovered. It had a small, spatulate head, reminiscent to the head of a fish spear (Callander 1920). 6.7 The fishing rod For thousands of years, the fishing rod remained short, not longer than a few feet (a metre or so). The earliest reference to a longer, jointed rod is from Roman times, about the AD 4th century. At that time also, Aelian (Claudius Aelianus) wrote of Macedonians catching trout with artificial flies and described how each fly was made. The rod used was only 6 feet (1.8 m) long and the line was of the same length, so that the method used was probably dapping, gently laying the bait on the surface of the water (Radcliffe 1926). 6.8 Boats, boat rivets and nails Archaeologists and experts in rock carving have formed two hypotheses on the origins of boats and boat building. One considers skin-boats to be the original type of boat, the other attributes their origins to dug-out boats (Hasslof 1972). Both arguments have been based on prehistoric boat finds and rock carvings as well as by analogy with the skin boats mainly of the native inhabitants of the Polar region. The skin-boat theory was greatly developed by Brøgger (1971), who argued that natural conditions and cultural environment played a dominant part in the development of boat making. For Norway, he argued, where most prehistoric settlements were situated in coastal areas, it was evident that most ancient communities presupposed the existence of boats, as do the ways in which people have made their living for thousands of years along the coasts (Figure 6.7). Brøgger argued that in the far North, where there are no forests, skin-boats were the oldest and most important boat type. Dug-outs, on the other hand, were a product of the widespread forestlands. The oldest known such boats have been discovered in lakes and rivers (Hasslof 1972). Brøgger went on further to stress the fact that in Norway, dug-out boats were the basis for the development of the Norwegian plank-boat itself. The character and distribution of dug-out boats recovered in Scotland have recently been systematically catalogued by Mowat (1996) and a more recent evaluation of log dug-out boats in mainland Europe and Britain has been made by Cheape (1999). The shape of single-log dug-out boats is often related (both in prehistoric finds and recent specimens) to the natural shape of the tree-trunk (Figure 6.8). The skin

6.9 Fishing nets The first fishing equipment may have been made of wooden materials such as sticks and flexible branches. The only references to fishing nets dating to prehistoric times in Northern Europe are so far those described by Keller (1878) that dated to the Bronze Age and those described by Munro (1890) dating to the Neolithic. Various fibres have been used in net-making and the 48

Scotland, is one of the simplest and least labour intensive devices for catching fish. The basic principle is quite simple: a permanent barrier or partial enclosure is constructed across a route commonly used by fish. It must be positioned in such a way that the fish are deflected into the area from which they cannot escape. Various designs have been employed in rivers, estuaries and the intertidal zone. Most are V-shaped enclosures often with a small weir or gate at the apex. Tidal fish weirs have the open end of the V-phase towards the high water mark although they are often angled towards the ebb flow. The types of fish sought influence weir design and structure. An article in Country Life (Anon. 1914) notes that some species of fish move towards the shore with the flood tide and then follow the ebb tide down and along the shore. The most basic fish weir type takes account of this and has one arm approximately 90 to the shore with the outer arm running roughly parallel to the ebb tide and hence close to parallel with the shore. The outer arm usually has a hooked or inturning end. The fish therefore come up against the arm running from the shore at ebb tide and head for deeper water at which point they will hopefully be trapped behind the inturning outer arm by the falling water levels. The walls of the weirs may be made from stone, or stakes with wattle woven between them, or a combination of the two. Fish traps on the northwest coast of Scotland consisted of low concentric barriers of piled stones. Till recent times such traps were still being used in some parts of the Western Isles. They were called ‘caraidhs’ and were built of stones, like the example known between Fladday Island and Raasay near Skye (Lethbridge 1952), other examples can be found in Badachro and Eilean Tionam (Figure 6.12) and at Torridon (Figure 6.13) in Western Ross. They were normally located in the upper reaches of lochs or inlets, which exhibit a wide tidal range. It is likely that most remaining fish traps post-date the Medieval period, with many of them being used at least as late as the mid-nineteenth century. Prehistoric examples, some of which may have been constructed from timber, have yet to be identified in Scotland but may well have survived submerged beneath silts, possibly in locations removed from the contemporary shoreline (Pollard 1996). Several surveys on intertidal fish traps (Table 6.1) have produced a relatively rich record of fishing traps or yairs in Scotland. The New English Dictionary defines ‘yair’ as ‘an enclosure extending into a tideway in a river or on the seashore, for catching fish’. Regardless of where they were built, yairs or fish-traps were placed with great skill and knowledge of fish habitats and habits. A wicker framework of wattle may originally have closed their entrance after the fish entered them (Bathgate 1948-49). Nets replaced built yairs in later periods. Cressey and Hale (1999) undertook the most recent survey of fish traps in the Inner Moray Firth region. They found that fish traps were mostly positioned in the intertidal zone between the Mean High Water Mark (MHWM) and the Mean Low Water Mark (MLWM). In this area of Scotland, the fish traps were mainly concentrated in in the Beauly and Cromarty Firths and

technique itself survived right to the present. The main fibre available in Scotland was flax (Linum usitatissimum L.) , common from the late 1st Millenium AD and by the eighteenth century spinning of flax and weaving of nets had become a cottage industry although some fishermen, particularly in the East Coast, made their own nets (Martin 1998). Netting needles were carved from wood, particularly elder (Sambucus nigra) and dogrose (Rosa carina), or from animal bone that had been first boiled to soften it and then flattened under a board (ibid.). Nets required great care as these would decay quite rapidly and had to be repaired frequently. They had to be dried and cleaned of any bacteria that may increase their rate of decay (Klust 1982). In the early 19th century, netdrying poles were used as ‘hangers’ to dry nets: these were made from sturdy wooden uprights (poles), usually the trunks of trees (Martin 1998). Netting needles for making and mending nets may be the only evidence for their use in prehistory. At Smoo Cave in Sutherland, Scotland, perforated pieces of antler and bone may represent needles used in the manufacture and repair of fishing nets (Pollard 1998). This hypothesis is supported by the fact that considerable amounts of herring bone remains were also recovered in the caves (Cerón-Carrasco 1989), herring is a pelagic fish and netting is required for its catching. 6.10 Sinkers Sinkers may vary in size from a small pebble to a hefty rock, either grooved or perforated for attaching a rope. The larger sinkers functioned as anchors to maintain the position of an item of fishing gear underwater. Small and medium size sinkers were used with a hook and line. Similar stones weighted the bottom edge of a net to hold it taut (Stewart 1982). Several line sinkers, dated to the Viking and Later Norse periods, were reported from the excavations at Jarlshof, Shetland by Hamilton (1956) (Figure 6.11). At Scalloway, Shetland, a hogback fishing weight, a distinctive Norse object, was recovered (Clarke & Sharman 1999). 6.11 Fish traps Fishing with primitive fishing equipment is confined to shallow waters as inshore waters lend themselves to methods such as passive trapping. Areas with fluctuating water levels made fishing easier in freshwater and in tidal areas along the sea coast. A basic form of sea trap exploited the natural mechanism of the tide. Fish spread into inundated areas and were stranded there after the water fell. To increase the number of tidal pools, pits were probably dug in areas likely to be flooded. Such pits must have been the first barriers designed to capture and retain fish (von Brandt 1984). Barriers can be made of different materials, such as heavy boarding made of thick wood andother constructions using shrubs, wickerwork, mats or netting. Permanent barriers, on the other hand, were made of piled up stones (ibid.). The fish trap or fish weir, or fish 'yair' as it is known in 49

appear to have been designed for catching salmon. The seasonal runs of migratory salmon and sea trout swim through marine river channels that at low water often act as holding pools. The fish then use the flood tide to progress further upstream. The traps were placed at right angles or obliquely to the channel so the fish could be funnelled into the traps interior (Cressey & Hale 1999, 271). The remains found in this area varied from low mounds or arcs of stone, to small concentrations of wooden stakes protruding from the foreshore and composite wooden and stone structures (ibid.). A similar coastal survey for erosion assessment was undertaken for Lewis by Burgess & Church (1997). A compilation of fish-related activity was drawn from their findings (Table 6.2). The only fish trap scheduled under the Ancient Monument legislation in Lewis is that at Barraglom (NB 13SE) Figure 6.14). The Historic Scotland Ancient Monuments Warden for the area reported that such fish traps run from each shore to an islet roughly in the centre of the Tob. Tob a’Chlachain (English = the inlet with the Causeway), is situated 100 m E of the main Bernera Road, 300 m beyond the Bernera Bridge. In addition to these fish traps, two areas of cupmarked stones on rock outcrops and the scheduled (protected) fish trap are situated to the NW (Murdie 1999) Figure 6.14 in Rubha nan Sidhean. 6.12 Conclusion The implements for fishing, the means of acquiring fish as food, and the knowledge acquired in the course of thousands of years, illustrate the development of fishing. It seems that a degree of conservatism has existed in the use of certain fishing implements. This suggests that the means of fishing are perfectly functional and what has changed is actually the material from which the implements were made and their size. This chapter is only a brief overview of fishing implements in the Scottish archaeological record. It is by no means a thorough study and least of all a catalogue of all fishing implements found so far. This review was in fact developed with the intention of showing that whereas very few fishing artefacts have been reported in the literature, such finds do exist and that some progress in fishing technology can be traced. The fact that fish remains have been found in archaeological contexts dating from at least the Mesolithic period in Scotland, attests to the use of some fishing technology in most periods of human occupation here. The recovery of fishing gear alongside fish remains in archaeological contexts, however, continues to be highly unlikely, as they may occur as off-site losses rather than be buried alongside fish remains. Experimentation and local ethnographic analogies, however, may provide insights into the variety of artefacts and materials most probably used for the production of prehistoric fishing gear. Such ethnographic data should at least partially fill the vacuum in the archaeological record.

50

extensively exploited and therefore played an important part in the subsistence economy of the site.

Chapter 7: Archaeological signatures, ethnography and modern fisheries biology: the Bostadh Beach case study

7.3 The archaeological evidence 7.1 Introduction The site at Bostadh Beach consisted of a multi-period settlement in a dune system that included a rectilinear structure and associated midden sealing three circular structures with circular annexes: Houses 1, 2 and 3. The excavation subsequently revealed the structures of an additional house (House 4). Radiocarbon dates appear to show that these structures date from AD 8th-9th centuries (Scottish Universities Research and Reactor Centre 2002) Table 7.1. They are semi-subterranean, round stone houses with south-facing entrances, each with at least one annex. The walls have drystone inner and outer faces with sand and midden cores. The roof appears to have had a symmetrically placed central ridge. Indeed the outer face of the vertical wall is mainly required to support the wall core for the roof to balance on. The resulting roof tapers down to the north, and is a perfect shape to face into the north wind. Each house had a centrally placed hearth (Neighbour 1999; 2001; forthcoming). The Bostadh Beach site represents the remains of a settlement sequence from Late Iron Age (Pictish) ca. 400 AD to ca. AD 800 to putative early Norse times, ca. AD 800 to ca. AD 1050. Although, the recent radiocarbon dates for Bostadh Beach have produced a set of absolute dates ranging from the AD 8th to the 10th c. (Scottish Universities Research and Reactor Centre 2002), the chronological framework relies on the stratigraphic and typological sequences first developed by the excavator of the site, Mr T. Neighbour. In this, he conformed to standard views, in which the ninth century and onwards are envisaged as the Norse Period in Northern Atlantic Scotland, although the dates for Bostadh may indicate that the appearance of the Norse at this particular site may have been delayed. While this sequence (transition from the Late Iron Age to the Early Norse period), is commonly recognised by excavations in Orkney, very few Hebridean sites displaying this succession have so far been recognised and excavated. The few examples so far found in the Western Isles include the Udal in North Uist (Crawford 1996) and Bornish in South Uist (Sharples 1999; 2005). The lack of suitable faunal assemblages in the study area has meant that the period has not been widely researched from the archaeozoological perspective. Fish remains from Bostadh Beach therefore add important data to the Scottish ichthyo-archaeological record developed principally for the Northern Isles and Caithness (Barrett et al. 1999). In this chapter, the existing models for the Late Iron Age (also referred to as the ‘Pictish’ period) marine economy developed by Barrett et al. (1999) are tested. Particular attention is paid to the co-existence of a range of fishing techniques and the seasonality of exploitation. It will be argued that Pictish period fishing was different from that practised during the Norse occupation. The Norse midden material at Bostadh also indicates changes in fishing practices in terms of the mode of

Throughout the development of this work, it has become apparent that fish remains alone will not help us to reconstruct aspects of the economy and social organisation of a given site. This Chapter illustrate the fact that such links are necessary within the study of archaeozoological material through the incorporation of archaeological and ethnographic interpretation as well as modern fish biology data. Jochim (1976) pointed out the importance of choice in a prehistoric society. This includes the choice of which resources to utilise, decisions as to their proportional use, and the allocation of time utilisation accorded to them, as well as the spatial arrangement chosen to accomplish their exploitation. All these factors require time and energy and can be envisaged as structuring the subsistence pattern of human settlement. Another factor concerns the nature of the choices made whether, for example, they are the result of long term planning and consideration of goals or are more opportunistic. Jochim identified three major problem areas: resource use scheduling, site placement and demographic arrangement. Furthermore, scheduling resource use included the identification of the following: means i.e. resources, environment, measures of performance and management considerations. Another important point in the exploitation of natural resources, is risk-minimisation. Environmental factors affect performance; therefore climate, geography and seasonal conditions must be taken into account in the approach to risk. Dunning (1959) considered that the importance of fishing among the Ojibwa in the Pacific Coast of North America was based on the fact that it was the most reliable source of food. It is therefore possible elsewhere that the reliability of successful accomplishment may have been a principal consideration in prehistoric food procurement. Settlement location is also important, and it has long been recognised that the form, size and permanence of human settlement bear a definite relationship to the modes of exploiting the natural environment practiced there (Murdoch 1969; Jochim 1976; 1981). 7.2 The Bostadh Beach settlement, Great Bernera, and its fishing Bostadh Beach in Great Bernera (Lewis, Western Isles; OS NB137402) is located within what is presently rapidly eroding machair (Figure 7.1). Its position, by a white sandy beach and surrounded by a rocky shore, allowed easy access to a rich variety of marine resources. The location of the archaeological deposits at Bostadh Beach within a calcareous environment led to an extraordinary degree of preservation of environmental material. The large numbers of fish and shellfish remains recovered indicate that marine resources were generally and 51

House 3 consisted of four cells (G, H, J and L) which were inter-linked, and whilst it is probable that at one time all the cells were in use together, the lack of stratigraphic links made it impossible to equate the sequences in all the components of this structure. It is assumed, however, that Structures G and L were constructed at the same time. Structures J and H are suspected to have had a longer occupation period. Morphologically House 3 was more complex than Houses 1 or 2, although much of its western extent had been lost to erosion. The eastern portion of the house (L and G) was similar to those of Houses 1 and 2. This house had two additional annexes (H and J) to the west of Structure L. At least one of these structures (J) is considered originally to have been part of a larger construction, possibly a wheelhouse. In Structure L, two edge-set stones formed a central hearth (362). Within the entrance, a squared-off whale vertebra, with a hole bored in it and partially sunk into the floor surface, must have formed a pivot for the door. A petal shaped hearth, formed of five edge-set slabs, was found, half way under a wall face separating Structures H and L. At the centre of Structure H, a small, rectangular hearth with an open end facing south was also unearthed. House 3 was constructed on a substantial midden spread, probably associated with House 4. This layer, however, was not excavated owing to time constraints and the protection strategy for the site that was developed during the project. House 4: the top of this house was directly below the eastern wall face of House 3. However, excavation proved that House 3 had two alignments of its outer wall on the eastern side. Further excavation led to the conclusion that House 3 had been revetted into the dune at its north end and had been free-standing to the south. Probably Houses 3 and 4 were inhabited at the same time. It is certain that House 4 was abandoned whilst House 3 was still in use, and filled with wind blown sand, which also built up around the full height of House 3 on its eastern side.

exploitation and related technology. Furthermore, Norse period fishing practices identified at the site of Bostadh Beach are also different from coeval patterns of marine exploitation in the Northern Isles. Bostadh thus provides a corrective to views often too readily generalised from Orcadian or Shetland information. 7.4 Description of the Iron Age settlement: Houses 1-4 (Based on Neighbour & Burgess 1996; Neighbour & Finlayson 1999; Neighbour 2001; Neighbour forthcoming) Houses 1, 2 and 3 shared a number of common architectural features (Figure7.2). They were essentially stone-built, circular houses with southern entrances and at least one annex. They are considered to have been largely subterranean: this is a sensible response to living in what even then is likely to have been an unstable sand dune system. It is assumed that the roofing was analogous to those constructed for more recent Hebridean Black houses. The house walls were made of drystone, with a core of sand and midden material. The hearths had been edged by stone, forming three sides of an open-ended rectangle; the open sides normally faced south. Stratigraphically, House 1 is later than House 2, although structural adaptations revealed by the excavation indicate that House 2 was still inhabited when House 1 was built. No stratigraphic link was apparent between House 3 and either House 1 or House 2, but it is argued that the spatial organisation of the three houses points to their contemporary occupation. House 1 had a large, central circular living space (Structure K) with a highly eroded annex to the north, and an annex to the east (Structure B), which was not excavated. House 1 was perhaps the most complex internally. The southern entrance has at least two phases of construction. A small alcove (C. 741) was present in the western side of the entrance. This has been interpreted as a fuel store for the domestic hearth or as a dog-house or kennel on account of its restricted scale. Four boxshaped hearths were uncovered (268, 289, 745 and 715), a number of post-holes, orthostats (including Structure M, an arch of orthostats: 706, 442, 470), pits and walls were also discovered. Structure M is considered to belong to the last occupation phase of House 1 which included several layers of sand and midden deposits. The main entrance and an entrance to the eastern cell of this building had been completely blocked, leaving only the entrance to the presumed northern annex to access the interior. House 2 had internal and external diameters of ca. 6.5 m and ca. 8.5 m respectively, and an annex to the north. The walls of House 2 were of double-skin construction, not seen elsewhere in the settlement. Dramatic slumping of the eastern inner wall face had occurred. Consequently, the central structure does not appear truly circular in plan. House 2 was entered from the south. The southern entrance has at least two phases of construction. As with House 1, a small alcove opened in the western side of the entrance. A large circular stone lined pit was dug east of the entrance. It also had a rectangular central hearth (525) that had been constructed of three edge-set slabs.

7.5 Ichthyo-archaeological evidence from the Late Iron Age settlement Large amounts of fish remains were recovered by sieving through 1-mm mesh size and by hand-collecting during the excavations. This author examined, identified and analysed all the fish remains from the site. And catalogues were prepared (Appendixes 1 and 2). The level of fish bone preservation was consistent throughout the site, in terms of fragment size and condition. Bones were most frequently 40-70 % complete. Their condition score was generally in the range of 6-9, indicating good to extremely poor preservation. A total of twenty-four taxa were identified, consisting of nineteen identified to species and five to family level.

52

which are of larger fish (Barrett et al. 1999). Saithe remains in these assemblages usually originate from first and second year old specimens, measuring between 15 cm and 30 cm in total length. Cod remains generally represent more mature specimens measuring from 30 cm up to 100 cm in total length. In the Later Iron Age Bostadh Beach assemblage both these tendencies are clearly expressed (Figure 7.9). Saithe are found in shallow water, particularly in their first 3-4 years, during which time according to modern fisheries data they range from 15 cm to 55 cm in total length. In the Scottish Islands in the recent past such fish were caught by net (tabh) or simple rod and line from the shore and from boats in shallow water. If the growth rates of saithe have been consistent through time, then fishing for saithe at Bostadh Beach would have been carried out throughout the year rather than during a single short season. This author closely observed fishing on Galson Beach in Lewis during the month of November. Within an hour, three people fishing from rocks with line and small hooks, filled a 12 litre bucket with second year saithe measuring between 15-17.5 cm in length. Approximately 50-60 saithe would fill a bucket. The small iron hooks, measuring less than 30 mm in length, required no bait. Saithe can be eaten whole (once gutted) or with the liver left inside. They can also be smoked and/or air dried and can thus be preserved for later use. This has been a practice in the Hebrides, where small fish were simply hung inside the Black houses and smoked by the domestic peat fire. It is also interesting to note that young saithe have traditionally been used in Scotland for the extraction of fish liver oil (Smith 1984). It is recorded that in Skye for instance, the oil used for lamps or ‘crusies’ was that extracted from the livers of fish caught for domestic use (McGregor 1880, 145). Cod has traditionally been caught by hand-line both from the shore and from small boats that remained within sight of land. Cod elements recovered at Bostadh Beach were mainly from specimens in the range of 30 cm to 60 cm in length. Elements from larger specimens of between 60 cm and 100 cm were recovered mainly from House 1. The presence of medium (< 60 cm Total Length) and large (