The Picts Re-Imagined 9781641890915, 9781641890922, 9781641890939

Table of contents :
Contents
List of Illustrations
Glossary
Introduction
Chapter 1. The Romans and the Picts
Chapter 2. Emergence of the Pictish Kings
Chapter 3. Origin Myths, Churches, and Kings
Chapter 4. Twilight of the Picts
Conclusions
Further Reading

Citation preview

i

The Picts Re-Imagined

ii

PAST IMPERFECT Overviews of the latest research by the world’s leading scholars. Subjects cross the full range of fields in the period ca. 400–1500 CE which, in a European context, is known as the Middle Ages. Anyone interested in this period will be enthralled and enlightened by these overviews, written in provocative but accessible language. These affordable paperbacks prove that the era still retains a powerful resonance and impact throughout the world today.

Director and Editor-in-Chief Simon Forde, ‘s-Hertogenbosch

Acquisitions Editors Erin T. Dailey, Leeds Ruth Kennedy, Adelaide

Production

Ruth Kennedy, Adelaide

Cover Design

Martine Maguire-Weltecke, Dublin

iii

The Picts Re-Imagined Julianna Grigg

iv

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

© 2018, Arc Humanities Press, Leeds Permission to use brief excerpts from this work in scholarly and educational works is hereby granted provided that the source is acknowledged. Any use of material in this work that is an exception or limitation covered by Article 5 of the European Union’s Copyright Directive (2001/​29/​EC) or would be determined to be “fair use” under Section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Act September 2010 Page 2 or that satisfies the conditions specified in Section 108 of the U.S. Copyright Act (17 USC §108, as revised by P.L. 94–​553) does not require the Publisher’s permission.

ISBN (print): 9781641890915 eISBN (PDF): 9781641890922 eISBN (EPUB): 9781641890939 arc-​humanities.org

Printed and bound by CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR0 4YY

v

Contents

List of Illustrations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi Glossary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Chapter 1. The Romans and the Picts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Chapter 2. Emergence of the Pictish Kings. . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Chapter 3. Origin Myths, Churches, and Kings . . . . . . . . . 59 Chapter 4. Twilight of the Picts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 Conclusions����������������������������������������������������������������������� 101 Further Reading. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105

vi

List of Illustrations

Figures F igure 1. Dun Carloway Broch, Isle of Lewis.. . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Figure 2. West face of Aberlemno 2 cross-​slab. . . . . . . . . . 40 Figure 3. Craw Stane with Pictish symbols, Rhynie. . . . . . . 47 Figure 4. East face of the Nigg cross-​slab. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 Figure 5. Detail of Saints Paul and Anthony receiving bread, east face of Nigg cross-​slab.. . . . . . . . . . . 76 Figure 6. Scone assembly (moot) mound.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 Figure 7. Detail of rider on Dupplin Cross.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96

Maps ap 1.   Northern Britain polities.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 M Map 2.   Principal sites.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Map 3.   Ecclesiastical sites. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

vi

Glossary

Bothy (bothie): a small hut or shelter usually built in the uplands and used in summer during stock grazing. Broch: Iron Age drystone tower or roundhouse with hollow walls and internal wooden platforms; mostly found in the north of Scotland with some lowland examples. Clientage: a social institution reliant on a vertical relationship between a patron and client expressed in mutual obligations of service, goods, or labour from the client in return for protection, land, or privileges from the patron. Crannog: a partial or artificial fortified island built on lochs, rivers, or in estuaries with a timber platform dwelling; a recent reconstruction can be seen on Loch Tay. E-​ware: high-​fired granular pottery, often with quartz inclusions, from western and central Gaul. Generally takes the form of amphora or containers and its distribution into Britain is dated to between the sixth and seventh centuries. Firth: a long, narrow inlet of the sea, linguistically related to the Scandinavian fjord. Hacksilber: silver coins or fragments of cut or damaged jewellery, ingots, and plate found in hoards and interpreted as bullion to be melted down for re-​use. Loch: Scottish term for a lake or a sea inlet.

newgenprepdf

vi

viii  Glossary Penannular brooch: an unclosed ring or horseshoe-​ shaped clothes fastener with a long hinged pin, made from a variety of metals and designs. Samian ware: glossy, red-​figured fine Roman pottery usually from southern and eastern Gaul dating between the first to third centuries. Sceat (pl. sceattas): small silver coins minted in Frisia, England, and Jutland during the Anglo-​Saxon period; their chronology is yet to be resolved but is generally dated to the seventh and eighth centuries. Strath: a wide and shallow river valley, whereas a glen is usually a narrower and deeper valley. Transhumance: act of moving livestock to mountainous grazing land during the summer.

1

Introduction

“At the present time there are in Britain … five languages and four nations—​English, British, Irish, and Picts. Each of these have their own language; but all are united in their study of God’s truth by the fifth—​Latin.” Writing in ca. 731, from a small but important monastery in Northumbria, Bede’s geopolitical perspective has largely informed our understanding of the Picts. His Ecclesiastical History of the English People is the primary source for any study of the British Isles in this period. To each of his linguistic nations Bede parcels out a territory, origin myth, and identity. Along with the other contemporary discursive source on the Picts, Abbot Adomnán of Iona’s Life of St Columba, it has promoted a vision of an isolated people adrift from time: more denizens of a Celtic Twilight than participants in the dynamic cultural shifts that Bede and Adomnán ascribe to their own people. Countering this vision has proven difficult without Pictish texts, but is currently being overcome. New archaeological finds and research approaches are radically altering our perspective. The Picts are now being re-​imagined as cultural agents, ably negotiating their place among the four contesting nations to often dominate the northern British political landscape.

When and Where? The Picts appear in documentary records between the third to tenth centuries, after which they transitioned into

2

2  Introduction the kingdom of Alba in alliance with their Dál Riata (Scots) neighbours. Terms used to define this period vary across the disciplines and, while the chronological span includes the late Iron Age to the medieval period, for simplicity it will here be referred to as Early Medieval. The territory of the Picts corresponded to modern eastern and northern Scotland and included Orkney, Shetland, and the Outer Hebrides. It is a landscape delineated by lochs, rivers, seaways, glens, pastures, forests, and mountainous ranges through which people travelled and ideas and goods were disseminated. The Firth of Forth provided a southern border with the Gododdin Britons (Brythonic Celtic-​speaking) who by ca. 600 CE were displaced or engulfed by Anglo-​Saxon expansion from Bernicia. In the south-​west, the Strathclyde Britons (also Brythonic speakers) mostly held on to the stronghold of Alt Clut (Dumbarton) over this period and controlled the region around the River Clyde and Loch Lomond. The mountain range known to Adomnán in Latin as Dorsum Britanniae (Gaelic Druim Alban) defined a western boundary that separated the Picts from the Gaelic Dál Riata (Goedelic Celtic-​speaking) whose territory included Argyll and most of the Inner Hebrides. Boundaries shifted throughout this period as groups coalesced, neighbouring polities flexed their military muscle, and territory was ceded or taken by force or diplomatic negotiations. At the same time, neither borders nor language isolated these northern political groups from each other or the cultural changes that affected emerging kingdoms across the Latin west. Within Pictland, the mountainous range known as the Mounth (Grampians) divided northern territories from those in the south. Trade routes undoubtedly reinforced cultural and political differences between the regions. The Great Glen, for instance, was a major trade highway between eastern Ireland and north-​eastern Scotland since at least the Bronze Age and this was the same route taken by St. Columba when he visited King Bridei at the head of Loch Ness. For the southern Picts, landscape and propinquity facilitated contact between first the Romans and later Dál Riata, Strathclyde Britons, Gododdin Britons, and (their territorial successors)

3

Introduction  3

the Bernician Anglians. Stirling guarded one of the few passable points into the southern Pictish zone with the Forth valley plain spread before it the focus for battle, invasion, and settlement throughout the medieval period.

What’s in a Name? Conventionally the ethnonym Pict is attributed to a late third-​century Roman pejorative term meaning “the painted ones” on account, it was alleged, of their habit of painting or tattooing their bodies. For the Romans it appears to have defined the un-​Romanized northern inhabitants of Britannia. Recent studies have made a strong case for identifying the name Pict with the early Welsh name for Pictland, Prydyn; a term from the same origin as “Britain”. The Gaelic word for Pict, Cruithne (which included the Gaelic speaking Dál nAraidi people of north-​eastern Ireland), was also derived from Prydyn. This accords with philological and place-​ name research which has established extensive linguistic correlations between Pictish and early Welsh indicating that they both spoke a P-​ Celtic/​ Brythonic language (whereas Gaelic is Q-​Celtic/​Goedelic). It also puts to rest the proposition that the Picts spoke a non-​Indo-​European (i.e. non-​ Celtic) language which, in any case, was unlikely given the dominance of Celtic languages across the British Isles.1 What would become defined as a distinct Pictish language by Bede was likely due to the amalgamation of distinct northern dialects that gradually evolved into a dominant form. There is also a shift in thinking about how Celtic came to be the primary language of the British Isles by the end of the Iron Age; this was interpreted as the result of large-​scale invasion/​migration of Celtic speakers. This diffusionist model is now largely replaced by a paradigm of gradual adoption (possibly in the Bronze Age) of a lingua franca trade language by indigenous groups. These models reflect an interpretive shift from a colonialist historiography to one of global mobilities. The identity of the Picts, how they identified themselves and on what basis identity was ascribed, remains complex;

4

4  Introduction nor can we be certain how Bede envisioned his four nations beyond their linguistic difference. Changing concepts of ethnicity mean we no longer assert identity based purely on language or material culture—​ both of which can be adopted, shared, and appropriated by other social groups. Identity is now recognized as a fluid cultural construct. To be a Pict was probably a matter of constitutional belonging based on common descent, geography, shared laws, and political association; language and material expression contributed and consolidated rather than defined this identity. The theory of ethnogenesis has recently gained popularity among Early Medievalists as a way to understand this phenomenon—​by which evolving constructs of ethnicity and identity drive social cohesion and change.2 But while most scholars accept that culture is socially constructed they also recognize the limits of theoretical concepts to fully explain the dynamics of particular historical social and cultural change. Similarly, critical care should be taken to avoid anachronistic constructs of Early Medieval nationhood and cultural continuity to prove modern exceptionalism.3 Some of the most exciting work currently being done in Pictish studies is notable for a willingness to cross disciplinary boundaries and apply a range of methodological approaches. Asking new and different questions of old material is resulting in some surprising answers.

Pictish Studies as a Discipline The Picts are receiving more concentrated interest than ever before. Some of this popularity stems from the recent discoveries of a Pictish monastery at Portmahomack, Easter Ross and the ceremonial complex site at Rhynie, Aberdeenshire. With new scientific and interpretive techniques, excavations like these are yielding diverse evidence of socio-​ cultural practices. They offer a challenge and an opportunity to revisit our assumptions on Pictish history. The dynamism of the subject today is in contrast to its centuries on the academic fringes. For eighteenth-​and

5

Introduction  5

nineteenth-​ century scholars the study of the Picts was fit only for the credulous. One of its nineteenth-​ century proponents, William Forbes Skene, earned later opprobrium for encouraging “patriotic Pictomania.” For the modern student a collection of essays edited by F. T. Wainwright in 1955 marks a turning point in the way the subject was studied. Both existential check and a catalyst to inquiry, The Problem of the Picts problematized every aspect of what was previously considered Pictish:  language, art, architecture, and social organization. This publication re-​ opened questions as to whether Pictish was a non-​ Indo-​ European language and therefore its place on the curriculum of Celtic Studies departments. For some scholars this pessimism acted as a spur to unravel the complexities of the period through empirical analysis of the evidence. Nevertheless, the paucity of Pictish texts has undoubtedly acted as a deterrent to wider academic engagement with the Picts, with their culture rarely integrated into Early Medieval studies (or university courses). This legacy underlies the tendency to treat Pictish history and material culture as a terra nullius colonized by external influences:  from Anglo-​Saxon artwork to an Irish-​led monopoly on Christianity. Comparative source choices, whether from Anglo-​Saxon or Irish evidence, have also influenced how the Picts are studied and conclusions become accepted. This can be positive, but can also result in a lack of differentiation. In objective terms, what can be confirmed about Pictish history and their material remains is limited so interpretations of that evidence are often contested and consensus rarely universal. At the same time, it should be noted that as with the Picts, our understanding of other Early Medieval cultures is incomplete and constantly undergoing revision to assimilate new evidence and theories. The last fifteen years has witnessed significant perceptual shifts in research on the Picts and Early Medieval history in general. One aspect is the integration of material evidence into the evidentiary corpus alongside a suite of interpretive methodologies. Another is a more critical approach to the documentary sources that drills down to

6

6  Introduction issues of reception and intentionality. Modern historiography seeks to identify Early Medieval people within mobile global networks by investigating the impact of neighbouring polities and the dissemination of ideas and technologies. It has resulted in the identification of a number of broad trends shared across Early Medieval polities such as:  the use of political assembly; compensatory legislation based on honour-​price; the development of centralizing kingship and the process of Christianization. Similarly, current studies are revealing a more nuanced structural relationship between “church” and “state.” For Pictish history, the repositioning of the home territory of Fortriu from the south to the north has comprehensively challenged previous assessments of Pictish politics. In addition, recognizing that the neighbours of the Picts spend far more time reporting on Pictish matters than on any other polity offers a critical pivot in how we view their development. Instead of labouring over the lack of Pictish texts as evidence of absence, we can see their political activities being carefully scrutinized by their neighbours whose own political ambitions relied on engaging with the Picts. There are advantages in confronting the speculative nature of a Pictish history in that it affords an opportunity for continual reconsideration of the evidence and interpretative method. New approaches have re-​framed the nature of Pictish studies as a series of challenges rather than problems. This has opened our eyes to what can be gleaned from a broader spectrum of sources.

Sources The Picts become increasingly visible in contemporary docu­ ments from the seventh to early eighth centuries. Not only were Bede and Adomnán keen to share their perspectives on the Picts, chronicles also become particularly informative. Scholars attribute this surge of interest to the monastery of Iona, which kept a record of current events in northern Britain and Ireland, where it had established a network of churches.

7

Introduction  7

This record is known as the “Iona Chronicle” and forms part of a composite chronicle known as the Annals of Ulster that probably incorporated information from Pictish sources.4 The Annals of Ulster is the most verbose of the chronicles but the Annals of Tigernach and Clonmacnoise also offer an occasional independent reference to Pictish affairs. Welsh and Anglo-​Saxon chronicles also contain some early strata of information for this period. The Pictish king-​ lists are incorporated into a number of later manuscripts and, while problematic, usefully preserve a prescribed genealogy of kingship with a scattering of informative glosses. An Early Medieval layer is also present in a number of church foundation legends, saints’ lives, and martyrologies. Pictish studies have long embraced an interdisciplinary approach, mostly by necessity. Material evidence provides a substantial corpus of information for many aspects of Pictish culture and social organization. New archaeological discoveries are currently invigorating the discipline by increasing the stock of evidence and prompting a re-​ assessment of cultural development. In addition, new disciplinary methodologies in archaeology, cultural geography, and art history are unpacking the processes of social reproduction through Pictish artefacts and the constructed environment. This includes a pluralistic approach to the placement, intent, and semiotics of Pictish symbol stones and cross-​slabs, forts, and precious metalwork. Place-​name studies are also making a significant contribution with recent projects establishing the discipline on rigorous empirical principles. As a primary resource, place-​name studies offer the potential to uncover evidence of Pictish language, administrative districts, tenurial organization, assembly, ecclesiastical sites, and cultural perceptions of the environment. As they primarily rely on medieval records it can be difficult to discern earlier toponyms; this is further complicated by the prodigality with which incoming or local groups re-​named places or translated sites into the dominant language (through a process referred to as “folk-​etymology”). Notwithstanding these issues, the application of careful philological method is increasing our

8

8  Introduction knowledge of Pictish church, settlement, landscape and administrative nomenclature.

Structure of this Volume This book is intended to provide an overview of our current understanding of Pictish history and their material remains. It is structured chronologically, with each chapter providing a run-​down of the history followed by short thematic discussions on Pictish culture and society. Unless otherwise referenced in the notes, information on the history and material remains is drawn from the volumes and databases listed in the further reading section. The historical discussion, in particular, takes its lead from the recent volumes by James Fraser and Alex Woolf for the New Edinburgh History of Scotland series. The notes cover some of the primary and secondary sources that explore an issue in more depth than is possible within this book. For those interested in pursuing the subject in more detail the further reading list includes some of the more recent histories on the Picts, translated primary sources (including poems mentioned in the chapters), and links to online sources and databases. There are also recent volumes on archaeology, Pictish art, and place-names. This book can in no way cover all the intriguing and enlightening discoveries and debates in Pictish studies. Some of the excavations discussed are current and will bring new evidence to the fore. Advances in source analysis and comparative studies will also continue to challenge our understanding of Pictish political agency and cultural practices. After languishing on the disciplinary peripheries, Pictish studies are now undergoing significant revision. We can now say more about the cultural and political lives of the Picts than ever before. Pictish studies is also being recognized as a valuable case study for examining more generally the development of nations, identity and the geo​political transitions that affected Early Medieval polities across the Latin west and underlie the modern world.

9

Introduction  9

Notes  Katherine Forsyth, Language in Pictland: The Case Against “Non-​Indo-​European Pictish”, Studia Hameliana 2 (Utrecht:  de Keltische Draak, 1997). 2  Andrew Gillett, “Ethnogenesis:  A Contested Model of Early Medieval Europe,” History Compass 4 (2006): 241–​60. 3  Patrick Geary, The Myth of Nations: The Medieval Origins of Europe (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2002). 4  Nicholas Evans, The Present and the Past in Medieval Irish Chronicles (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2010). 1

10

Map 1. Northern Britain polities.

1

Chapter 1

The Romans and the Picts

Pictish history begins with the Roman incursions into Scotland, the extent and long-​term effects of which were generally underestimated. As sources confirm, Roman diplomats and legions reached as far north as Moray. While they did not stay long in the north, they were a frequent presence in the Scottish lowlands for nearly two and a half centuries. Historians and archaeologists are just beginning to map the ways in which Roman imperial policy effected enduring structural transitions in Pictland, from religious change to social organization. Roman authors provide us with the first snapshot of the people who would eventually constitute the kingdom of the Picts. We also have Ptolemy’s map of Britain, derived from military survey work undertaken in the Flavian era (69–​96 CE), which identifies some dozen territorial groups across Scotland. The two groups that most concerned Rome were the Maiatai and the Caledonii. The Maiatai, situated in Fife and parts of Stirlingshire, appear to have ousted the Dumnonii sometime after the Flavian survey, leaving traces of their occupation in the place-names Dumyat hill and Myothill. They were one of the few Iron Age groups to retain their name and territory into the seventh century (as the Miathi in the Life of St Columba) and probably controlled the Early Medieval district of Manau. This district, including the plain at the head of the Firth of Forth, remained a pivotal buffer zone between England and Scotland throughout the medieval period.

12

12  Chapter 1 Beyond the Maiatai, the Caledonian territory stretched to the foot of the Mounth (Grampians) where the place-names Dunkeld and Schiehallion survive them. These were the groups that came into direct confrontation with Rome and its variable strategies of diplomacy and military aggression. Flipping between these policies, Roman control under the Flavians extended to the isthmus between the rivers Forth and Clyde. They consolidated this line with forts that reached to the foot of the Mounth along the Gask Ridge. This frontier proved unsustainable and by 122 CE Hadrian had withdrawn his armies and settled a new frontier between the Tyne–​ Solway isthmus. After his death a renewed offensive under Antoninus Pius re-​established the frontier between the Forth and Clyde rivers. It was probably in this period that the fort known as the Leckie broch in the Forth valley was destroyed.1 After a few short-​lived victories, by 165 CE the Antonine Wall was abandoned and work renewed on Hadrian’s Wall. These walls would determine territorial boundaries and communal identity throughout the Pictish period: to be a Pict was to be beyond the Roman wall. Scholars of Roman Scotland are still resolving the extent and duration of Roman penetration into northern regions. The final push was around 208 CE under Severus. This was a brutal campaign of pillage and burning that subjugated the Maiatai and Calendonii and reached the Moray Firth region. After Severus’s death in 211 some concessions were probably made as the frontier returned to Hadrian’s Wall with official outposts at Carpow (on the right bank of the river Tay), Inveresk, and probably at Cramond. In his jeremiad on the state of Britain, the sixth-​­century theologian Gildas describes Picts and Scotti terrorizing southern Britain in recurring raids over the course of the fourth and fifth centuries.2 Perhaps the most successful began in the winter of 367 CE when Rome was in civil turmoil and British garrisons depleted. Ammianus Marcellinus’s history refers to it as the Barbarian Conspiracy. It began when the garrison at Hadrian’s Wall rebelled and opened the way for Pictish war bands, in concert with Scotti, Attacotti, and

13

The Romans and the Picts  13

Saxons, to raid deep into Romanized Britain; at the same time, Franks and Saxons invaded northern Gaul. This coordinated campaign lasted a year, devastating Roman settlements and military posts. According to Ammianus, Rome eventually responded to the pleas of the Romano-​British by sending garrisons under Theodosius to rout the raiders, execute collaborators, and offer amnesty to deserters. It was not to last. After Rome’s official withdrawal in ca. 410 CE, Gildas laments that the Picts along with the Scotti renewed their attacks on southern regions where they netted a sizable booty of slaves, bullion, and other movable wealth. Gildas informs us that this prompted the Romano-​British leaders to bring in Angles and Saxon mercenaries for their defence.

After Rome The Pictish king-​lists are our main source for the succession of kings in the fifth to seventh centuries. Although surviving in later medieval manuscripts, versions were in circulation by the mid-​seventh century. They concentrate on the dynasty of Fortriu, who were the Verturiones in the Roman period. Sometimes referred to as the “Pictish Chronicle,” the earliest section of the lists are pseudo-​ historical, with valorizing ascriptions and improbable names and reign lengths. One such, Drust son of Erp, reigned in the first half of the fifth century and is eulogized as the victor of a hundred battles. As an authenticating document of the Fortriu kings’ right to rule it has helped to erase the historical record of competing dynasties and provinces. Chronicles generally corroborate the names of sixth-​century kings found in the king-​lists but they are quiet on Pictish matters in this period, being far more interested in their own volatile local political landscape. Extrapolating from sixth-​century chronicle entries, the fifth century was an era of gradual political consolidation and persistent fighting between competing groups. Northern British kingdoms stretched from the west to the east coast, roughly between the Antonine Wall and Hadrian’s Wall. The Bernicians were consolidating their Anglo-​ Saxon identity

14

14  Chapter 1 in the Tweed basin and the Dál Riata were developing into distinct territorial identities as Gaelic speakers with a foot in Argyll and one in Antrim, Ireland. Mid-​ sixth-​ century chronicles bear witness to the clash between these nascent kingdoms, often driven by expansionary leaders. A  brief chronicle entry of ca. 558 records a “flight before Máelchu’s son” (Bridei son of Mailcon), followed by the death notice of Gabrán of the Dál Riata. It suggests that the Picts, under King Bridei, were responding to territorial pressures from the Dál Riata. Given that the Dál Riata were a confederation of competing kin-​groups (Old Irish Cenél, pl. cenéla—​kindred) aligned by territorial interests, internal and external friction was a regular occurrence. In 576 King Áedán mac Gabrán (ca. 574–​609) of the Dál Riata bursts into the records waging war across the north-​west. As leader of the Cenél nGabráin from the territory of Kintyre, he attacks rival dynasts of the Cenél Conaill who occupied the Cowal region. This was the first of six battles, which included a sea raid on Orkney in ca. 580. This chronicle entry is followed by a death notice for Cennalath rex Pictorum (king of the Picts), who the king-​lists name Galam Cennaleph, apparent co-​ruler with Bridei son of Mailcon. Scholars assume that Cennalath ruled in southern Pictland but his obituary entry directly after Áedán’s attack on Orkney may prompt alternative interpretations. Áedán goes on to target the Miathi in Manau and the fortress at Alt Clut in Strathclyde—​ excavations determined that new defences were erected around the stronghold in this period. At the same time, northern British kingdoms were attacked by Bernicians under the Anglo-​Saxon king Aethelfrith (593–​616). By ca. 604, Aethelfrith had gained control over his southern Anglo-​Saxon neighbours, the Deirans, exiling their dynasts. The Welsh poem Y Gododdin is set in this period and recounts a mustering at Edinburgh of British warriors from all parts of the north, including Picts and Anglo-​Saxons, and their heroic deaths in battle at Catraeth (identified as Catterick). A recent suggestion is that this battle occurred after 616 when Bernicia was subordinated by Deira and Edwin returned from exile to take the kingship. Archaeology certainly confirms

15

The Romans and the Picts  15

that northern British kingdoms came under pressure in this period, particularly Rheged under King Urien. This backdrop of war, loss, and heroic encounter was the canvas on which many of the later Arthurian legends were painted. New excavations of the major hill forts of Trusty’s Hill, Dumfries and Galloway, and Mote of Mark in Kirkcudbrightshire indicate they suffered severe burning events ca. 600. In the aftermath, the British kingdoms’ territories were reduced and the Deiran king Edwin (616–​633), beloved by Bede, annexed Bernicia. Aethelfrith’s children, including the future kings Oswald and Oswiu, took refuge among the Picts and Dál Riata. The only sixth-​century Pictish king for whom we have any detail is Bridei son of Mailcon, who reigned from ca. 555 to 584. Bede refers to him as rex potentissimus (“most powerful king”) but his source was late and our knowledge primarily derives from Adomnán’s Life of St Columba and is therefore problematic. Adomnán’s stories of Columba’s meetings with King Bridei at his court near Inverness seem supra-​temporal with a strong flavour of heroic saga. The detail of an Orkney ruler at Bridei’s court and Columba’s petition for safe passage through Pictish waters on behalf of a colleague probably describes a later Bridei’s rule. This was either Bridei son of Bili (ca. 671–​693), or King Bridei son of Derelei (697–​706), who was a friend and political ally to Adomnán and potentially flattered by this portrait of his antecedent. Similarly, questions were raised regarding the accuracy of the ca. 558 chronicle record of Bridei son of Mailcon’s military action which may be a late interpolation aimed to valorize the Fortriu dynasts. We are left with the inference that a reputed thirty-​year reign, during a period of political upheaval, implies a successful king whose exploits survived in oral rather than written records. Equally unknown was the extent of Bridei’s territorial control. The eulogistic poem Amra Choluimb Chille (Elegy for Colum Cille), composed soon after Columba’s death in 597, refers to the saint teaching the tribes of the Tay (Old Irish túatha Toí). As the earliest source for Columba’s presence in Pictland, the saint’s reputed missionary field in the Tay valley region has proved an awkward fit against Adomnán’s insistence on Columba’s

16

16  Chapter 1 visitation to the north. To reconcile the two sources some scholars suggest that Bridei’s northern domains included the province of Atholl, with its foot in the river Tay. In effect, historical records tell us little to nothing about the reign of Bridei son of Mailcon, his predecessors, or much about his immediate successors. The Annals of Tigernach provide a death notice for a certain Gartnaidh regis Pictorum in ca. 597; he is followed by an otherwise unchronicled Necton grandson of Erp, who appears to have reigned ca. 601–​620. This king was probably associated with a misplaced gloss in list A  of the king-​lists, which describes a fifth-​century Nectonius magnus filius Wirp rex omnium prouinciarum Pictorum (“Necton the Great, Wirp’s son, the king of all the provinces of the Picts”) as the founder of a monastery at Abernethy.

Communal Organization The early Pictish political landscape was far more diverse than the limited details provided by Bede or Adomnán. For these authors, Pictland was an established kingdom with a Christian king and a populace identifying as Pictish but how this was achieved, its governing constitution, and territorial control is unclear. Attempts to shine some light on the social and political processes that established a Pictish kingdom usually assume the pre-​existence of hierarchies, economic stability to surplus production, and the existence of institutions that supported the collective identification with authority. Some of these assumptions can be tested by, and extrapolated from, archaeology and comparative sources from contemporary societies. Roman authors allude to established proto-​Pictish aristocracies and rulers leading their warriors into battle. Yet this is not generally accepted as evidence for social hierarchy, the contention being that Roman authors, like Tacitus, conflated the proto-​Picts with the forms of “barbarian” social organization they witnessed in northern Europe. It was left to archaeology to establish the evidence for elite control. Sites interpreted as high status came under review, with Iron Age

17

The Romans and the Picts  17

Figure 1. Dun Carloway Broch, Isle of Lewis. Author’s photo.

monumental architecture, like the northern Brochs and defensive forts in eastern Scotland, interpreted as sites of political coercion and maintenance. Effectively, buildings that required a larger labour force to construct than the number who could dwell within them were reflective of a tiered social structure. Further, it implied a society run on obligation where labour was demanded in exchange for social and economic benefits. In the post-​Roman period, abandonment of these high-​status sites was followed by smaller-​scale buildings and re-​occupation that was interpreted as a situation where greater territorial control rested in the hands of fewer elites. Intermittent occupation of some forts has suggested that their high-​status residents were mobile: deploying the forts for symbolic capital and the occasional extraction of resources. Recent research directions incorporate the wider topography and funerary and monumental display into the interpretive site data to offer another perspective. It is now postulated that Roman influence created systemic social change through diplomatic trade and military action:  the former by prompting the rise of prestige economies of hospitality and personal adornment, the latter would encourage a collective response to an external enemy.

18

18  Chapter 1 Increased access to Roman goods by some groups fuelled the rise of new elites, which, in turn, encouraged the formalization of noble classes and created more complex levels of social status. Moreover, it is suggested that uneven access to prestige goods provided cultural capital that, along with military strength, expedited political centralization. These groups probably viewed themselves as political communities (Latin gentes) united by common descent who shared an identity created by circumstances and territory. Political and cultural change was uneven and some communities may never have participated in or become part of a collective Pictish kingdom by virtue of their location or limited collateral. From at least the fifth century there is fragmentary evidence for increased exploitation of resources, investment in personal ornaments, and monumental funerary forms, generally explained as hierarchical consolidation. The contributing factors for this change were multifarious, including:  new agricultural innovations that shifted subsistence to surplus economies; caches of silver bullion and slaves taken in raids in the wake of Roman withdrawal; new trade routes; diffusion of Christianity; expansionist Anglo-​ Saxons; climate change; and occasional pandemics. The institution of clientage also expedited the upward transfer of authority. From this period, scholars begin to be more confident in naming Pictish rulers as kings. Anglo-​Saxon and Irish scholars track a similar political change, seeing warrior leaders establishing themselves as regional rulers who gradually assume more territorial control through coercive means. By the end of the seventh century these regional “kings” begin to be demoted to mere rulers in the records. In Ireland, the over-​king or high-​king is distinguished from other kings; this contrasts with the Anglo-​Saxon evidence that kingship was singular and dynastic. Specific titles for the king’s military leaders and the stewards in charge of his newly acquired estates also emerge in documents. A thesis of centralizing kingship gradually extending territorial control raises questions about how that territory was divided, physically and conceptually.

19

The Romans and the Picts  19

Regions, Territories, and Boundaries The range of hills known as the Mounth was understood by Bede to define a division between northern and southern Pictland, persisting as a political division into the seventh century. It remains a fissile boundary, with accessible glen passes, rather than a barrier. Nevertheless, the pressures of successive British, Roman, and Anglo-​Saxon intrusion into the south defined and differentiated it from regions north of the Mounth. Likewise, the agricultural productivity of the south is historically contrasted with the perceived poverty of the arable landscape in the north. This led to assumptions that southern provinces were wealthier, more desirable, and culturally more developed than those in the north. Ergo, the south was the beneficiary of concerted archaeological interest. The Ptolemy map provides the earliest information that proto-​Pictland had distinct territories named after their regional polities.3 Few of these ethnonyms survive into the post-​Roman period and only a few province names—​such as Fortriu, Manau, Atholl, Circin, and the Orkneys—​reoccur in contemporary records. Their extent, longevity, and whether these can be considered territorial or tribal names remains difficult to determine. A  late tradition that Pictland was divided into seven distinct provinces, described in the ca. 850 Irish quatrain Mórseisor do Chruithne claind and the twelfth-​ century De Situ Albanie, is problematic.4 This tradition imagines a Pictish political geography of seven kingdoms ruled by seven brothers but the names of these kingdoms and their territorial extent are ambiguous and further analysis is required. Using references in the Annals of Tigernach, Pictish king-​lists and the Irish genealogical tract Senchas Sil hÍr, among other evidence, Nicholas Evans has recently argued that Circin and Fortriu constituted the principal territories in the south and north respectively. He suggests that Circin may have extended from the south bank of the Tay estuary, including Abernethy, to the fort of Dundurn, and along the east coast into Angus and the Mearns (possibly

20

20  Chapter 1 beyond Dunottar).5 On its southern border, the Ochil Hills may have divided it from Miathi territory with the province of Atholl to its west. The first documentary record of Atholl (Athfoitle) is in 739 in relation to its king, implying it had a degree of independence of unknown antecedence. The name is generally translated as “a second Ireland” but this remains uncertain.6 Atholl lies along a major route between the Picts and Dál Riata to the west and its concentration of commemorations to Iona clerics infers a direct connection that probably resulted in early Gaelic settlement. The province of Fortriu included Moray, Easter Ross, and parts of the shires of Inverness and Aberdeen; but the number of times Dunottar fort is targeted suggests it fell within Fortriu’s territorial ambitions. Another suggestion is that Dunottar was within the province of Cé (only attested in the placename Bennachie, Aberdeenshire). There is no evidence to suggest how long Circin and Fortriu were established prior to their appearance in seventh-​and eighth-​century records. Likewise, the extent of Miathi territory is obscure. How territories or districts were organized within these northern and southern zones is also difficult to determine. It is suspected that some modern Scottish county boundaries preserve Early Medieval territorial divisions, particularly along fixed topographic features such as rivers and coastlines. Work elsewhere has pointed to the continuity of significant territorial boundaries marked by stone monuments and cemeteries. Attempts to determine the extent and organizational nature of Pictish regions largely focused on the thanage (roughly analogous to a shire). A  medieval term, it derived from an Anglo-​Saxon word referring to the land held, often in stewardship, by a thegn (or thane). In tenth-​century Scottish records the thane is interchangeable with a mormaer and in later records an earl. By the medieval period Scotland had a number of thanages which can be traced back to the earliest property records, but continuity from the Pictish era remains unproven. In terms of size, a recent landscape assessment of the thanage of Kintore in Aberdeenshire found that in the medieval period it encompassed six “parish-​sized” estates

21

The Romans and the Picts  21

under ecclesiastical control.7 Recent place-​name analysis has detected a potential Pictish administrative term in the affix fetter (such as Fetterangus, Aberdeenshire). Pictish *uotir (fetter) is related to Welsh godir, meaning district, and is found in other place-names in north-​east Scotland. Moreover, the toponymic appearance of fetter appears coincident with the administrative centre of late medieval baronies and could indicate the headquarters of Pictish secular administration.8 This is a significant development that offers scope for reconsidering issues of territorial continuity. Scholars of Early Medieval England have proposed a pattern of administrative districts which they describe as “multiple estates” with villae regiae (royal estate) or caput (administrative centre). The multiple estate is envisioned as similar to a later baronage, with the king underwriting his local ruler’s rights of administration or establishing a steward to maintain a principal residence for royal visits (villae regiae). Pictish provincial rulers may have established similar administrative districts with residences that provided hospitality during their annual circuits of their properties. Furthermore, it is likely that these residences became the villae regiae of centralizing kings as a means to consolidate their territorial control.9 Thanages, multiple estates or the Pictish *uotir were large territories that included multiple communities. Scholars are also focusing on how a single community was organized. The parish was seen as an obvious choice as, despite numerous boundary changes over the centuries, some may retain a hint of earlier territorial organization. The traditional view that King David I (1124–​1153) established the parish system is now re-​ interpreted to suggest he instead codified and extended an existing organizational pattern. The size of the parish depended on having sufficient exploitable resources to maintain its population (of roughly fifteen small-​holdings, one large estate farm and several mid-​level farm estates) and ensure the administration of law, local property rights, and defence. The evidence for Pictish terms of regularized land measurements, like the Anglo-​ Saxon hide, remains under review. For instance, a davoch (Scottish Gaelic dabhach—​tub

2

22  Chapter 1 or boll) was probably a Pictish term for a unit of farming land, based on productive potential. Additionally, the well-​attested tenurial term pit, while derived from the Pictish *pett, mostly appears with Gaelic personal names and the process of adaptation is unclear.10 Most analyses of parish/​territorial units have concentrated on the south of Scotland, where a syncretism was identified between Early Medieval territorial units (described as “units of lordship”) and later parishes.11 In this regard, research on assembly sites (discussed in the next chapter) found a recurring incidence of one meeting site to each parish, often alongside the primary manor and demesne land. It suggests the long-​term exercise of local administration. In theory, these “parish-​sized” territorial units may allow us to explore community practices, resource exploitation, the way networks were established beyond and between communities, and how socio-​political changes were managed.

Settlement Archaeology The archaeology of settlement can generally be divided into high-​status sites and lower-​status dwellings; although there is some overlap in interpretation. Archaeologists have identified a range of architectural types in use during the Pictish period; from forts, cellular structures, crannogs, and rectilinear buildings. All these forms were regionally variable reflecting local materials and topography. The heterogeneity of types, sites, and chronologies so far resist efforts to develop an overarching settlement pattern. Chronology can also be difficult to determine, with the lack of locally made pottery to establish a timeline; and radiocarbon dating is not always achievable. Similarly, without a sound knowledge of the population size over this period it is difficult to assess settlement drivers, communal networks, spatial or gender organization, or morphology. Despite these constraints, some broad trends are becoming apparent, such as the use of platform foundations rather than posts (with their diagnostic post-​hole evidence) and the preference for rectilinear structures.

23

The Romans and the Picts  23

Traditionally, archaeological surveys have concentrated on high-​status sites mentioned in the sources. They were seen to offer important clues to cultural shifts but considerable gaps remain in our understanding of how they were socially structured and physically organized. Forts, whether located on promontories or hills, are the better known architectural feature of the Pictish period still recognizable in the landscape. Characterized by defensive walls, usually with ramparts (often referred to as vallate and multivallate), they were sited along communication nodes that took full advantage of the topography. Some of the excavated sites (such as Clatchard Craig, Fife, and Dundurn, Perth and Kinross) indicate the re-​occupation of earlier forts in the Early Medieval period after a long period of abandonment. This rebuilding activity was usually on a smaller scale within existing defensive walls (sometimes referred to as nucleated forts). Many of the excavated forts have revealed evidence of trade and high-​status metalworking along with iron working. Ongoing efforts went into repairing the ramparts and walls of these forts, with Dunadd in Argyll showing indications of timber platforms and palisades. Their dominant position in the landscape is usually interpreted as a psychological and symbolic act of defence that reinforced superior status, social stratification, and communal identity. This perhaps understates the continued necessity for practical defence given the numerous records of besieged forts during the sixth and seventh centuries. It is now apparent that forts were only one type of high-​ status architecture. Rectilinear buildings surrounded by large enclosures are now being identified through aerial photographs. One in Upper Gothens, Perth and Kinross has provided radiocarbon dates in the ninth century. This corresponds to the “longhouse” with a stone-​built hearth recently discovered within the promontory fort at Burghead, Moray; dated to the ninth century on the basis of the Alfred coin recovered from the floor debris. The interpretation of these buildings as elite is debated but the combination of rectilinear shape inside a large palisade is envisaged for the

24

24  Chapter 1 palace site at Forteviot, Perth and Kinross. Its high status is implied by its position within an extensive Neolithic monumental landscape. Three large rectilinear wooden buildings were recently identified within the palisade complex at Rhynie, Aberdeenshire. They are dated to the fifth to sixth centuries, which suggest that this form was in use earlier than the ninth-​century examples so far recovered. Cellular structures, conjoined roundhouses, and rectilinear buildings are found across the Atlantic sea zone dating from the fifth to sixth centuries—​evidence for the exploitation of resources from midden deposits on some of these sites points to elite activity. Crannogs similarly appear to be revived as an architectural form from ca. 600, often with non-​continuous occupation. While the evidence for general settlement is patchy, non-​invasive methods such as aerial photos and fieldwalking are beginning to identify settlement forms in the arable southern zones; crop marks are harder to observe in the north. Landscape investigations around Loch Tay indicate that Iron Age hut circles, homesteads, and crannogs were abandoned towards the middle of the third century CE. In addition, souterrains, interpreted as a form of cellar or grain store (once seen as a southern feature, they were recently detected north of the Mounth), went out of use in the same period. Ostensibly, abandonment of these features may relate to Roman military aggression in the south and the central Highlands during the second and third centuries. How significantly this impacted settlement is unknown. Recent work in Aberdeenshire detected a sequence where unenclosed settlements went out of use in the third century with fortified sites appearing in the fifth to sixth century. In the seventh century, rectilinear structures emerge accompanied by indications of an increase in cereal production; this corresponds to the situation across Britain, where there was increased cultivation of oats.12 At Pool, Orkney, where 60 per cent of cereal samples were oats, the excavator linked their cultivation to the increased presence of horses. Barley and wheat were also grown across Pictland, and on

25

The Romans and the Picts  25

Pool signs of flax cultivation hint at the farming of tradeable surplus crops.13 Faunal remains collected at a number of sites (Pool; Portmahomack; Dundurn; Dunadd) indicate livestock diversification with sheep, pigs, and a heavy reliance on cattle but a limited interest in marine protein. Reliance on cattle is not surprising as Irish sources suggest the commoditization of cattle for tribute and rent, as well as for leather and dairy products. The large number of incised Pictish Bull symbol stones recovered from the promontory fort at Burghead underscores the socio-​ cultural importance of cattle. This fort was potentially used as a stockade for the cattle tribute demanded by Fortriu kings. Cattle bones found at Rhynie also point to their use in ritual feasting, while the industrial processing of cowhides and bones for the manufacture of vellum at Portmahomack monastery was dated to the eighth century. The exploitation of uplands for grazing cattle probably occurred throughout this period but the practice was confirmed by the discovery of eighth-​century, round-​ended, rectilinear buildings at Pitcarmick, Perthshire. The “Pitcarmick-​ type” structure was a previously unrecognized form of byre-​house (the closest exemplars are found in Jutland) and are found across the southern uplands. Occupation was spasmodic, suggesting either marginal settlement or summer activity linked to seasonal transhumance. With limited excavation it can only be postulated that the main settlements were close to rivers along the straths. To what degree these comprised “villages” (nucleated settlement) or dispersed farmstead dwe­ llings remains undetermined. Dispersed settlement would certainly coincide with Welsh and Irish examples. Examples from Orkney, Shetland, and the Western Isles, however, point to more nucleated settlement, such as the fifth-​to sixth-​ century wheelhouse at Bornais Mound on South Uist, which was part of an extensive Pictish settlement. The farmsteads of Buckquoy and Red Craig adjacent to the elite complex on the Brough of Birsay, Orkney offer a clue to the way settlement was arranged around prestige sites. Set within large enclosures, these farmsteads comprised cellular houses that

26

26  Chapter 1 were altered over the centuries, becoming more sophisticated in structure, with internal partitions and hearths. These farms probably supplied the elite residents on the tidal island of Brough of Birsay. Radiocarbon dating returned a long chronology for the settlement of ca. 600–​915.14 Over this same period, the settlement structure at Portmahomack, while primarily monastic in its later phase, reveals changes in resource exploitation and culture. In the sixth to seventh century a settlement (designated high status by the excavators) was growing cereal crops, working iron, and burying their dead in a nearby cist cemetery. By the eighth century it had become a monastic settlement. The industrial complexity of this latter phase echoes descriptions in the Rule of Benedict of a monastic precinct (with farms, water irrigation, and craft industries); it is debatable how closely this was adapted to existing Pictish settlement norms. It is hard to overlook the lacuna in settlement evidence from the third to fifth centuries. Notably, the excavation at Morangie Dun (on the Tarbat peninsula, Ross and Cromarty) found that this roundhouse went out of use in the third century after being occupied for over eight hundred years. The apparent discontinuity of the roundhouse tradition is noticed elsewhere. Recent projects focusing on northern Scottish sites are, however, beginning to fill this gap. Excavation on the Dunnicaer sea-​stack near Dunnottar Castle, Aberdeenshire found a substantial fort with evidence of hearths and timber structures, which returned radiocarbon dates between the third and fourth centuries. Dunnicaer was a promontory fort before the causeway eroded and probably prompted the occupation of nearby Dunnottar sometime in the fifth century. Dunnicaer was one of a series of defensive strongholds that lined the Aberdeenshire coast. The inference is of territorially organized groups able to muster considerable resources for multiple defences. The numerous Pictish symbol stones found in and around the site also suggest the inhabitants engaged in ideas of cultural and collective identity. Artefacts relating to specialist metalworking were found as well as fragments of Samian ware: this indicates contact, at some level, with the

27

The Romans and the Picts  27

Roman world. These defensive sites were possibly a response to Roman ships passing just offshore in their navigations around the coast. Another site, Rhynie in Aberdeenshire, also challenges assumptions as to the political organization of Pictland in this early period. While it will be discussed in more detail in relation to assemblies, Rhynie is emerging as a large royal and ritual complex which flourished in the fifth to sixth centuries. Recent studies are revealing a confident society, with access to luxury trade goods, pursuing organized ceremonial and cultural practices. The developing picture is of a Pictish society very much responsive to and engaged with events outside its territories and moving towards increased hierarchical control over a productive landscape.

Christian Conversion: Saints Columba and Ninian Discussions on the conversion of the Picts to Christianity rarely examine the nature and role religion played in Pictish society prior to conversion. This is due to the problem of proving continuity with the Iron Age evidence of small shrines, animal deposits, and subterranean spaces found predominately in the Orkneys and Western Isles. Excavations at Rhynie may point the way to the types of ceremonial practices prevalent just before Christianity took hold. One suggestion is that the incised stone depicting an axe-​bearing figure known as the Rhynie Man may represent the ritual veneration or deification of warrior attributes. The axe-​ shaped pin found at the site may be a symbol of this cult. It is also surmised that the Gaulcross hoard, Aberdeenshire, indicates that votive deposition continued into the era of Christianization. Nevertheless, it is notable that socio-​ political interpretations are usually sought to explain Pictish appropriation of earlier sacred features, such as megaliths and cairns. It is yet to be established whether early churches were built over pre-​Christian sacred sites; although the veneration of local saints around sacred trees and wells is generally interpreted as the Christianization of

28

28  Chapter 1 landscape deities. Part of the success of Christianity was its ability to accommodate local spiritual customs. Territorial organization and hierarchical control in Pictland makes it highly unlikely that Christian conversion missions occurred without the sanction of regional rulers. Religious conversion in Pictland, as elsewhere, is now viewed as multi-​ phased with Christian ideas first disseminated through contact with Roman legions, merchants, hostages, and captives; later followed by episcopal initiatives that traded on the cultural appeal of Rome and access to western Christian exchange networks. New monasteries, such as Whithorn in Dumfries and Galloway (a late fifth-​ century Gallo-​ British foundation) and probably Portmahomack, introduced innovative technologies that increased their appeal to elites. Once the attention of local leaders was caught by the strategic advantages of conversion this could then be extended to their followers, clients, and tenants.15 Debate continues as to how early Christianity was preached in Pictland, to whom and by whom. Roman imperial policy gave Christianity a firm foothold in Romanized Britain and early popes continued to display an interest in the Christian orthodoxy of Britain and Ireland. For instance, the Epitoma Chronicon of Prosper of Aquitaine describes Palladius of Gaul being sent by Pope Celestine as bishop to the Irish Christians in 431. This mission, according to the seventh-​century Book of Armagh, was unsuccessful and Palladius reputedly fled to Pictland. Church dedications to Palladius at Fourdon in Kincardineshire probably relate to the late development of his cult (possibly in the eighth century).16 Nevertheless, evidence suggests that the southern Picts were exposed to Christian missions by the fifth century. Bede is largely responsible for establishing the narrative on the Picts’ dichotomous conversion to Christianity. His presentation of St. Ninian converting the south and St. Columba the north of Pictland continues to influence archaeological and historical dating and interpretation. Where Bede asserts, Adomnán only hints that St. Columba established Christianity in northern Pictland. Nevertheless, between them Bede and

29

The Romans and the Picts  29

Adomnán create an image of a pagan wasteland to which Ninian and Columba under individual inspiration breathe life through the Christian message. Fixing Columba’s visit to the northern Picts after 565 provides a concrete moment in Pictish conversion history that is rarely challenged. Yet we know Columba’s monastery on Iona was not a lone outpost; for instance, the missions and cults of Saints Brendan of Clonfert, Moluag (MoLuóc) of Lismore and Blane of Bute competed for space in the Hebrides and Argyll in the same period. Adomnán and Bede also present competing traditions around Iona’s foundation:  the former states the island was gifted to Columba by the Dál Riata, the latter that the Picts offered it to the saint. Both authors were correct according to their own political times and constructs and this also alerts us to the limits of our knowledge on how identity functioned within Early Medieval communities. Trade routes between the Irish Sea and northern Pictland probably facilitated Christianization, whereas the south was directly exposed to Romano-​Christian Britain. Bede, therefore, was probably correct in asserting two separate directions of Christianization. It is generally accepted that a nascent ecclesiastical system existed in late Roman Britain, some of which survived on the peripheries after Roman withdrawal. The fifth-​century Romano-​British St. Patrick came from one such Christian community where high social status and Romanitas were synonymous. His Letter to the Soldiers of Coroticus berates the “apostate” Picts who enslaved some of his congregation, which may confirm that some Picts were Christians, albeit lapsed, by this period. Reputed founder of the monastery at Whithorn, the St. Ninian described by Bede is now identified as the Bishop Uinniau (sometimes Finnian, Findbar), who died in 579. He had connections to the mid-​sixth century King Tudwal of the Strathclyde Britons.17 According to Adomnán, as a youth St. Columba studied under Bishop Uinniauo and adopted many of his theological concerns. Columbanus of Bobbio assigned one of the earliest handbooks on penance to this cleric and claimed that Uennianus auctor consulted with Gildas on monastic discipline. It is now apparent that

30

30  Chapter 1 known ecclesiastical figures of sixth-​ century Britain and Ireland were part of a dynamic Christian network: Gildas and Uinniau could be described as monastic moral theologians while the next generation, Columba and Columbanus, made their mark as proselytizers of the monastic enterprise. They promoted a vibrant monasticism that sat alongside a nascent diocesan system. Uinniau’s penitentiary and correspondence with Gildas are responses to the increasing popularity of monasticism and a desire by some laity for a rigorous spiritual practice. In the sixth century Christianity was undergoing consolidation among the northern British, who had long-​ standing socio-​ political connections to the southern Picts. This connection is indicated by the rare chi-​ rho motif on the Skeith stone at Kilrenny, near Anstruther in Fife, which has parallels to a similar motif on a late fifth-​ century pillar gravestone at the monastery of Whithorn. The Skeith stone lies within the territory of the Niuduari who, according to an eighth-​century Whithorn poet, were visited by St. “Nynia” (Uinniau). Ecclesiastical place-​name evidence in southern Pictland indicates a more multi-​layered process of Christianization than that presented by Bede. One of these place-​name elements, *egles (Latin ecclesia—​church), was considered to date to the earliest phase of Christianization in the fifth century. Instead, the evidence now points to the earliest religious houses bearing direct toponyms, such as Abercorn, Abernethy, and Lismore. The recent project analyzing hagiotoponyms (saint placenames) found that the ubiquitous combination of “church” plus the saint name (in genitive) relates to late seventh-​to eighth-​century naming practices.18 The Latin derived placename annaid (from antiquitas—​antiquity), which identified a mother church, had an eastern distribution and often lacks a saint association suggesting an early inception. Another church-​associated Latin loan-​word, locus (place), is found in place-names like Logierait in Atholl; probably the bishopric of Cóeti of Iona, who died in 712. The logie place-name, from a putative Pictish *loc or *log, is found in fourteen parishes across eastern Scotland. Small clusters of Gaelic cill names

31

The Romans and the Picts  31

(church), dating to the late seventh century, are found coincident with routes used by Iona clerics into southern Pictland.19 While Adomnán refers to Iona’s daughter-​houses among the Picts, scholars now suggest that these were established in successive missions after Columba’s tenure. It is suspected that Iona’s alleged dominant position in Pictland by the eighth century was due to Adomnán’s considerable administrative and diplomatic skills rather than any long-​standing monopoly of veneration for Columba among the Picts.

Funerary Evidence In the fifth century a new burial practice began to dominate the previous individualized local rites, spreading across most of Britain, Ireland, northern Gaul, and the Low Countries. It was characterized by extended burials aligned east–​ west with limited grave goods often in a stone-​lined cist or barrow. In Pictish territories a broad chronology was recently developed where new forms of burial types (platform cairns, ditched barrows and long-​cists sometimes associated with prehistoric monuments) come into use from the fifth to the seventh century, after which there was a shift to inhumations within cemeteries.20 A similar transition was observed in the excavations of cemeteries in Fife, such as at Hallow Hill near St. Andrews. At this site, the change from crouched or flexed burials (often with north–​ south orientation) to extended inhumations orientated east–​west was dated to the sixth century. At nearby Kirkhill, a new cemetery was created for dug graves by the seventh century. Possibly earlier, the Isle of May off the Fife coast produced evidence of a long-​cist cemetery in which some of the cists held multiple burials. These partly overlay an earlier and extensive burial cairn. This island was potentially a sacred burial site for mainland communities that continued to be used into the Christian period. A recent project analyzing cemeteries across northern Pictland adds considerable insights to the funerary sequence. From the fifth century barrow cemeteries, often enclosed, were created alongside low-​lying agricultural land next to major routes

32

32  Chapter 1 or river crossings (some seem to lie along old territorial boundaries). These were monumental cemeteries of earthen mounds that made the dead highly visible. The efforts of construction for the small number of internments points to the commemoration of only high-​ status individuals. This may represent the rise of a provincial hereditary aristocracy where cemeteries were constructed to valorize and create “lineages of the dead.” These sites were abandoned in the seventh century in favour of larger cemeteries near churches. The alteration in practice may indicate the subordination of local dynasties by an over-​king or the introduction of new Christian forms of dynastic legitimization.21 Across Pictland the limited excavation evidence points to clusters of long-​ cist cemeteries around Fife and the Tay valley with barrow cemeteries predominately in the north. Some of the cemeteries appear to be concentrated in regional centres of power, which would reflect a pattern of top-​down cultural adoption. For the only verified Pictish monastic site at Portmahomack excavators found cist graves of mostly middle-​aged males (radiocarbon dated to ca. 565–​700) with the continued use of cist graves (some with stone pillows) from ca. 700–​800. The socio-​cultural issues behind the deposition of human remains are complex, but the emerging consensus is that alterations in mortuary practice do not necessarily represent religious change. Instead, the fifth-​ century alterations in funerary rites may reflect either cultural Romanization and/​ or significant alteration in the political hierarchical structure. This does not rule out Christianity having some impact on burial rites, but their analogous appearance in the fifth century across Pictland would suggest a dynamic cultural adoption. It is only with the seventh-​century move to church cemeteries and the apparent abandonment of monumental graves that Christianity is definitively implicated in altering burial practices and the commemoration of ancestors. Christianization should be considered as a process where successive waves of new cultural material and ideas along with proselytizers encouraged its uptake. It is therefore not surprising that cultural adoption of the appurtenances of a

3

The Romans and the Picts  33

new religion came first. A religion that claimed special interventionist powers, particularly in warfare, and a connection to an economy of belief outside their borders would be viewed by some rulers as advantageous. How and when the southern and northern Picts came to adopt Christianity is yet to be determined. Recent emphasis, however, is placed on Columba and his mentor Uinniau’s promotion of scholastic accomplishments. Skilled scribes and teachers in exegesis, rhetoric and computus they established scriptoriums and advocated monastic living:  introducing new forms of penitential rites and a rule that encompassed devout liturgical practices alongside profitable agricultural estates. The capacity of these estates to accumulate wealth concentrated their effective socio-​political power. Even if Pictish conversion was as binary as Bede reports, the Picts were being trained in the vibrant and inquiring Christian learning that was exemplified by the scholarship of Iona and Bangor in Ireland. The excavation of the Portmahomack monastery has demonstrated that its monks were skilled scribes: a commemorative stone inscribed in insular majuscules (similar to the Lindisfarne Gospels script) and extensive vellum production implies an active scriptorium. Notes  E. W.  Mackie, Brochs and the Empire:  The Impact of Rome on Iron Age Scotland as Seen in the Leckie Broch Excavations (Oxford: Archaeopress, 2016). 2  Gildas, The Ruin of Britain and Other Works, trans. Michael Winterbottom (London: Phillimore, 1978). 3  Alastair Strang, “Recreating a Possible Flavian Map of Roman Britain with a Detailed Map for Scotland,” Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland [PSAS] 128 (1998): 425–​40. 4  Dauvit Broun, “The Seven Kingdoms in De situ Albanie:  A Record of Pictish Political Geography or Imaginary Map of Ancient Alba?,” in Alba: Celtic Scotland in the Middle Ages, ed. E. J. Cowan and R. A. McDonald (East Linton: Tuckwell Press, 2000), 24–​42. 5  Nicholas Evans, “Circin and Mag Gerginn: Pictish Territories in the Irish and Scottish Sources,” Cambrian Medieval Celtic Studies 66 (2013): 1–​36. 1

34

34  Chapter 1 6  Thomas O.  Clancy, “Atholl, Banff, Earn and Elgin:  ‘New Irelands’ in the East Revisited,” in Bile Ós Chrannaibh: A Festschrift for William Gillies, ed. Wilson McLeod, Abigail Burnyeat, Domhnall Uilleam Stiùbhart, Thomas Owen Clancy, and Roibeard Ó Maolalaigh (Brig O’Turk: Clann Tuirc, 2010), 79–​102. 7  RCAHMS, In the Shadow of Bennachie: A Field Archaeology of Donside, Aberdeenshire (Edinburgh: Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland, 2007), 132. 8  Simon Taylor, “The Toponymic Landscape in the Gaelic Notes in the Book of Deer,” in Studies in the Book of Deer, ed. Katherine Forsyth (Dublin: Four Courts Press, 2008), 275–​308. 9  Alexander Grant, “The Province of Ross and the Kingdom of Alba,” in Alba: Celtic Scotland, 88–​126. 10  Alasdair Ross, “The Dabhach in Moray: A New Look at an Old Tub,” in Landscape and Environment in Dark Age Scotland, ed. Alex Woolf (St. Andrews: University of St. Andrews, 2006), 57–​74. 11  Stephen T. Driscoll, “The Early Historic Landscape of Strath­ earn: The Archaeology of a Pictish Kingdom” (PhD dissertation, University of Glasgow, 1987); John M.  Rogers, “The Formation of Parishes in Twelfth-​ Century Perthshire,” Records of the Scottish Church History Society 27 (1997): 68–​96. 12  Murray Cook, “New Evidence for the Activities of Pictish Potentates in Aberdeenshire: The Hillforts of Strathdon,” PSAS 141 (2011): 207–​29. 13  J. M. Bond, “A Growing Success? Agricultural Intensification and Risk Management in Late Iron-​ Age Orkney,” in Sea Change:  Orkney and Northern Europe in the Later Iron Age, AD300–​800, ed. J.  Downes and A.  Ritchie (Balgavies:  Pinkfoot Press, 2003), 105–​10. 14  Christopher D. Morris, “From Birsay to Tintagel: A Personal View,” in Scotland in Dark Age Britain, ed. Barbara E.  Crawford (St. Andrews:  University of St. Andrews, 1996), 37–​78; also J.  R. Hunter, Rescue Excavations on the Brough of Birsay 1974–​82 (Edinburgh: Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, 1986). 15  For a recent discussion, see Neil Christie, “Becoming Christian, Being Christian in Early Medieval Europe,” in The Art, Literature and Material Culture of the Medieval World, ed. Meg Boulton, Jane Hawkes, and Meilissa Herman (Dublin: Four Courts Press, 2015), 59–​79. 16  Thomas O.  Clancy, “The Cults of St. Patrick and Palladius in Early Medieval Scotland,” in Saints’ Cults in the Celtic World,

35

The Romans and the Picts  35

ed. Steve Boardman, John Reuben Davies, and Elia Williamson (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2009), 18–​41. 17  Thomas O. Clancy, “The Real St. Ninian,” Innes Review 52 (2001): 1–​28. 18  Thomas O.  Clancy, “Saints in the Scottish Landscape,” Proceedings of the Harvard Celtic Colloquium 33 (2013): 1–​34. 19  Simon Taylor, “Place-​Names and the Early Church in Eastern Scotland,” in Scotland in Dark Age Britain, 93–​110; and “Seventh-​ Century Iona Abbots in Scottish Place-​ Names,” in Spes Scotorum: Hope of the Scots, ed. Dauvit Broun and Thomas O. Clancy (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1999), 35–​70. 20  Aidán Maldonado, “Burial in Early Medieval Scotland:  New Questions,” Medieval Archaeology [MA] 57 (2013), 1–​34. 21  Juliette Mitchell and Gordon Noble, “The Monumental Cemeteries of Northern Pictland,” MA 61 (2017): 1–​40.

36

Map 2. Principal sites.

37

Chapter 2

Emergence of the Pictish Kings

Only the Pictish king-​ lists notice the reign of Necton grandson of Erp (ca. 601–​620). A late gloss in one of these lists describes the king’s establishment of the monastery of Abernethy (Aburnethige) in Perth and Kinross. To add to the confusion, this gloss is attached to the reign of an earlier Necton, the son of Erp (ca. 456–​480); another version credits the initiative to Gartnait son of Dolmech, successor to Bridei son of Mailcon. These versions claim that Abbess Darlugdach of St. Brigid’s monastery in Kildare journeyed to Pictland, as a voluntary exile, where the king granted her lands to establish a monastery in honour of St. Brigid and God. One version explains that Necton’s generosity was due to the intervention of St. Brigid who, in response to his prayer, restored him to the kingship after he had been exiled by his brother Drust. Improbably, this would place Necton son of Erp in Ireland around the 450s when Brigid was just a child; hence the preference for the legend being associated with the later Necton. As a Brigidine foundation with local commemorations to nine holy virgins Abernethy was potentially a double house of nuns and monks, like its mother house of Kildare in Ireland. The foundation account was probably added to the king-​lists between 862 and 876 at Abernethy. The descendants of Erp, often identified with the northern British king Guipno, are prolific in the Pictish king-​lists. Nevertheless, it is difficult to extract a cohesive account of Pictish rule for this period. Instances of kings reigning simultaneously add to the

38

38  Chapter 2 confusion. Scholars generally interpret this as evidence of distinct southern and northern Pictish kingdoms or provincial kingdoms. One picture to emerge is the prevalence of consanguine links and alliances between the northern ruling dynasties. They also sought refuge among each other’s courts during periods of exile. This can make it difficult to unpick genealogies and alliances to construct a plausible geo​political history. As a result, there is limited consensus among historians about this period. An added complication remains the extent, nature, and date of kings Oswald and Oswiu’s intrusion into southern Pictland. In 638, according to the Annals of Tigernach, “Etain” was besieged. Interpreted as the conquest of Din Eidyn (Edinburgh) by King Oswald, this date is often used to mark the annexation of British territories south of the River Forth. It is debatable whether it was Oswald (634–​ca. 642)  or his successor and brother Oswiu (642–​670) who then cemented Bernician control over the southern Pictish and Dál Riata territories. The stages and form of subjugation remain unclear, although the first mention of a king of Alt Clut (Dumbarton) occurs in 657 and is interpreted as the consolidation of a kingdom in Strathclyde from the vestiges of a Miathian hegemony that once stretched from Dumbarton to Fife. The evidence of wholesale subjugation is also complicated by the apparent success of the Cenél nGabráin during Oswiu’s reign; both polities had a mutual interest in the monastery of Iona. Oswald and Oswiu appear to have spent their youth in exile among the Dál Riata learning military skills and tactics. Their brother Eanfrith may have ended up among the Picts where he fathered the Pictish king Talorcan son of Anfrith (ca. 653–​657). Despite reigning less than ten years, Bede credits Oswald with uniting Bernicia and Deira to form the kingdom of Northumbria. Adomnán, after noting Oswald’s debts to Columba and Iona, memorialized Oswald as “ordained by God as emperor of all Britain.” By establishing the Iona cleric Aidan as bishop over his kingdom, Oswald increased Iona’s opportunities for expansion into northern Britain. Iona gained daughter-​houses in the monasteries of Lindisfarne,

39

Emergence of the Pictish Kings  39

Coldingham, and Melrose. Oswald and Oswiu also gained new trade networks and military opportunities. Control of the land route between Iona and Lindisfarne probably also expedited the Northumbrian occupation of southern Pictish lands and accompanying tribute demands from Dál Riata and northern British territories. Towards the end of the seventh century our sources indicate that the southern Picts had become restless under the Northumbrian “yoke.” It is likely that King Oswiu’s death in 670 was seen as an opportunity to test the cohesion of the Northumbrian hegemony and the military strength of his son Ecgfrith. In 671 Irish chronicles and Stephen of Ripon in his Life of Wilfrid describe “innumerable” Pictish nations (Latin gentes) under King Drest son of Donuel (ca. 664–​671) mustering to expel the Northumbrians from their territories. Drest may have come into his kingship after his success at the battle of Lutho Feirnn in 664, which is also the first mention of the territory of Fortriu. He was unable to convert this to a victory over the Northumbrians in 671, lost the kingship, and was sent into exile. He was succeeded by Bridei son of Bili (ca. 671–​693) whose genealogy reveals the degree to which northern royal dynasties were interconnected. Nennius’s ninth-​century Historia Brittonum tells us that he was cousin to King Ecgfrith (via Edwin’s daughter) while the tenth-​ century Betha Adamnáin ascribes his paternity to the king of Al Clut. A Welsh genealogical tract names Bridei’s paternal grandfather as Neithon map Guipno, who was probably the Nectonius magnus filius Wirp listed in the Pictish king-​lists.

Battle of Dún Nechtain It is indicative of the political importance of Bridei son of Bili’s reign that the chronicles begin to take a close interest in Pictish affairs from this point. At his death in 693 Irish chronicles refer to him as the king of Fortriu (Latin rex Fortrend), potentially recording the beginning of a Pictish dynastic over-​k ingship. Until recently, scholars located the territory of Fortriu in southern Pictland. They identified the

40

40  Chapter 2

Figure 2. West face of Aberlemno 2 cross-​slab, photo by Otter, CC BY-SA 3.0, wikicommons.

battle site of Dún Nechtain with the village of Dunnichen in Angus where, they suggested, the sources claim Bridei vanquished the Northumbrians from his grandfather’s land. Positioning the territory of Fortriu south of the Mounth meant that the political centre of Pictland was considered to have always been in the Tay valley region,

41

Emergence of the Pictish Kings  41

which impacted historical constructs and the choice of sites for archaeological excavation. Alex Woolf’s article in 2006 argued persuasively that Dunachton, in Badenoch and Strathspey, more accurately fitted the topographical descriptions of the battle site and he re-​positioned Fortriu within Moray and Easter Ross, north of the Mounth.1 This accords with Adomnán’s depiction of Columba’s visit to Bridei son of Mailcon near Inverness and reconciles other problematic aspects of a southern hegemony able to coalesce while under Northumbrian overlordship. While Woolf’s repositioning of Fortriu has not received unanimous support, it has encouraged new examinations of northern Pictish sites and a reconsideration of Pictish political cohesion. On Saturday, May 20, 685, Bridei son of Bili won a decisive victory over the Northumbrian King Ecgfrith and his forces. The Battle of Dún Nechtain (noted in the Irish chronicles as Cath Dún Nechtain, in Old Welsh as Gueith Linn Garan and in an eleventh-​century English source as Nechtansmere) had important outcomes for the northern kingdoms:  the recovery of southern Pictish territories occupied by Northumbrians for at least a generation; a proportion of northern British and Dál Riata settlements gained freedom from Northumbrian overlordship; and the Northumbrian bishop Trumwine gave up his ecclesiastical see at Abercorn and any claim to be bishop of the Picts. Most importantly it became a rallying point for Pictish political cohesion. It offered a story of military victory that became part of Pictish identity; the battle scene carved onto the Aberlemno 2 stone in Angus may relate to this triumph. Irish sources waxed lyrical, seeing it as just revenge for the Northumbrians’ aggressive assault on Mag Breg in Ireland in the previous year: the poem Iniu feras Bruide cath claimed “that restitution be made.” Bede spares little sympathy for Ecgfrith’s “rash” actions and laments that this was the moment Northumbria’s hope and strength wavered and slipped backwards. The battle marks the end of what is interpreted as a five-​year campaign by Bridei to organize a coherent resistance to Northumbrian deprivations.

42

42  Chapter 2 Between 679 and 685 Irish chronicles detail sieges and military engagements occurring across Pictland that are now interpreted as confederating activities by Bridei son of Bili. Bridei is named as the protagonist who “destroyed” (Latin deletae) the Orkneys in ca. 681 and the other entries read like a series of targeted military campaigns against northern political strongholds. First Dunbeath (Dún Baite) in Caithness was besieged in ca. 679, followed by Dunottar (Dún Foither) in Aberdeenshire the next year. The destruction of Orkney was next and a year later in ca. 682 Dunadd (Dún At) in Argyll and Dundurn (Dún Duirn) in Perth and Kinross were besieged. Dunadd was probably a residence of the Dál Riata kin-​group, the Cenél Comgaill, and it was assumed that the Pictish boar carved into the fort’s rock floor relates to this siege. There are, however, indications that Bridei and the Cenél Comgaill were allies in this period. Dundurn was a strategic and significant border fort between the southern Picts and Dál Riata. One suggested scenario is that Bridei called in his Strathclyde British allies to mount attacks on these key sites. Another is that Bridei himself was besieged in Dundurn fort by the Dál Riata in reprisal for the siege of Dunadd. Sieges were effective political tools of subjugation with minimal loss of lives compared to pitched battles. The record of consecutive sieges does look like an attempt by Bridei to widen his hold over northern Pictland through targeted military attacks on elite centres. With northern dissent subjugated, Bridei and his confederates became a distinct threat to Northumbrian control over southern Pictish regions. Adomnán’s account of an Orkney ruler at the court of Bridei son of Mailcon also corresponds to the political reality of Bridei son of Bili’s reign when Orkney was subjugated. The wording of the chronicle entry (deletae—​destroyed) certainly suggests a radical alteration in effective local rule. Moreover, Adomnán’s detail that Bridei held hostages at his court to ensure the Orkney ruler’s compliance describes a typical tactic used by centralizing kings in this period. Overall the implication is of a highly mobile Fortriu king, capable of making complex alliances and commanding fleets of seaworthy vessels, with sufficient

43

Emergence of the Pictish Kings  43

military strength to coerce and impress a federation of northern Pictish support. After the Battle of Dún Nechtain, Bridei reigned a further eight years, during which the chronicles have little to say on Pictish affairs. This is not necessarily an indicator of lack of conflict, and scholars generally view Bridei’s reign as a turning point in the consolidation of a Pictish regnum (kingdom). Just how stable this hegemony or federation of provinces was is open to question given that Bridei’s alliances were personal and in many cases coercive. Similarly, questions remain as to how southern Pictland fared in the absence of Northumbrian oversight. While Bridei’s control may not have extended as far south as Strathearn, Abernethy may nevertheless have operated as a Pictish bishopric with his support. Adding to the political complexity, the sources begin to further differentiate among the kin-​groups (cenéla) of the Dál Riata who continue to be combative. The Strathclyde Britons seem to hold their own. Northumbria had a new king in the Irish-​ fostered and trained Aldfrith (685–​705) who, Bede claimed, “restored the shattered fortunes of the kingdom, though within smaller boundaries.” Iona responded quickly, with Adomnán visiting Aldfrith’s court in 686 to petition for the release of Irish captives taken in the 684 raid on Mag Breg. Iona’s fortunes, however, did not improve as Aldfrith turned his eyes towards an Anglo-​Saxon rather than Irish-​led episcopacy. This may have encouraged Adomnán to pursue closer ties with Bridei son of Bili. The late Betha Adamnáin provides a poignant portrait of Adomnán mourning Bridei in his coffin, and we also have his interesting claim, in the Life of St Columba, that the saint’s monasteries in Pictland prevented plague from entering the kingdom in this period. Adomnán’s ascendant relationship with Fortriu is now seen as pivotal to the emerging dynasty and the organization of churches in Pictland. In what appears to be a smooth transition, Taran son of Entifidich (ca. 693–​697) succeeded Bridei as king; he would soon be evicted from office by another Bridei.

4

44  Chapter 2

Political Assembly and Rhynie Political assembly, particularly on monumental mounds, was the primary vehicle of governance throughout north and north-​ west Europe in this period. There are sufficient correlations in the types of sites and purposes of assembly among the Irish, Anglo-​Saxons, Welsh, and Scandinavians to suggest it was a long-​term collective practice. Regular assemblies reinforced identity and status. They also ensured the maintenance and extension of communal memory of all types of social and economic contracts, being an ideal venue to expedite issues of justice and to gain consensus. As a forum that made leadership visible and politically convincing, it had an important role in the centralization of authority; mustering for warfare; framing of laws; establishing contracts; and granting of political favours. Moreover, comparative evidence indicates the act of assembly could be deployed at a local, regional, and national level; this organizational pattern has inspired modern analogies to local, state, and national cricket teams, or layers of government. The practice of assembly survived into the modern era as local fairs coinciding with saints’ feast days or quarter days. Place-​ name studies have identified numerous toponyms relating to assembly across Scotland that have raised some intriguing possibilities for Pictish social and political organization. A desktop survey of the Scottish toponym cuthill (Old Irish comdál, Gaelic comhdhail—​ assembly, meeting) found that these sites of local open-​air justice and assembly were typically on a mound or flat-​topped hill. There was never more than one to a parish.2 Other toponyms, such as eireachd (Gaelic airecht—​ court, gathering) and mòd (Gaelic mhòid from Old English mōt—​court, trial or meeting) often included the Irish and Welsh toponymic tulach and tom, meaning hillock.3 Frustratingly, no equivalent Pictish place-name for assembly has been identified, although it may be conjectured that Gaelic or Norse (thing sites) place-names may overlie traditional Pictish meeting sites. Until recently, the inauguration mound at Scone in Perth­ shire was the only archaeologically attested assembly site in

45

Emergence of the Pictish Kings  45

Scotland. The excavation found that the mound was deliberately re-​created in the ninth century as a site of royal inauguration, possibly to make manifest a new social identity and territorial focus for the collective kingdom of Alba.4 A similar phenomenon was suggested for the earlier Northumbrian site of Yeavering, Ad Gefrin: the site fell out of use when the focus for royal power shifted to accommodate a new political agenda. In this case, Bede contributes a rare insight into how Yeavering concentrated regnal authority. It was from this assembly site that, during his regular royal circuit, King Edwin (616–​633) introduced and imposed a radical social and cultural change on his people: Christian conversion and baptism. Yeavering combined a royal residence with an assembly in the same way that Irish sites (such as Óenach Tailten) combined royal inauguration, a legal and royal court and political assembly. Restrictions as to who was allowed to travel to these assemblies reinforced the hierarchical status quo. In Anglo-​Saxon law attendees were regarded as inviolate while they travelled to and from the assembly and for the duration of the meeting. This made assembly sites ideal spaces for treaty negotiations and visiting diplomats. The creation or abandonment of royal assembly sites, such as Yeavering, may point to increasing territorial consolidation by a king, resulting in larger assemblies on traditional sites and the creation of new sites to showcase and legitimize aspirant political power. Sites appear to be chosen with regard to the topography and proximity of ancient monuments such as Neolithic henges and monoliths, suggesting the deliberate appropriation of the past, via visible monuments, to authenticate contemporary authority. Current theories suggest these sites were constantly being re-​modelled to incorporate more complex rituals. This allows us to put the recently discovered site of Rhynie, Aberdeenshire into context as a possible major site of early Pictish assembly and royal power.5 The village of Rhynie is situated on a significant crossroads near the western border of Aberdeenshire. It is nestled within a glen pass and overlooked by an Iron Age fort perched on top of the massive hill known as the Tap o’Noth. Given

46

46  Chapter 2 the number of Neolithic monuments in the vicinity, this landscape was a spiritual focus over a long period. There are a concentration of Pictish symbol stones within the parish; one bearing an unusual incised image of a bearded man carrying an axe, known as the Rhynie Man.6 The Craw Stane, a megalith retro-​incised with symbols of a Pictish beast and salmon, sits on a prominent mound and is the focus of continuing excavations. Consecutive excavation seasons have revealed an important Pictish power centre. Two phases of building were uncovered: a banked enclosure dating from ca. 400 CE which was followed in ca. 500–​550 by the construction of a substantial wooden structure with a ditch and palisade enclosing three large rectilinear wooden buildings. The palisade and ditch is interpreted as more symbolically defensive than purely functional. A square barrow cemetery nearby is linked to this later phase. Moulds for pins and brooches indicate that high-​status metalworking occurred on the site, and fragments of continental glass, Mediterranean amphora, and E-​ware pottery from Gaul implies access to trade. A possible reconstruction of the place-name Rhynie in early Celtic may be *rīgonin or *rīgonīn, meaning “place of a great king.” Ongoing excavations and analysis of the wider landscape will provide evidence of a particularly opaque period of Pictish history. It is already prompting a reconsideration of early Pictish political cohesion in the north. The sophisticated material assemblage, at a site some distance from the coast or the Great Glen route, implies access to trade networks. This casts doubt on traditional assumptions that trade rarely penetrated the coastal fringes. Moreover the Rhynie Man carving, the hammer-​shaped pin, and the ceremonial aspect of the building work may offer a glimpse of a pre-​ Christian cult centre. The site may also have acted as a neutral place of assembly for travellers across Pictland and potentially for visiting diplomats from other kingdoms. The significant reinvestment of resources in the site after a century of apparent use and the later church dedication to St. Moluag offers scope for examining political and social change. Attention is now focusing on these sites of political maintenance as important venues of community action.

47

Emergence of the Pictish Kings  47

Figure 3. Craw Stane with Pictish symbols, Rhynie. Author’s photo.

Pictish Symbols and Stones The most defining artistic characteristic of the Picts was their use of symbols (animal and geometric) incised or sculptured on stone and other artefacts. Art historians have suggested that the  animal designs in particular echo Scythian and Mediterranean art styles, possibly filtered through Roman objects. In turn, it was recently speculated that Pictish animal designs influenced the Northumbrian illuminators of the late seventh-​ century Echternach Gospels. Pictish symbols were in use over a long period, from simple incised carvings on undressed stones and cave walls to their use on elaborate cross-​slabs. The symbols have a distinct cultural character; a limited and static corpus of approximately fifty designs suggests a communally understood symbolic language.7 Attempts to interpret the symbols concentrated on their occasional use as burial markers which, by extrapolation, suggested

48

48  Chapter 2 that the symbols represent personal names. The discovery of fragmented symbol stones in long-​cist burials appeared to validate this conjecture, but it is unsupported by the wider data-​set. A  recent statistical analysis of the symbol pairings has nevertheless  come down in favour of the theory that they represent names.8 This proposal has gained support but explanations are yet to fully resolve the broader function of the symbols on stones, objects, and cave walls. If, as is suggested, the symbols represent a form of writing (that we merely lack the ability to interpret) then their prevalence may suggest a “literate” culture in which the symbols carried the same meaning for a Pict in Fife as they did for a Pict on Orkney.9 The distribution pattern of the symbols suggests that they were largely confined to areas regarded as Pictish. Single outliers such as at Trusty’s Hill and Dunadd fort may reflect military or diplomatic connections. The symbols incised on cave walls, such as Wemyss in Fife, are interpreted as drafts for designs on metalwork or other materials. One theory is that portable objects bearing symbols were circulated in southern Pictland before being applied to the symbol stones in the north, or vice versa. Small stone disks bearing symbols were also found on Shetland; these were possibly used as tokens. The concentration of symbol stones in Aberdeenshire encouraged the view that it was the political centre from which the symbols originated. The presence of symbol stones in Orkney, Shetland, Caithness, and Skye has also tied these territories firmly into a putative early Pictish political hegemony. Likewise, their absence from Atholl may imply its autonomy. It is generally agreed that these symbols articulate power and relationships of authority. A  theory gaining increasing support is that the symbols were developed and propagated as a way for the Picts to consciously differentiate themselves. Eschewing the Latin alphabet in favour of symbols and ogham text was possibly a deliberate policy that emphasized a sense of cultural separateness in response to a communal memory of the Picts as antagonists of Rome. The corpus of Scotland’s surviving sculptured monuments was first published in

49

Emergence of the Pictish Kings  49

1903; in it the stones were grouped into distinct categories.10 Although this taxonomic impulse is now seen as unnecessarily restrictive, scholars continue to distinguish artefacts carrying Pictish symbols into two main groups: Class I, which includes incised carvings of the symbols with no other decorative motifs, and Class II, which is reserved for symbols appearing on carved cross-​slabs. Class IIs will be discussed in the next chapter. Class  I  is a broad category. It includes symbols incised, often in pairs, on undressed stones (sometimes Neolithic megaliths), cave walls, and silver ornaments. Many were moved from their original sites and re-​ used in buildings. As yet there is no secure dating and art historians have suggested a long period of design development in other media such as wood and textile. The silver plaque from the Norrie’s Law hoard, Fife suggests the decorative employment of symbols by elites on clothing and horse accoutrements. Widely divergent dates from the second to seventh century have been put forward for their creation. Similarly, attempts to develop a chronology based on the design evolution of the symbols are inconclusive. Pictish symbol stones from the recently excavated fort at Dunnicaer may indicate that these designs were being developed as early as the third or fourth century. The symbols from this site are rough and somewhat unresolved, prompting speculation that they date from the earliest strata of development. Class  Is from Rhynie may suggest that by the sixth century, at least, the design and corpus of symbols was resolved. The longevity of their use means they cannot be used to date sites but they are now seen as diagnostic of a Pictish presence. Analysis of the distribution of Class  I  stones raised a number of theories about their function, such as their use to memorialize burials. Alternative theories maintain that they were situated on high ground as “signposts” or to indicate a proprietary claim. On the north-​ east mainland they are often sited along inland routes and at the head of glens, while having a predominately coastal distribution in Caithness, Orkney, Shetland, and Skye. Certainly the larger symbol stones

50

50  Chapter 2 would have made visible statements of authority in the landscape that reflected a conscious social process of creation and erection. This is particularly the case where earlier megaliths were re-​purposed with incised symbols. Moreover, it is likely that the symbol stones were painted to increase their visibility. Scholars now view Class Is as functioning in a variety of ways: not just as semantic statements but objects rooted permanently within the landscape that construct and memorialize the past while reaffirming communal identity in an ongoing discourse. As a consequence the symbol stones accrued individual sacral identities.

Metalworkers Evidence of blacksmithing and non-​ferrous metalworking is found on most excavated sites dating to the Pictish period. Ironworking was well developed by the Roman period and was a ubiquitous presence. Residue from ironworking was also found in caves and “bothy”-​type structures. Local sources of iron (bog iron ore) were exploited while on Orkney considerable effort went into importing sufficient fuel in order to work iron. There are also indications that the smelting of ore was an organized industry, and some iron was imported from England. Irish laws indicate that artisans, particularly metalworkers, adhered to established professional standards relating to weights, measures, purity of metal, and formalized apprenticeships. Evidence also points to blacksmiths having considerable status in their communities where their possession of craft secrets set them apart, as did the noxious aspects of their craft. In Welsh, Irish, and Anglo-​Saxon cosmographies the blacksmith was socially marginal, being both beneficial and dangerous. He was one of the few artisans to be consistently deified: in Wales he was Gofannon, in Ireland Goibniu, and in England Wēland. Silver features prominently in Pictish metalwork ­production and became the precious metal of choice after the Roman period. The massive double-​linked silver chains found mostly south of the Firth of Forth, with four in Pictish regions, were

51

Emergence of the Pictish Kings  51

probably produced soon after the Roman withdrawal. Scholars have identified the chains as products of Pictish metalworkers due to two examples bearing Pictish symbols (on a terminal ring from Whitecleugh, Lanarkshire and on the chain from Parkhill, Aberdeenshire). Northern leaders in this period clearly had access to large reserves of silver and the desire to showcase it on their person. The Traprain Law silver hoard, most likely concealed in the hillfort during the fifth century, represents a small portion of the silver in circulation at the end of the Roman period which had found its way into the hands of Pictish metalworkers. In the nineteenth century hacksilber hoards—​like those found at Norrie’s Law, Fife and Gaulcross in Aberdeenshire—​were often dispersed and melted down. Despite this, sufficient quantities survive in museum collections as scrap or finished objects to suggest that this highly prized metal accelerated the development of new forms of personal ornament and design elaboration. Recent excavations at Gaulcross discovered a cache of silver objects missed by the antiquarians.11 Traditionally the deposition of the Norrie’s Law hoard was dated to the seventh to eighth centuries due to two of the silver plaques bearing Pictish symbols (one was recently identified as a nineteenth-​century fake). Correlations between the items found in the Gaulcross and Norries Law hoards now suggest that both were deposited in the fifth to sixth centuries. There are various interpretations as to how these hoards came into Pictland:  payment for Roman military service; raids; trade; or Roman subsidies. Similarly, the deposition of the hoards are interpreted as votive offerings; a metalworker’s cache, or buried under conditions of crisis or convenience. One of the most well-​known deposits of precious metalwork is the St. Ninian’s Isle treasure found under a cross-​marked slab in a chapel on Shetland. Possibly secreted in the face of Viking invasion or placed in “secure deposit” by the local ruling family, the predominately silver treasure is of Pictish craftsmanship and displays the distinct wear of heirloom objects. There are penannular brooches similar in style to those made on the Brough of Birsay, Orkney, sword chapes, and decorative hanging bowls.12

52

52  Chapter 2 Silver probably had an impact on trade and legal transac­ tions. Irish laws of this period begin to abandon the currency of the female slave (cumal) in preference for ounces of silver. At a number of metalworking sites ingot moulds have turned up alongside crucibles and clay moulds for pins and brooches (such as the Brough of Birsay, Orkney; Clatchard Craig, Fife; and, most recently, Rhynie). They were dated typologically to between the seventh and eighth centuries. While it is yet to be determined if these ingot moulds are of a standardized capacity, their presence offers some intriguing possibilities for trade, patronage, and regulated manufacture. The moulds suggest that non-​ferrous metals were melted down in situ, possibly from recycled objects, to be further worked into new ornaments. The clay moulds for pins and brooches display designs with a sophisticated understanding of geometry. Non-​ferrous metalworking was generally associated with high-​status secular and ecclesiastical sites, but this is currently being challenged by finds from Shetland and the Hebrides.13 Nevertheless, the assemblages at Birsay, and the clay moulds found at Craig Phadraig, Inverness-​shire, Clatchard Craig, Portmahomack, and now Rhynie conform to the view that Pictish elite largely controlled the production of fine metalwork. Adding together the skills required to create the finely worked objects (such as those from the St. Ninian’s Isle hoard) and the precious materials employed, it can be inferred that Pictish society supported full-​ time specialist artisans learning their professions in formalized apprenticeships. The increased production of fine metalwork is explained as a shift from communal expressions of power, through architecture, to individual displays of prerogative. One of the most ubiquitous of these prestige items was the penannular brooch. This form, with its ribbed hoop and movable pin, had been popular since the Iron Age, and the Pictish brooches differ sufficiently from Irish annular versions to suggest a deliberate design choice. Production of these brooches occurred at Brough of Birsay, Clatchard Craig, and Dunadd, where the brooch moulds display design affinities between the sites

53

Emergence of the Pictish Kings  53

and production usually occurred in single phases. The general consensus is that the penannular brooch was a marker of status, possibly to designate an office bearer or participant in the political hierarchy. The brooch moulds differ in size and, the residue suggests, composition of precious and non-​ precious metals. A Pictish term for brooch was also detected in an early Irish status tract that suggests their development as signifiers of status was a Pictish innovation.14 The brooch designs carry layers of meaning and their socio-​political use was apparently shared by secular and ecclesiastical elites. Their production implies elite, if not royal, patronage, where the items were part of a gift-​giving exchange that created networks of social obligation. Perhaps the most significant aspect of this type of brooch was that it broadcast a range of political statements wherever the wearer travelled, particularly outside their traditional territories of operation.

Trade and Mobility It is difficult to ascertain the extent of trade into and out of Pictland. This includes evidence of the type of export goods—​ beyond furs, hunting dogs, and slaves—​that could encourage regular exchange networks. Trade items discovered in Pictland are often interpreted as diplomatic gifts sent from south-​west England or Ireland. This theory arises from the paucity of imports found at excavated sites, particularly the duns and forts analogous to Dunadd in Argyll, which did reveal involvement in long-​ distance trade. The single sceat coin found at Portmahomack along with recent finds at Rhynie (including amber beads from east England, and Mediterranean and Gaulish pottery) are prompting a reconsideration of Pictish access to long-​ distance trade. While the excavators caution that one or two finds do not make an established trade network, they do open the way for considering how these artefacts arrived at the sites. In the Rhynie case, these imports were carried some distance inland, while the harbour at Portmahomack would certainly have expedited access to north Atlantic sea lanes. The scale

54

54  Chapter 2 of vellum production and craft workshops at Portmahomack also suggests that the monastery had goods to trade. Without diagnostic evidence for inward trade, however, it is difficult to discuss the export/​import potential of other harbours near promontory forts like Burghead, or Craig Phadraig at the end of the Moray Firth, or even the accessible stretch of pebble beach near the church of Rosemarkie on the Black Isle at the head of this firth. Evidence of long-​distance trade has traditionally underpinned our evaluation of social and economic complexity. Economic theories of social change argue that rising elites employed gift-​giving and cultural capital to accumulate power, thereby driving the demand for trade, particularly in luxury goods. This was thought to require ever-​increasing surplus production (leading to the commodification of resources). Urban markets then developed to facilitate and regulate trade. The excavator of Portmahomack, Martin Carver, offers a different reading of the evidence where “cult” centres rather than the secular elite drove trade and economic change. He suggests that the ceremonial site of Rhynie and the monastic centre of Portmahomack were congregational sites where people participated in cultic rituals that became increasingly complex. Resources were drawn into these congregational centres as pilgrims stimulated demand for the creation and import of sacred objects (fine metalworking) and alterations to the monumental ritual landscape (symbol stones). This stimulated surplus production, accelerated by the acquisition of new technologies, and an exchange system of service or goods.15 This theory suggests that we look to cult or congregational centres as the Early Medieval economic powerhouses where trade flourished rather than to the high-​status forts. Early ecclesiastical sites are recognized as the nodes through which new cultural ideas and material were transmitted to the populace. The relationship between rulers and the church was therefore pivotal and evidence points to early bishoprics being established in close proximity to secular centres, such as Rosemarkie at the mouth of the

5

Emergence of the Pictish Kings  55

Moray Firth, leading to Bridei’s putative fort near Inverness. Artefacts, such as the penannular brooch, also suggest that some members of Pictish society were mobile. The penannular brooch was a versatile indicator of status and affiliation that was in use over a long period. The manufacture of similar types at Dunadd and in Ireland points to the brooch being a recognizable transnational symbol. The Christian symbology of some of their designs has led to suggestions that they were also worn by church officials to advertise their status as they travelled between churches inside and outside their territories. According to Bede and Adomnán, some monasteries drew students from all across Britain and Ireland in pursuit of knowledge. Notable churchmen would also travel between institutions and to Gaul and Rome. It evokes an image of continual travel along busy seaways, rivers, and glens. A chronicle note of 728 refers to the destruction of 150 Pictish ships off the Banffshire coast and, added to the number of times Orkney came under attack, we should imagine a society as physically and intellectually mobile as their Irish and Anglo-​ Saxon neighbours. Traffic and trade between these northern polities went both ways, like their marriage alliances and the sanctuary offered to exiled royalty. The idea of the Picts as isolated from the wider cultural continuum of the Latin west needs to be revised. Notes 1  Alex Woolf, “Dún Nechtain, Fortriu and the Geography of the Picts,” Scottish Historical Review 85 (2006): 182–​201. 2  Geoffrey W.  S. Barrow, “Popular Courts in Early Medieval Scotland:  Some Suggested Place-​Name Evidence,” Scottish Studies 25 (1981): 1–​24. 3  Oliver J.  T. O’Grady, “The Setting and Practise of Open-​air Judicial Assemblies in Medieval Scotland:  A Multidisciplinary Study” (PhD dissertation, University of Glasgow, 2008). 4  Stephen T. Driscoll, “The Archaeological Context of Assembly in Early Medieval Scotland—​ Scone and its Comparanda,” in Assembly Places and Practices in Medieval Europe, ed. Aliki Pantos and Sarah Semple (Dublin: Four Courts Press, 2004), 73–​94.

56

56  Chapter 2 5  Gordon Noble and Meggen Gondek, “Symbol Stones in Context: Excavations at Rhynie, an Undocumented Pictish Power Centre of the 6th–​7th Centuries AD?,” MA 55 (2011): 317–​21. 6  Meggen Gondek and Gordon Noble, “Together as One: The Landscape of the Symbol Stones at Rhynie, Aberdeenshire,” in Pictish Progress:  New Studies on Northern Britain in the Early Middle Ages, ed. Stephen T. Driscoll, Jane Geddes, and Mark A. Hall (Leiden: Brill, 2011), 281–​305. 7  Katherine Forsyth, “Some Thoughts on Pictish Symbols as a Formal Writing System,” in The Worm the Germ and the Thorn. Pictish and Related Studies Presented to Isabel Henderson, ed. D. Henry (Balgavies: Pinkfoot Press, 1997), 85–​98. 8  Rob Lee, “The Use of Information Theory to Determine the Language Character Type of Pictish Symbols,” Scottish Archaeo­ logical Journal 32 (2010): 137–​76. 9  Elisabeth Okasha, “The Non-​Ogam Inscriptions of Pictland,” Cambridge Medieval Celtic Studies 9 (1985): 43–​69. 10  J. Romilly Allen and Joseph Anderson, The Early Christian Monuments of Scotland, 2 vols. (Repr., Balgavies: Pinkfoot Press, 1993). 11  Gordon Noble, Martin Goldberg, Alistair McPherson, and Oskar Sveinbjarnarson, “(Re)discovering the Gaulcross Hoard,” Antiquity 90 (2016): 726–​41. 12  To view these artefacts visit the National Museum of Scotland’s web page:  www.nms.ac.uk/​explore/​stories/​scottish-​ history-​and-​archaeology/​st-​ninians-​isle-​treasure/​ 13  Andrew Heald, “The Interpretation of Non-​ferrous Metal­ working in Early Historic Scotland,” in Pictish Progress, 221–​41. 14  Colmán Etchingham and Catherine Swift, “English and Pictish Terms for Brooch in an 8th-​Century Irish Law-​Text,” MA 48 (2004): 31–​49. 15  Martin Carver, “Commerce and Cult: Confronted Ideologies in 6th–​9th-​Century Europe,” MA 59 (2015): 1–​23.

57

58

Map 3. Ecclesiastical sites.

59

Chapter 3

Origin Myths, Churches, and Kings

The brothers Bridei son of Derelei (ca. 697–​706) and Necton son of Derelei (ca. 706/​710–​724/​732) were pivotal in the development of the Pictish kingdom. Their reigns coincide with a comparative increase in contemporary sources which has given historians the opportunity to develop various explanatory narratives of Pictish political progress. As a result, it is one of the most regularly re-​envisioned historical periods. Before Bridei son of Derelei became king, however, he had to remove Taran son of Entifidich (ca. 693–​697). Just a year into Taran’s reign the chronicles note the siege of Dunottar; this argues against unanimous support for his ascension. Exactly how or why Taran was ousted from office and sent into exile two years later is uncertain, although scholars have detected the hand of Iona in the manoeuvre. Parallels with Taran’s fate and a story in the Life of St Columba were identified; particularly in its depiction of Taran, the exiled nobleman from Pictland who is given succour by Columba. What may link Adomnán more directly to this event is that, in the same year as Taran is deprived of kingship, Bridei son of Derelei is named guarantor to the abbot’s famous Cáin Adomnáin (also known in Latin as lex innocentium—​law of the innocents).1 A  compensatory law protecting non-​combatants (women, children, clerics, and churches), it was issued at the synod of Birr, Ireland in 697. Its signatories included kings and bishops of Ireland, Dál Riata, and Pictland. In the list of guarantors Bridei is styled rí Cruithintuathi (Old Irish—​king of the Picts); a

60

60  Chapter 3 genitive singular construct that implies the king represented a single polity, not just a single province. The guarantor list also provides the first mention of a bishop of the Picts, one Curetán of Rosemarkie. Despite their relative increase, sources in this period have proved confusing, with Bridei and Necton accorded different patronyms: sons of Dargart and/​or sons of Derelei. It was assumed that this referred to four separate individuals, who happened to share similar first names. A  2004 article by Thomas Clancy offered a resolution to these discrepancies. By exploring a range of sources, he determined it likely that Bridei and Necton’s father was Dairgart mac Finguine of the Cenél Comgaill (died ca. 686/​693), from a branch of the Dál Riata.2 It followed that Derelei was Bridei and Necton’s mother, a royal member of the Fortriu dynasty whose father was possibly Bridei son of Bili. This neatly tied into Bede’s contemporary Pictish origin legend that stated the selection of a king through the maternal royal line (matrilineal succession) was allowable “when any dispute arose” as to the succession. It is notable that when a source specifies either the patronym or matronym it is relational. So in 710, when the chronicles note “a conflict among the Cenél Comgaill in which two sons of Nectain m.  Doirgarto were killed,” Necton’s patronym reflects the context of a paternal familial encounter. In 726, when he is imprisoned by his successor Drust, he is referred to as “Nectan m. Deir Ile.” In his wide-​ranging paper, Clancy also places Dargart’s sub-​branch of the Cenél Comgaill in Manau (territory within Strathearn and Clackmannanshire). One of his sources for this claim is a late hagiographical account of St. Serf which describes a Brude filius Dargart offering the saint the land of Culross in Strathearn with the approval of Adomnán.3 This donation, as part of his father’s putative patrimony, was a politically expedient means of consolidating the southern frontier against continuing Bernician depredations. Clancy’s paper included another notable departure from the traditional historiography, which was to consider that Bede’s account of Necton’s learning was a faithful portrayal. Clancy’s theories have not received unanimous support, but they have

61

Origin Myths, Churches, and Kings  61

proven influential to historians such as James Fraser, who has redefined our understanding of Bridei’s relationship with Iona and the political consolidation of Pictland. A Dál Riata genealogical tract, dated to pre-​719, describes four competing cenéla (kindred or group) in this period: the cenéla nGabráin, Loairn, Oengus, and Comgaill.4 The Cenél Comgaill is first noted in Irish annals in 710 in relation to the killing of Necton’s sons. Their emergence in chronicle records at this point raised the possibility that this cenél had compacted a military alliance with Bridei son of Bili, rewarded by marriage into the Fortriu dynasty. Alliance with the Cenél Comgaill would have ensured that the offspring of Derelei enjoyed advantageous connections with the Dál Riata and their affiliates in Ireland. In this period, political alliances between northern British groups, the Picts, and the Dál Riata are complex and fluctuating. One alliance was potentially between the Picts and the Cenél Loairn who held territory at one end of the Great Glen from Fortriu. Their geographic propinquity would indicate a long-​standing relationship. In 701 Selbach mac Ferchar of the Cenél Loairn became king of the Dál Riata and parallels between his and Necton’s later careers hints at a connection between the two rulers. The influence of Iona and the familia Columbae (Iona and her daughter foundations) under Adomnán also played a dominant role in Pictland due to the abbot’s apparent personal relationship with the king. Bridei’s reign appears intertwined with two of Adomnán’s projects; the abbot’s Cáin Adomnáin and the patronage of St. Serf. It is possible that Adomnán added many of the stories about St. Columba’s interactions with Bridei son of Mailcon to his opus on the saint at this time. A year into Bridei son of Derelei’s reign he may have needed the support of his Comgaill kin. The chronicles note a battle between “Saxons and the Picts” in which a “Bectrid son of Bernith” fell. It is likely that Bectrid was attempting to re-​take territory in Manau and Fife where his father had ruled as a sub-​regulus during the Bernician occupation. Bridei’s victory appears to be followed by his property donation to St. Serf under the aegis of Adomnán. In this period Clatchard

62

62  Chapter 3 Craig fort in Fife, to the north of the Comgaill’s new territory, underwent renovations; possibly to ensure Pictish oversight of the region. A disruption in northern politics occurred with Adomnán’s death in 704, which appears to have sparked a crisis on Iona and among the familia Columbae.5 Bridei lost a spiritual advisor who had built an extensive diplomatic network among northern rulers. Between Bridei’s death in 706 and the killing of Necton’s sons in 710 the chronicles refer to only one incident in Pictland: a battle in the Orkneys in 709 in which the otherwise unattested son of Artabláir was killed. As noted previously, Necton is accorded the patronymic Dargart in relation to the 710 killing of his sons. It is worth considering the wider ramifications of this loss, as there is no hint in the chronicles that these deaths initiated reprisals. This has raised the possibility that a settlement was reached with the perpetrators, suggesting that blood feuds were being effectively managed by compensatory legislation. A  flurry of aggressive conflicts followed over the next few years, beginning with the Bernicians “slaughtering” the Picts on the plain of Manau in 711. Fights between the Dál Riata and Strathclyde Britons are noted with a long record in 713 about the “slaughter” of Ciniod son of Derelei. In the next note “King Nechtan” captured Talorg son of Drostan, which raised the possibility that Necton only assumed the kingship at this point after removing his rival Talorg in revenge for Ciniod’s death. This is the same Talorg who is named king of Atholl in 739. The sources shed no light on whether Necton did directly succeed Bridei; the king-​lists imply a direct transfer rather than a hiatus.

Church Reforms While Necton’s reign begins and ends with internal conflict, his role in church reform is now recognized as significant. Scholars had previously written off Necton as a weak ruler. However, recent work is revising this view by examining his church reforms as acts of political and territorial consolidation. These reforms were initiated by Necton’s request to

63

Origin Myths, Churches, and Kings  63

Bede’s abbot, Ceolfrith of Wearmouth and Jarrow, for information on the correct method of dating Easter. This request may have formed part of a diplomatic exchange to establish peace between the Picts and Northumbrians. According to Bede a peace treaty existed between the two kingdoms in 731. Bede also informs us that Necton had considerable learning and already possessed various conflicting Easter tables; although there remains some resistance among scholars to the notion that a Pictish king had scriptural training. After the ensuing Pictish synod found against Iona’s Easter tables and method of tonsure, the monastery re-​assessed its position and in 716 Iona accepted the “Roman” Easter tables. In 717, however, the chronicles record the “expulsion of the community of Iona across Druim Alban by king Nechtan.” Various reasons for this expulsion were put forward: from Iona’s continued refusal to change their tonsure style to Necton’s endeavours to counter an Iona-​led ascendency in his kingdom. Likewise, theories on the extent of this expulsion envisage the wholesale expulsion of Iona clerics, the expulsion of a visiting delegation of Iona-​based clerics, or the eviction of an Iona episcopate from Logierait in Atholl. There are good reasons to suggest that Necton instituted a  period of ecclesiastical expansion. The centre of this operation was potentially  the bishopric at Rosemarkie. It is probably in this period that Bishop Curetán of Rosemarkie, signatory to the Cáin Adomnáin, was posthumously venerated as St.  Boniface. In addition, traditions associating Saints Maelrubha of Applecross and Moluag of Lismore with Rosemarkie may date to this period. The extent of Bridei and Necton’s territorial authority remains difficult to ascertain, but it is considered unlikely that they held southern territories in any but the loosest federation while some provinces, such as Atholl, may have remained autonomous. Orkney, likewise, appeared to require regular attention. The penetration of churches and saints’ cults into southern territories and Orkney in this period is considered one of the means by which the Derelei brothers extended their territorial control. Bridei’s property donation of Culross to St. Serf and the late

64

64  Chapter 3 hagiographical reference of Necton’s provision of the lands of Restenneth in Angus to St. Boniface imply that these were districts in which the Derelei brothers attempted to consolidate their authority. In 724 Necton entered clerical life (Latin clericatum) and Drust took the kingship. The nature of this clerical retirement remains debated: other kings of this period, notably Selbach of the Cenél Loairn, went into clericatum only to return to their kingship a few years later. The king-​lists suggest Drust ruled alongside another king, Elpín. They are accorded no patronymics, which makes it difficult to ascertain their relationship to the ruling dynasties. Whatever form clericatum took, Necton did not stay withdrawn for long. From 725 to 729 the chronicles record numerous battles among the Picts contesting the kingship. So prolific are the records that this contest must have been viewed with considerable interest and confusion in neighbouring scriptoriums and royal courts. They begin with the imprisonment of Drust’s son, followed in the next year by the imprisonment of Necton by Drust. This action eventually resulted in Drust’s exile and Elpín assumed the kingship alone. In 728 an impressive warlord named Onuist (Óengus/​ Angus) son of Vurguist defeated Elpín in battle at Moncrieffe Hill, south of Perth. Onuist then pursued him to (the unidentified) Castellum Credi, where the chronicles report “a woeful battle” in which Elpín was put to flight. The Annals of Tigernach at this point note that Necton re-​assumed the kingship, while the Annals of Clonmacnoise add that Eolbeck son of Moydan and the rest of the nobles turned their backs on Elpín to receive Necton as king. It does not appear to have resolved the conflict, as in the next year Onuist took the battle directly to the borders of Atholl (if Stagnum Loogdae is correctly identified as Loch Lochy, west of Perthshire).6 This battle was traditionally interpreted as the end of Necton’s kingship at the hands of his putative rival Onuist. The Latin terms hostem and exactatores in this record were recently re-​ assessed to connote that Onuist attacked Necton’s enemies over whom he triumphed, instead of the death of Necton’s host and tax gatherers as previously

65

Origin Myths, Churches, and Kings  65

assumed.7 Earlier, in 729, the Annals of Tigernach note the wrecking of 150 Pictish ships off Troup Head on the Banffshire coast. This has all the appearance of a, albeit failed, naval response issued possibly from Burghead. A final battle in 729 indicates that Drust remained a problem as Onuist defeated Drust “in the territories of the Picts.” We are left in doubt as to who claimed the kingship. Bede’s silence and the new reading of Onuist’s support of Necton suggest that Necton continued in the kingship until his death in 732. The nature of Necton’s relationship with Onuist remains obscure, with some scholars pointing out that Necton’s lack of appetite for conflict made him a pawn to Onuist’s opportunism. Onuist son of Vurguist is the next king, and his military skills earn him equal parts criticism and praise from his contemporaries. Instead of just protecting and consolidating the borders, this king crosses them and takes the battle to his enemies and the enemies of his allies. It indicates that in Onuist’s reign a Pictish kingdom was effectively consolidated and authority centralized.

King-​Lists, Succession, and Origin Myths The creation of genealogies and origin myths was ubiquitous among seventh-​to eighth-​century polities in Britain and Ireland. Usually with mythic progenitors, they enunciated a cohesive vision of ethnic unity and destiny. As authoritative written statements, these documents were scholarly attempts to legitimize territorial claims and construct identity by reconstituting the past. As such, they reveal the contemporary political agenda, aims, and alliances of the dominant leaderships. The short and long versions of the Pictish king-​lists (series breuior, series longior) represent this process of reconstruction over multiple periods.8 The lists appear to derive from a common source in circulation by the reign of Gartnait son of Donuel (ca. 656–​663). Various additions, such as the pseudo-​ historical progenitor Cruithne, were assigned to the reign of Constantín son of Cináeda (ca. 862–​876).9 The surviving manuscript versions of these lists are a hodgepodge of scribal errors and conflations, but they are nevertheless important as

6

66  Chapter 3 a genealogical record created for and by Picts. Research into their purpose and transmission history is ongoing. Historians are pursuing a similar analysis of the Pictish origin myths, of which a number of alternative traditions exist emanating from Irish and British sources. It is generally accepted that the origin myth preserved by Bede is the earliest version from a Pictish source. Bede’s Pictish origin myth has significantly influenced how the Picts are perceived into the modern period. In particular, the myth’s claim that “in all cases of doubt, they should elect their kings from the female royal line rather than the male” became the focus of a long-​running debate on whether the Picts were matrilineal or practised matriarchy. It is only recently that historians have diffused the issue by pointing out that Bede’s insertion of “when in doubt” does not equate to customary matrilineal succession and that succession through the female line also occasionally occurred among neighbouring kingdoms in this period.10 Similarly, the cultural history theories that sought to use the myth as an indicator of authentic ethnic origins are now abandoned. Current studies now suggest that Bede’s origin myth was constructed by the Fortriu dynasts in the late seventh century to legitimize Bridei and Necton’s claims to kingship through the maternal line. It also expressed an ideological statement reflecting the realpolitik of the period, in which Dál Riata allies supported Pictish sovereign rights (framed as an ancient marital alliance with the Irish). Moreover, the internal evidence regarding the myth’s claim that the Picts came from Scythia indicates the author had knowledge of both Servius’s Commentarius on Vergil’s Aeneid, and Isidore’s Etymologiae.11 Most western polities located their origins in classical antiquity in this period and the Picts, with their pseudo-​Scythian ancestry, were participating in this trend. It indicates a Pictish scholastic milieu which had a sophisticated degree of Latin learning, access to Latin texts and a desire to skilfully engage with ideas of ethnic solidarity. This does not necessarily mean unity was achieved. These types of origin myth are now recognized as self-​conscious attempts by elites to declare a manifest

67

Origin Myths, Churches, and Kings  67

destiny in order to construct a cohesive identity from heterogeneous provinces. Genealogies and origin myths aimed to present the app­ earance of an unbroken line of dynastic claimants, whereas the reality of succession practices among the Picts was probably more pragmatic. Chronicle references to rex Pictorum (king of the Picts) and rex Fortrenn (king of Fortriu) are now viewed as titles of a Pictish over-​king that nevertheless differentiate between types of dynastic descent (i.e. rex Fortrenn being from the dynasty of Fortriu). It is, however, yet to be demonstrated that over-​ kingship was a reality prior to Bridei son of Bili, the first king named rex Fortrenn. Fortriu’s dynastic dominance can probably explain why, by 866, chronicles refer to Fortriu as synonymous with Pictland. The few instances of two kings reigning at the same time are harder to determine. They may indicate contesting rights, political upheaval, or an agreed division of jurisdictions that occasionally occurred among other western kingdoms. Fraternal succession was also in evidence, which made extended familial networks pivotal to dynastic success. One important distinction is that before the mid-​eighth century there was no father-​to-​son succession. This suggests that a formalized prohibition drove exogamous alliances. Another distinction is the reoccurrence of names that indicate the application of a suite of dynastic nomenclature.12 The recurrence of the name Bridei is the most obvious case in point but Talorg, Necton, and Drust also reappear regularly. It would suggest that a son born into an extended royal Pictish dynasty was given a “royal” name if their descent made them a legitimate future contender (such as a king’s nephew or grandson of a previous king). From Onuist son of Vurguist’s reign this system appears to fragment; he was the progenitor of a new dynasty that retained the kingship to 839. Onuist, and Giric after him, may also demonstrate that kingdoms can be taken by force. The church also played a role in legitimizing succession. Adomnán’s Life of St Columba is particularly concerned with kingship; the saint taking on the guise of prophet to

68

68  Chapter 3 bestow divine blessing on approved rulers. Where it comes to Columba’s exchanges with the Pictish king, however, this blessing is less overt. Columba’s visits to Bridei’s fortress are presented as otherworldly and avoid any outright claims of conversion.13 Nevertheless, the curious incident where Columba launches into Vespers with Psalm 44 (45 in modern bibles) outside Bridei’s fort is now interpreted as a coded message validating the dynasty of Fortriu. The psalm is a laudation poem to a king on his marriage that sits oddly within the story of contesting druids. The psalm exhorts the king to act with justice because God has anointed him. It resonates with contemporary clerical ideas on Christian kingship and implies that this unusual inter-​ textual reference was incorporated as a message for a Pictish royal court skilled in exegesis.14 Adomnán’s Life of St Columba was certainly in circulation during Bridei’s reign and was a suitable gift to a king who acted as guarantor to the Cáin Adomnáin. Instituting law was a legitimating act of kingship and was potentially an important strategy to reinforce Bridei’s position after usurping his predecessor. As guarantor of Adomnán’s law Bridei placed himself in the company of the most influential clerics and kings of Ireland and Dál Riata. Instituting the Cáin Adomnáin required Bridei to allow Iona and her stewards unusual liberty to collect fines and prosecute jus­ tice in Pictland. Judges were appointed by Iona suggesting that Iona’s jurisdiction in Pictland expanded in this period. The fines were extracted according to Irish legal principles with a portion of the fine divided between Iona and the king in whose province the law was enacted. The benefits of a new fiscal levy were significant for church and king. Enacting this law in Pictland depended upon similar compensatory systems, based on honour-​price, to those practised in Ireland and among the Anglo-​ Saxons. Ideologically, by instituting this law Bridei exemplified the ideal Christian ruler protecting the innocent and the church. In this guise he could, theoretically, exert a controlling interest over churches in his kingdom. This may have proven useful to Necton in his pursuit of church reform.

69

Origin Myths, Churches, and Kings  69

The Easter Question Sometime between 710 and 716 Necton petitioned Abbot Ceolfrith for advice on the dating of Easter. Bede provides Ceolfrith’s putative reply and brings us into more intimate contact with a Pictish king than any other surviving document. Authorship of the letter remains contested, as does Bede’s account of Necton’s dramatic reception of the letter, particularly in relation to the king’s ability to enact reform. The dating of Easter was a highly charged issue in this period. Reconciling the lunar and solar calendars to determine the correct date of this movable feast was a computistical challenge.15 Over two centuries of often heated debate resulted in multiple methods and tables (although the various Easter tables rarely produced divergent dates). At issue was unity of practice. With growing dissent among the clergy, rulers like King Oswiu took the initiative to establish which dating method they would collectively adopt. Oswiu’s synod of Whitby in 664 is viewed as a test case in the exercise of a king’s prerogatives. The result overthrew the eightyfour-​year tables of Iona, among others, and caused a critical split among the clergy. Bede puts the blame for similar clerical contention in Pictland squarely on the Iona school, who he saw as intractable in their refusal to acknowledge the “Roman” dating of Easter. For Necton, like Oswiu, this was more than a liturgical matter. The integration of Christianity had effected changes across all social and political institutions that mobilized and strengthened hierarchical authority. Clerical unity was a pivotal factor in ensuring a strong kingship. By resolving the Easter debate, Necton acted as patron of the church and patriarch of his people. For Oswiu and other kings across the Latin west, bishops and abbots were ideal nation-​builders who promulgated the idea that a united church under a just ruler equated to a happy kingdom. According to Bede, Ceolfrith’s letter was well received and with support of his council Necton effectively limited Iona’s putative liturgical dominance. By enforcing a new form of “Roman” tonsure

70

70  Chapter 3 Necton made non-​adherence to his dictates visible. As part of the agreement Northumbria sent stonemasons to construct a church in the “Roman” manner, which Necton promised to dedicate to St. Peter. Traditionally, the contracting of Northumbrian stonemasons was interpreted as the wholesale import of design, carving techniques, and liturgical oversight. The current consensus is that Necton was not inviting a Northumbrian primatial claim over churches in Pictland, but rather seeking to limit Iona’s influence. This seems to be supported by Bede’s use of the past tense in reference to Iona’s authority over monasteries in Pictland. Necton’s ability to effect religious reform over his kingdom is being re-​ assessed against the evidence for early saints’ cults, place-names, and archaeology.

Reform and Consolidation of Christianity The excavation of a monastery at Portmahomack has moved the conversation on Christian practice in Pictland forward significantly. We can now assert that there was a monastic presence in Pictland that showed little differentiation from monasteries excavated elsewhere in Britain and Ireland. While data from the excavation is still being assimilated, the developmental chronology of the site appears to be consistent with an expansion in ecclesiastical practice across Pictland in the early eighth century. Between the sixth and seventh century, notwithstanding the cist graves along the ridge overlooking the Dornoch Firth, the nearby settlement did not appear overtly Christian but finds suggest it was a high-​status site. By the beginning of the eighth century a monastery was established with irrigation, paved roads, and sculpture. Vellum production and metalworking took place on a semi-​industrial level. By the end of the eighth century the monastery appears to have controlled the entire Tarbat peninsula. The decision to excavate this site was based on the assemblage of Early Medieval sculpture and a cropmark outline of a C-​(or D-​) shaped enclosure surrounding the site. These types of enclosures are often

71

Origin Myths, Churches, and Kings  71

diagnostic of early church settlements, of which Iona is a prime example. At some point between 780 and 810 the site was destroyed, probably by Vikings. It was soon replaced by secular metalworking and mercantile activity. This wealthy monastery exercised authority over the region but left no documentary presence. This is symptomatic of the period. Neither Bede nor Adomnán mentions a Pictish church by name (other than the Northumbrian foundation at Abercorn) although they assure their readers that they were numerous. For this period evidence of Pictish ecclesiastical organization relies on laconic chronicle records, place-names, late hagiographies and breviaries (particularly the sixteenth-​ century Aberdeen Breviary), saint dedications, and medieval charters.16 These sources represent centuries of conflated tradition. One prominent Pictish cleric named in contemporary documents was Bishop Curetán of Rosemarkie. He was the joint guarantor, on behalf of churches in Pictland, of the Cáin Adomnáin alongside King Bridei. It may indicate that Curetán’s episcopal jurisdiction was congruent with Bridei’s in the same way Bishop Wilfrid had claimed his diocese was coterminous with King Oswy’s kingdom. This affinity may be supported by an obituary notice in 725 to Bishop “Brec of Fortriu” who was possibly Curetán’s successor. Curetán’s feast day is March 16, and there are commemorations to the saint along the north bank of Loch Ness and in Ross and Cromarty. In the Martyrology of Gorman he is named bishop and abbot of Ruiss Meinn. The bishopric at Rosemarkie may therefore have included monastic service, lay outreach, and diocesan administration. Scholars attribute to Curetán the initiation of reforms in Pictish churches during the reign of Bridei son of Derelei under the auspices of a “Romanizing” Adomnán. The tendency to attach all reforms to a documented Pictish cleric is compelling but difficult to substantiate. At some point Curetán was re-​marketed as St. Boniface, and Rosemarkie was rededicated to Saints Peter and Boniface. A late hagiography describes Boniface, an ex-​pope, baptizing Necton

72

72  Chapter 3 and receiving a property donation in Angus to establish a church to St. Peter.17 This church is identified with the defunct Egglespether (church of St. Peter) that was either at Restenneth or at nearby Aberlemno. Boniface’s vita, with baptism and appeal to Rome, is a statement of ecclesiastical renewal and consolidation. Dedications to Boniface in Scotland are rare (one may survive at Papa Westray, Orkney) suggesting he was principally associated with the dissemination of a St. Peter cultus. New dedications to St. Peter emerge across Pictish territories in this period indicative of an active reform movement.18 The bishopric at Rosemarkie also appears to have expanded its authority by accruing traditions of visitations and burials of Saints Moluag of Lismore and Maelrubha of Applecross. Maelrubha was active during Necton’s reign. His monastery was established at Applecross in Wester Ross around 673, and his death is recorded in 722. The remains of this monastery include monumental barrows and carved cross-​slab fragments that compare stylistically to those at Rosemarkie, Tarbat, and the sculptured cross at St. Vigeans, Angus. Late traditions state that he died after (or during) a visit to Rosemarkie; he is commemorated at Urquhart on the Black Isle. Maelrubha’s association with Bangor in Ireland may indicate that Fortriu dynasts encouraged rival monastic settlement, possibly to offset Iona’s influence. Traditions claim that St. Moluag of Lismore was (temporarily) buried at Rosemarkie upon his death in 592. A contemporary of Columba, this saint is also associated with Bangor and his foundation on the island of Lismore was within Cenél Loairn territory. Scholars have suggested that the cults of Moluag and Maelrubha were promulgated in Pictland due to an alliance between the Cenél Loairn, the family of Gartnait on Skye, and Bridei or Necton. Dedications to St. Moluag survive at Europie on Lewis and on Rasaay and Skye. A cluster of dedications in Aberdeenshire (including at Rhynie) and the later bishopric of Mortlach in Banffshire are indicative of the imposition of his cult, which was extended south to Alyth in Perth and Kinross. There is no consensus as to when his cultus was established in north-​east Scotland.

73

Origin Myths, Churches, and Kings  73

Another bishop active during Necton’s reign was Fergustus Episcopus Scotiae Pictus (Fergus the Pict, bishop of the Scots) who was present at a council in Rome in ca. 721.19 This was probably the same Fergus commemorated in the north-​east of Scotland and at Wick and Halkirk in Caithness. Tradition places his burial at Glamis in Angus and he is commemorated in the nearby parish of Eassie; similar Class II cross-​slabs were erected at both sites. Our source describes Fergus as bishop of the Scots, which has led to the inference that there was only one bishop active in Pictland in this period: Curetán. Pictish scholars are more optimistic. In particular, Thomas Clancy has identified other bishops roughly contemporary with Fergus: Uoloch, Talorcan, Gartnait, and Drostan.20 It is notable that Drostan and Fergus are commemorated in the north-​east, at Halkirk in Caithness as well as in southern Pictland in Angus and Fife. This may suggest that the southern and northern expansion of their cults from a north-​eastern base was politically inspired. Abbots in this period wielded comparable political authority to that of bishops, and Clancy also identified an early abbacy near Fetternear in Aberdeenshire from obituary records of Finnia, Abbot of Nér, in 623 and Nectain Neir ca. 679. These notices indicate the monastery of Nér was established by at least the seventh century and was sufficiently prominent to be recognized in Irish chronicles. As previously noted, Abernethy in Perthshire probably operated in an episcopal capacity from the seventh century. In addition, the twelfth-​century foundation legend of St. Andrews claims it was established by a donation of land, Cennrígmonaid, from King Onuist to St. Regulus.21 Scholars now suggest this gift was an endorsement of an existing bishopric rather than the creation of a new see. A further bishopric was probably at Logierait in Atholl, where Iona may have exercised episcopal jurisdiction. The picture of ecclesiastical organization in Pictland that is emerging from the recent analysis of later sources resembles ecclesiastical patterns elsewhere, with individualized foundations of various types exercising local spiritual and territorial authority. Necton’s reforms were a proactive approach to liturgical orthodoxies that had an impact not only on Pictish churches but on the authoritative reach of

74

74  Chapter 3

Figure 4. East face of the Nigg cross-​slab. Author’s photo.

Pictish kingship. A concomitant expansion in devotional culture in this period can be seen in the exuberant sculpture of the Class II cross-​slabs.

Pictish Cross-​Slabs as Liturgical Texts Class  II sculptured cross-​slabs dominate our perceptions of Pictish art and design. They form just a portion of the

75

Origin Myths, Churches, and Kings  75

ecclesiastical sculptural corpus that includes cross-​marked stones (Class IVs), shrines, architectural fragments, and sarcophagi. Due to their highly decorative carvings Class  IIs, as pictorial masterpieces, comprise our closest approximation to Pictish texts. The category is defined by the addition of Pictish symbols within the decorative schema on the west face; occasionally the symbols accompany the crosses sculpted on to the east face. The designs on the west face are sometimes interpreted as secular. Usually taking the form of a stele, Class  II Pictish stones resemble a wax tablet or message board bearing pictorial statements. While this shape is rarely used for Irish and Anglo-​Saxon monumental crosses, it was assumed that the Class II decorative schema borrowed heavily from their artistic repertories. Instead of searching for stylistic origins, art historians now view design development as a multidirectional process of hybridization—​this has raised the proposition that the Book of Kells was influenced, if not created, by Pictish artists. Since the 1980s, style analysis has given way to questions of context and reception that lead to examinations of patronage, function, semiotics, and the monuments’ position in the wider landscape. Moreover, the intentionality of their design, creation, and erection is now viewed as an ongoing discourse that articulated relationships of power.22 The marrying of Christian iconography with secular scenes, such as the hunt, is interpreted as an expression of the reciprocal relationship between church and realm. The virtuosity and sophistication of the designs, technical skill, and widespread uptake of the form across Pictland indicates wealthy churches and patrons participating in a cultural “fashion” that enunciated a shared sense of identity. Similarly their placement in the landscape was an ideological statement of authority. This is a factor noted in relation to the Class II cross-​slabs placed across the Tarbat peninsula, where they appear to delineate a proprietary claim by the monastery at Portmahomack.23 The practice of churches marking the boundaries of their precincts with monuments is well attested but represents only one aspect of their function. Isabel Henderson suggests we consider the wider corpus as

76

76  Chapter 3 stages along a liturgical journey or pilgrimage—​such as the Ross and Cromarty Class II corpus that includes Rosemarkie, Nigg, Shandwick, Hilton of Cadboll, and Portmahomack.24 At each stop along the pilgrimage route the cross acted as prayer station, exegetical text, and sometimes a burial site. The recognition that the sculptural designs represent an intentional liturgical program has encouraged the possibility that we may “read” the monuments. New research is detecting references to contemporary Christian texts in the decorative agenda of some Class IIs. The imagery delivers layers of meaning in the same way that exegesis sought to reveal layers of biblical truth. An examination of Saints Paul and Anthony imagery on the Nigg cross-​slab pediment found correlations with descriptions of the saints meeting and breaking bread in Jerome’s Vita Sancti Pauli and from Antiochene traditions.25 Even the hunt scenes are now interpreted as biblical iconography that epitomizes the Christian struggle combined with the idealization of the virtuous ruler. The sophistication of the liturgical imagery is becoming more widely appreciated, and research into their theological sources will generate a deeper

Figure 5. Detail of Saints Paul and Anthony receiving bread, east face of Nigg cross-​slab. Author’s photo.

7

Origin Myths, Churches, and Kings  77

understanding of Pictish Christian practice. The question of their dating is therefore important. Until recently Class IIs were conservatively dated to the ninth century, based on stylistic comparisons with Irish and Anglo-​Saxon sculpture. The discovery at Portmahomack of broken Class  II fragments under a destruction layer, radiocarbon dated to between ca. 780–​810, demonstrates that Class IIs were being created in the eighth century. Scholars working on the material corpus suggest that the Class II cross-​ slab form first appeared in the early eighth century. How long the form continued is debated, but the presence of Pictish symbols on sculptural crosses is no longer seen as diagnostic of their “Pictishness.” This was recently established by the discovery of a dedicatory inscription to the Pictish king and founder of Dunkeld, Constantín son of Vurguist (789–​ ca. 820), on the freestanding Dupplin Cross in Perthshire.26 Its high-​cross form and lack of Pictish symbols was previously classified as characteristic of Scottish (Alban) sculpture. It indicates that an ideological shift occurred in Pictish material expression that made the symbols less relevant. New approaches to Pictish monumental display and material culture offer insights into their rhetorical agendas. Cultural biography is one such approach that engages with the ways in which artefacts shape social interaction and accumulate meaning and “personhood.”27 It is an interpretive framework that crosses traditional disciplinary and chronological boundaries to draw out social processes on the micro and macro level. Pictish monuments had a long life, with biographies of fragmentation, removal, and renewal. Many remain undiscovered within the fabric of medieval churches while others become beloved members of the community whose possession can be contested between locals and museums. Ongoing projects studying the monumental corpus are identifying correlations between design and material to determine quarry sites and artistic connections that will help to answer questions on the development of dioceses. The Pictish material culture, particularly Class  II crosses, offer us an unparalleled opportunity to approach the

78

78  Chapter 3 Picts and understand their priorities, aspirations, and sense of themselves.

Female Visibility The role gender performed in Pictish society receives limited attention. We have records of kings, battles, and churchmen but the ordinary Pict is rarely noticed. Likewise, the principal documentary reference to women in Pictland was the Irish wives offered to Pictish settlers in the origin myth. Recovering the role of women in Pictish society is a challenge, let alone creating a gender-integrated history. According to John C. Barrett the core issue is one of female visibility across the sources (material and textual) and, crucially, how we notice and interpret their presence.28 It requires gender to be considered as relational and inherent in historical cultural processes. With the abandonment of the matrilineal theory scholars are yet to accord a role to royal Pictish females beyond their generative capacity. Comparisons with the slightly better records of their Anglo-​Saxon and Irish neighbours would suggest that royal Pictish women had a critical role as culture bearers advancing secular and ecclesiastical interests. Pictish dynastic succession would also have increased the importance of female royals. Alterations in the succession system towards the end of the period may have reduced their influence and restricted extended familial networks. In terms of female visibility, it is notable that two, possibly three, Class  II cross-​slabs display female sculptural images. Other than Marian iconography, female images are rare on Irish and Anglo-​Saxon crosses. Perhaps the best known of the Pictish examples is the female rider wearing a penannular brooch on the Hilton of Cadboll cross-​slab, Ross and Cromarty. The second, also bearing a penannular brooch, is a female figure in a headdress on the Monifieth 2 cross-​slab, Angus. A headless figure, facing forward with a penannular brooch, on a recently discovered cross-​slab fragment from Wester Denoon in Angus was also identified as female. Their prominent position within the designs, facing forward and wearing brooches that are

79

Origin Myths, Churches, and Kings  79

recognized as symbols of status, contrasts with the usual way males (except some clerics) are depicted in profile on Pictish sculpture. Arguably, female authority was sufficiently visible within the Pictish culture to be accorded a role in sculptural discourse and rhetorical displays of communal identity. Significant gaps remain in what we can ascertain about the Picts, but we are now asking new questions of the documentary and material corpus and gaining intriguing new insights. The proposition that documentary and material culture represents the actualization and articulation of power offers new avenues for understanding the layered socio-​political conversations of Pictish society. Notes 1  Cáin Adomnáin and Canones Adomnani, trans. Pádraig P. Ó Néill and David N.  Dumville (Cambridge:  Department of Anglo-​ Saxon, Norse, and Celtic, University of Cambridge, 2003). 2  Thomas O. Clancy, “Philosopher-​K ing: Nechtan Mac Der-​Ilei,” Scottish Historical Review 83 (2004), 125–​49. 3  Alan Macquarrie, “Vita Sancti Servani: The Life of St. Serf,” Innes Review 44 (1993): 122–​52. 4  David Dumville, “Cethri Prímchenéla Dáil Riata,” Scottish Gaelic Studies 20 (2000): 170–​91. 5  Máire Herbert, Iona, Kells and Derry: The History and Hagio­ graphy of the Monastic Familia of Columba (Oxford:  Clarendon Press, 1988). 6  William J. Watson, The Celtic Place-​Names of Scotland (Repr., Edinburgh: Canongate Press, 1993), 50; see 63 and 507 for details on the other battle sites. 7  Alex Woolf, “AU 729.2 and the Last Years of Nechtan mac Der-​Ilei,” Scottish Historical Review 85 (2006): 131–​37. 8  Marjorie O. Anderson, Kings and Kingship in Early Scotland (Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press, 1973); king-​lists are repro­ duced at 240–​91. 9  Nicholas Evans, “Ideaology, Literacy and Matriliny: Approaches to Medieval Texts on the Pictish Past,” in Progress of the Picts, 45–​65. 10  Alex Woolf, “Pictish Matriliny Reconsidered,” Innes Review 49 (1998): 147–​67. 11  James Fraser, “From Ancient Scythia to the Problem of the Picts,” in Pictish Progress, 15–​43.

80

80  Chapter 3 12  Nicholas Evans, “Royal Succession and Kingship Among the Picts,” Innes Review 59 (2008): 1–​48. 13  Gilbert Márkus, “Iona: Monks, Pastors and Missionaries,” in Spes Scotorum: Hope of the Scots, 115–​38. 14  Julianna Grigg, “Psalm 44 and the Pictish King,” Innes Review 64 (2013): 87–​99. 15  Julianna Grigg, “Paschal Dating in Pictland: Abbot Ceolfrid’s Letter to King Nechtan,” Journal of the Australian Early Medieval Association 2 (2006): 85–​101. 16  Legends of Scottish Saints: Readings, Hymns and Prayers for the Commemorations of Scottish Saints in the Aberdeen Breviary, ed. Alan Macquarrie (Dublin: Four Courts Press, 2012). 17  Aidan MacDonald, Curadán, Boniface and the Early Church of Rosemarkie (Alness: Groam House Museum Trust, 1992). 18  Alan Macquarrie, “Early Christian Religious Houses in Scotland:  Foundation and Function,” in Pastoral Care before the Parish, ed. John Blair and Richard Sharpe (Leicester:  Leicester University Press, 1992), 110–​33. 19  Councils and Ecclesiastical Documents Relating to Great Britain and Ireland, ed. A.  W. Haddan and W.  Stubbs (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1878), 2:7. 20  Thomas O.  Clancy, “Deer and the Early Church in North-​ Eastern Scotland,” in Studies in the Book of Deer, 363–​95. 21  Dauvit Broun, “The Church of St. Andrews and its Foundation Legend in the Early Twelfth Century: Recovering the Full Text of Version A of the Foundation Legend,” 108–​14, and Simon Taylor, “The Coming of the Augustinians to St. Andrews and Version B of the St. Andrews Foundation Legend,” in Kings, Clerics and Chronicles in Scotland 500–​1297, ed. Simon Taylor (Dublin:  Four Courts Press, 2000), 115–​23. 22  Stephen T. Driscoll, “Power and Authority in Early Historic Scotland,” in State and Society: The Emergence and Development of Social Hierarchy and Political Centralization, ed. J.  Gledhill, B.  Bender, and M.  Trolle Larsen (London:  Unwin Hyman, 1988), 215–​36. 23  Martin Carver, “Sculpture in Action:  Contexts for Stone Carving on the Tarbat Peninsula, Easter Ross,” in Able Minds and Practised Hands:  Scotland’s Early Medieval Sculpture in the 21st Century, ed. Sally M. Foster and Morag Cross (Leeds: Society for Medieval Archaeology, 2005), 13–​36.

81

Origin Myths, Churches, and Kings  81 24  George and Isabel Henderson, The Art of the Picts: Sculpture and Metalwork in Early Medieval Scotland (London:  Thames & Hudson, 2004), 180. 25  Ellie Meyer, “Saints, Scrolls and Serpents: Theorising a Pictish Liturgy on the Tarbat Peninsula,” in Pictish Progress, 169–​200. 26  Katherine Forsyth, “The Inscription on the Dupplin Cross,” in From the Isles of the North: Medieval Art in Ireland and Britain, ed. Cormac Bourke (Belfast: HM Stationery Office, 1995), 237–​44. 27  Mark A. Hall, “Tales from Beyond the Pict: Sculpture and its Uses in and around Forteviot, Perthshire, from the Ninth Century Onwards,” in Pictish Progress, 135–​68. 28  John C. Barrett, “Fields of Discourse: Reconstituting a Social Archaeology,” Critique of Anthropology 7 (1988): 5–​16.

82

83

Chapter 4

Twilight of the Picts

The military prowess of King Onuist son of Vurguist (732–​761) is unparalleled in Pictish history. The Gaelic poem Fó sén dia ngaib Óengus Albain trumpets that it was “good the day” when Onuist claimed Alba (Pictland). He smote the Dál Riata and English chronicles denounced him as a “despotic butcher” whose entire reign was stained “with criminal blood.” With such contrasting and impassioned attitudes towards Onuist’s reign it is unfortunate that our sources only sketch an outline of his career. Historians must therefore infer the political trajectory of his reign from chronicle entries of conflict. Onuist’s origins are also obscure. A  tract from Munster (Éogan Már trá óenmac leis) claimed he descended from Irish Éoganacht settlers in the Mearns of Circin. This is interpreted as either a reference to a contemporary alliance or a later construct by the medieval Scottish administration to prove their Gaelic (Irish) ancestry. Onuist’s home territory, the Mearns (A’ Mhaoirne), translates as “a territory under stewardry” (or Maerdom); Dunottar fort lies within this district. While Onuist’s dynasty of Vurguist supplants the Derelei line, it retains a connection with Fortriu—​either genealogical or as a title of kingship. For although Onuist was rex Pictorum in the records, his brother and successor Bridei was rex Fortrenn. Similarly, Onuist named his sons Bridei and Talorcan, which suggests they were affiliates of the Fortriu dynasty. Onuist’s reign is characterized by shifting political alliances. His early career was concerned with the removal of rival

84

84  Chapter 4 factions, beginning with Talorg of Atholl. A putative alliance between Talorg and the Cenél nGabráin may have motivated Onuist’s son Bridei to join with the Cenél Loairn to attack Kintyre in 731. Two years later this alliance was defunct when Dúngal of the Cenél Loairn forcibly removed Bridei from the precincts of the Columban monastery on Tory Island, Ireland, after which Dúngal was removed from leadership by his uncle Muiredach. A  year later Talorc of Kintyre was handed over to the Picts by his brother and summarily drowned. Then Talorg of Atholl was taken near Dunollie, bound, and five years later drowned by Onuist. The return of Dúngal to Argyll in 736 appears to have prompted Onuist to personally lead an assault on the region. He seized Dunadd, burned Creic, and captured Dúngal and his brother, placing them in chains. Onuist’s son Bridei, however, died soon after. In the same period, Onuist’s brother Talorcan led Fortriu forces to victory over Muiredach and the Dál Riata. In 741, possibly prompted by the death of a Cenél nGabráin ally, Onuist returned to Argyll and “smote” the Dál Riata, possibly annexing the entire region. There follows a thirty-​year gap in the Irish chronicles on affairs in Dál Riata. By 736 Onuist had forged an alliance with King Aethelbald of Mercia (716–​757). This was an unusual collaboration and it appears that its aim was the suppression of Northumbria. In 740 Onuist launched an attack on Northumbria from the north while Aethelbald simultaneously attacked from the south. It is the first time a Pictish king led a warband directly into Northumbrian territory. Eadberht retained the Northumbrian kingship, possibly under tribute conditions to Pictland and Mercia. In 744 Onuist fought against Strathclyde and his distant kinsman Teudubr of Alt Clut. Neither side gained in the encounter, although King Eadberht won the plain of Kyle in Ayrshire while the Britons were busy fighting the Picts. In 750 Onuist may have allied with King Eadberht to pursue a further offensive against the Strathclyde Britons. This later alliance may explain Onuist’s inclusion in the Durham Liber vitae. His brother Talorcan died in this encounter, along with many of his warband, and there is a curious notice that Onuist’s rule

85

Twilight of the Picts  85

ended. It is suspected that internecine conflict ensued as the records suggest Talorcan son of Vurguist briefly held the Pictish kingship before his defeat. If Onuist had abdicated in favour of his brother he once again took the kingship for a further ten years. Onuist covered considerable ground as in 750 he also came to the aid of his old ally Aethelbald of Mercia against Cuthred, king of the West Saxons. Cuthred finally defeated Aethelbald in 752. Scholars have pointed out that Aethelbald and Onuist were both old men by this time and vulnerable. Nevertheless, on August 1, 756 Onuist again led his forces to Alt Clut in a potentially bloodless coup, as records indicate that Strathclyde accepted a treaty with the Picts. With his posterity recognized by a gift of land to the foundation at Cennrígmonaid (St. Andrew’s), Onuist died in 761 having held a united and powerful Pictland, expanded its territorial ambitions, and probably moved the centre of Pictish political power into southern Pictland. Scholars have suggested that his remains were interred in the St. Andrew’s sarcophagus with its figurative David imagery carved in the realistic style favoured in Mercian art.1 Whether Onuist’s right to the Pictish kingship was legitimate or not, he retained the kingship for thirty years by right of arms and political acumen.

Dál Riata or Pictish Rule? Onuist was succeeded by his brother Bridei in a reign that lasted only two years (761–​763). Described as rex Fortrenn at his death, the records are silent on this king’s achievements. Ciniod son of Uuredech (763–​775) reigned after, but his origins are obscure and his obituary names him regis Pictorum. His battle with Áed (linked to Áed Find of the Cenél nGabráin) in 768 was interpreted as the beginning of Dál Riata’s takeover of Pictland. This is now disputed and an alternative suggestion is that Áed held Argyll as a client king of the Picts but became ambitious for autonomous rule. It is notable that this is the first mention of the Dál Riata since 741. Ciniod reigned a further seven years; in the year before his death he

86

86  Chapter 4 welcomed the deposed king of Northumbria, Alhred, into his court. Elphín son of Uurad succeeded Ciniod; his obituary in the Annals of Ulster in 780 incorrectly names him king of the Saxons. Attempts to construct a narrative of Pictish kingship to ca. 850 are hampered by the limited records. The Pictish king-​ lists are likewise confusing, with kings appearing to rule over both Pictland and Dál Riata or sharing joint rule. In order to reconcile this confusion, one suggestion is to assume Pictland was partitioned between the old north and south geographical divide of the Mounth. It results in an “amended” succession from the king-​lists as: Talorcan son of Onuist (Dub Talorc), reigning 780–​782 south of the Mounth (named rex Pictorum); Drest son of Talorcan, reigning 780–​ 781 north of the Mounth; he is replaced by Talorcan son of Drestan (ca. 781–​785), who may have eventually ruled alone as he is followed by Conall son of Tadg (ca. 785–​789). According to the chronicles, Conall was defeated in battle by Constantín son of Vurguist. Questions remain as to Conall’s inclusion in this list as he may also have been king of Dál Riata 805–​807. Anticipating the imminent disappearance of the Picts from our records, historians have sought to identify the moment of Dál Riata (Gaelic) ascension over Pictland. Ciniod son of Ailpín (843–​858), better known as Kenneth mac Alpin, is traditionally associated with this coup, but some scholars suggest the process started earlier. It was Constantín son of Vurguist (789–​ca. 820) who, they suggested, established a new dynasty of Pictish kings with prominent Dál Riata ancestry. They identified his progenitor Vurguist (Fergus) with Fergus son of Eochaid, the king of Dál Riata who died in 781. Comparing the Pictish king-​lists against later Dál Riata king-​lists (found in the poem Duan Albanach and the “Synchronisms of Irish Kings”) raised the possibility that this dynasty ruled simultaneously over Pictland and Dál Riata. The combined lists appeared to confirm that Constantín first became king of the Picts (rex Fortreinn) and only assumed the Dál Riata kingship in 811. His brother Onuist then succeeded to both kingships (820–​834). The evidence is not straightforward as it is probable that a later scribe interpolated the Vurguist dynasty into

87

Twilight of the Picts  87

the Dál Riata lists. Contemporary chronicle records add to this complexity as they name kings of Dál Riata who do not appear in the king-​lists. The lists also include an implausible set of dates for the reign of King Domnall son of Constantín (781–​ca. 805)  eight years prior to his father’s tenure in the Pictish kingship. One credible suggestion is to remove the Vurguist dynasty from the lists and reconfigure the date of Domnall’s rule to align with chronicle records. This results in Donncoirce succeeding Fergus son of Eochaid as king of Dál Riata in 781, reigning until 792 when there is a hiatus in the records coinciding with the first Viking attacks. Conall son of Tadg appears to have then reigned from 805 to 807, when he was killed by Conall son of Aedán (807–​811). At this point Domnall son of Constantín assumed the kingship of Dál Riata as a sub-​regulus for Fortriu between 811 and 835.2 The revision radically alters two conflicting assumptions: that the Dál Riata kingship was held outright by the Picts, and that the Dál Riata had taken over the Pictish dynasty. Instead, Vurguist’s sons (Constantín and Onuist) descended from the dynasty of Onuist son of Vurguist rather than Fergus son of Eochaid. They ruled as kings of Fortriu, exercising control over the subordinate Gaelic kings of Dál Riata. Constantín son of Vurguist’s rule lasted thirty-​one years, during which he probably retained overlordship in Argyll (including Iona). He saw the first effects of Scandinavian raids and their settlement in Orkney and the Shetlands. By 798 Vikings were demanding cattle tribute from Ireland and in this period the monastery at Portmahomack was destroyed. Wealthy churches were their prime target and Columban houses on Iona and in Ireland sustained multiple attacks. Constantín’s Columban foundation at Dunkeld probably held the saint’s relics until 814, when Kells was completed. Dunkeld rose to prominence as the Pictish kings’ primary foundation; the 865 obituary record of “Túathal son of Artgus, primepscop [chief bishop] of Fortriu, Abbot of Dunkeld” indicates that it continued in this role. Moreover, Dunkeld’s importance represents a geo​political shift from the north to the Tay valley region and the continuation of the

8

88  Chapter 4 concept of “Fortriu.” Little is known of Constantín’s reign and he is followed by his brother Onuist (820–​834), who may have established the cult of St. Andrew at Cennrígmonaid. Their reigns coincide with new artistic expressions in architecture and sculpture. Onuist’s nephew, Drest son of Constantín (834–​837), succeeded him as rex Fortrenn and appears to have shared his kingship with Drest son of Uuthoil. Uen son of Onuist had an equally short reign (837–​839) that ended in a violent battle with the “heathens” that dealt a killing blow to the dynasty of Vurguist and their Dál Riata king. It was clearly a decisive moment in Pictish history, of which we know little. A dynastic change seems to have occurred as no further Pictish king is designated rex Fortrenn. Sources for this period are slim to non-​existent and we are reliant on the problematic “Chronicles of the kings of Alba” (known by the more familiar title “The Scottish Chronicle”).3 More a discursive king-​list than chronicle, it begins with the reign of Ciniod son of Ailpín, claiming that he ruled Pictavia for sixteen years.

From King of the Picts to King of Alba Within sixty years of Uen’s death at the hands of the “heathen,” the Picts had disappeared from contemporary records. The Pictish king-​lists name his immediate successors Uurad son of Bargoit (ca. 839–​841) followed by Bred (Bridei) who reigned for one year. Ciniod son of Ailpín may have assumed the Pictish kingship but an alternative king-​list inserts a further three kings, suggesting internal dissent over the succession. “The Scottish Chronicle” claims that Ciniod destroyed the Picts and terrorized Northumbria while also facing Viking attack, and died at Forteviot of a tumour. Extracting a contemporary core from later additions to this source is difficult, particularly around the claim that he destroyed the Picts. Likewise, scholars have cast doubt on the chronicle’s statement that Ciniod became king of Dál Riata in 839 then rex Pictorum two years later. References to his six raids into Northumbrian territory, his burning of Dunbar, and attack on Melrose, are seen as more feasible, as is the claim that the

89

Twilight of the Picts  89

Northmen wasted Pictland as far as Dunkeld. Excavations at Forteviot in Perth and Kinross confirm that this palace complex was occupied in 841 when the chronicle claims Ciniod died there of a tumour. His successor and brother, Domnall (858–​862), held a council at this palace where he asserted the rights and laws of his Dál Riata petitioners. This reading is now contested, reflecting the recent contention that Dál Riata remained under Pictish overlordship. Domnall died at Scone, or nearby, and was succeeded by his nephew Constantín son of Ciniod (862–​876). Sources for this king’s reign are slightly more numerous as Scandinavian leaders begin to take a keen interest in the region. Since 853 one such leader, Amlaíb, had subjugated northern Britain and Ireland, plundered Armagh, destroyed Alt Clut and taken his English, Pictish, and British captives to Ireland. His retinue “wasted” Pictland in the second year of Constantín’s reign and stayed to extract tribute. When Amlaíb returned for his tribute in the third year, Constantín mustered sufficient warriors to kill him. Reprisals followed and in the last year of his reign Constantín and his army were slaughtered at Dollar, Clackmannanshire, by Healfdene’s army. Into this hostile environment Constantín’s brother Áed assumed the kingship before being assassinated in 878 by members of his household. One king-​list states that Giric killed him. He is the last king to be named rex Pictorum. The sources cannot tell us exactly when Pictland was transformed into the kingdom of Alba, or when the Picts  became Scots. A  version of Lebor Bretnach suggests Constantín was the last Pictish king. Following Áed’s pitiful reign there is inexplicable confusion as to who assumed the kingship: Eochaid (son of Ciniod’s daughter) or Giric son of Dúngal. Giric is missing from some sources, indicating an attempt to expunge him from the record and create an unbroken line of kings descended from Ciniod son of Ailpín. “The Scottish Chronicle” avers that “others say” Eochaid held the kingship on behalf of Giric his alumnus (Latin—​ward). It further claims that both were expelled from the kingship after reigning eleven years. A  contemporary request of prayers for Giric in the Dunkeld Litany does suggest that

90

90  Chapter 4 he was considered an active king who delivered both military success and church reform. Domnall son of Constantín (ca. 889–​900) appears to re-​establish the Ailpín dynasty and his obituary notably refers to him as ri Alban (Gaelic—​king of Alba). Pictavia and Fortriu do not completely disappear from contemporary records and it is suspected that any alteration in the geo​political conceptualization of northern identity was minor. The noun Alba was an established Gaelic literary term for Britain, but in this period generally refers to Scotland. Domnall died at the hands of the “heathens” at Dunottar who then occupied Pictland for three years. A new entente between the Gaelic Scots and the Picts was probably compacted under his successor Constantín son of Áed (ca. 900–​952). After finally defeating Ímar and his warriors in 904, Constantín held an assembly at Scone alongside Bishop Cellach of Alba and promised to respect the rights of the church partier cum Scottis. The ambiguous Latin phrase partier cum was interpreted in two ways: “in conformity with [the customs] of the Scots,” suggesting the Gaelicization of the Pictish church; or “along with the Gaels,” implying the participation of the Gaels in the oath swearing. This is the only act mentioned from the assembly but it indicates that Constantín was broadcasting a message of his right to rule over a political community of Scots and Picts. Both kingdoms had suffered severe privations under the Vikings that disturbed the social fabric, reduced their territories, and redefined political alliances. Constantín’s assembly reflects a conscious reworking of ceremonial ritual to entrench this new political reality. The assembly mound at Scone may have been purpose-​built or altered in this period to enhance its symbolic significance. Considerable effort went into reworking the Pictish king-​ lists in this period, with new histories that claimed Ciniod son of Ailpín as the progenitor of the kings of Alba. The eleventh-​ century Prophecy of Berchán was one such text.4 By the reign of Alexander II (1214–​1249) explicit claims were being made for a “Scottish” takeover of Pictland under Ciniod (Kenneth I), who was deemed to be a Gael. This idea has proven resilient.

91

Twilight of the Picts  91

Figure 6. Scone assembly (moot) mound. Author’s photo.

Nevertheless, seminal research by Dauvit Broun on the emergence of Alba means we now no longer believe the Picts were subjugated or their culture extinguished.5 Instead, Alba appears to be the realization of a new political alliance between the two kingdoms under later Ailpín dynasts who were just as likely to be Picts as Gaels. The details of how, why, and when the kingdom of Alba identified itself as Gaelic rather than Pictish continue to be examined. Alliances, marital and diplomatic, between the kingdoms had continued throughout our period, encouraging both settlement and language acquisition across all social levels. Ailpín dynasts also encouraged a vigorous pro-​ Gaelic church that harnessed the cult of Columba alongside the new Irish monastic reform movement, the céli Dé (or culdees—​servants of God).6

The Church and Cultural Change Pictish symbols are regarded as a defining cultural expression of their identity. Increasingly they are viewed as signs that enunciated difference and Pictish resistance to Romanizing

92

92  Chapter 4 culture. Yet sometime towards the end of the eighth century Pictish symbols fell out of use on monumental sculpture. The cross-​slab form survives (Class III) and new cross forms, like the Dupplin Cross, emerge in the ninth century. Their imagery also changes from hunting scenes to more overt militaristic depictions such as the Sueno stone in Forres. On other cross-​ slabs apostles, clerics, and angels proliferate, particularly on sculpture from Orkney and Shetland. It is important to note that many Class II cross-​slabs remained in situ with their symbols intact. The redundancy of the Pictish symbol is explained as the result of significant political and social changes. The onset of Scandinavian attacks would certainly presage the martial imagery reflective of a militarily mobilized polity of Picts and Dál Riata. Earlier, Necton’s reforms had encouraged the idea of a cohesive Pictish church aligned to the distant authority of Rome. The proliferation of Roman and native church cults and their symbol-​inscribed sculptural cross-​ slabs probably reflects the enthusiastic uptake of this idea. As time went on the need to declare Pictish identity, particularly for monastic houses, became less important than the liturgical statements and rituals of veneration. Hand bells and portable house shrines, such as the Monymusk reliquary, are evidence of this elaboration in devotional practices. Constantín son of Vurguist’s patronage of the cult of Columba (and Ciniod’s later acquisition of the saint’s relics for Dunkeld) may have initiated broader changes in church ritual in line with Irish reform movements. It is suspected that further reforms under Giric removed churches from the control of local rulers. This would have altered the balance of power between local religious houses and their secular patrons. Pictish churches and monastic houses were centres of significant wealth and authority. Changes in their cultural alignment, particularly under the patronage of the king, impacted diocesan organization and pastoral services. As Gaelic influence in Pictish churches increased, so did Gaelic settlement into Atholl (which stood astride the Druim Alban divide) and then into Pictland. Pictish kings also moved

93

Twilight of the Picts  93

away from fortified residences in the north to palaces like Forteviot in Strathearn.

Forteviot On Tuesday, February 13, 858 Ciniod son of Ailpín died at his palace of Forteviot. It is the first mention of this royal complex and current excavations may pinpoint when it was established. The Dupplin Cross, commemorating Constantín son of Vurguist, stood on the opposite side of the River Earn to Forteviot, implying an earlier occupation of the palace. Most of the archaeology was eroded by the adjacent Water of May, from which the Forteviot arch was recovered in the 1820s. It is suggested that this sculpture, now in the National Museum of Scotland, was a chancel arch for an adjacent monastery. It is an unusual sculpture within the surviving Pictish corpus; the three figures, possibly holding staves or oars and tiller, are interpreted as a king and his clerics.7 The putative co-​ location of palace and monastery was compared to contemporary Carolingian practice where monasteries maintained the administrative functions of the court. Another possible palace/​monastic site at Meigle, Perthshire is referred to in the longer version of the St. Andrew’s foundation legend in reference to King Uurad (ca. 839–​841). Meigle has one of the largest concentrations of Pictish cross-​slabs and sculptural fragments. The ongoing excavation around Forteviot found that the site sits within an extensive prehistoric ritual landscape dating from the late Neolithic. The Pictish horizon is so far represented by a cemetery of barrow and unenclosed graves that was in use over a number of centuries. Test pits and geophysical surveys have yet to locate the palace site but analysis of nearby hill forts may offer clues to when Pictish kings moved from their defended hills to low-​lying residences. The nearby cemetery may also indicate that low-​lying palaces were a southern Pictish preference, possibly with roots in the fifth century. As the arena of Pictish political action moved south from the middle of the eighth

94

94  Chapter 4 century, sources lose interest in northern Pictland. Norse raids targeted the north as well as southern Pictland yet the evidence from Portmahomack would suggest that secular trade and manufacture resumed after only a brief hiatus.

Treaty or War Pictish sculpture is replete with images of combat from well-​ equipped hunters and warriors to battle scenes. They inform us about the types of weapons and armour employed; how horses were outfitted for combat and sometimes the battle tactics. These masculine martial images are indicative of the idealization of heroic combat that underpinned the Picts’ image of themselves. It was one shared by their neighbours and demonstrated by the concentration of chronicle records relating to conflict. There is no doubt warfare impacted cultural and political developments across the Early Medieval world. In Pictland the martial careers of Bridei son of Bili and Onuist son of Vurguist are arguably  watersheds in the development of Pictish “statehood” (broadly defined as being recognized as an independent nation with centralized governance). Yet we have limited information on how they mustered forces to prosecute and execute their wars. One source which refers to Pictish military organization is Adomnán’s story of St. Columba baptizing the elderly Pictish man, Artbranán; he is described as chief commander of the Geon warband (Latin—​ Geonae primarius cohortis). Artbranán’s position has been compared to the later Welsh Penteulu (head of a ruler’s retinue) and the Gaelic Toisech, who, as head of a kin-​group, was a military leader in charge of local militia.8 This correlation suggests Artbranán was similarly responsible for a local body of warriors. Moreover, his description as decrepitus senex (decrepit old man) implies that this role continued to define his status beyond his ability to perform active service. It is also conjectured that Artbranán’s role supports the existence of territorial organizational structures able to support a permanent body of armed men. We know that among the Anglo-​Saxons and Welsh the

95

Twilight of the Picts  95

training and equipping of a warband was the responsibility of the ruling nobility, on behalf of the king. According to Bede, young noblemen were required to perform a period of military service in the king’s warband until the age of twenty-​ five; after that they were given land in order to establish an adult social identity. There is also evidence for irregular musters in times of crisis. The seventh-​ century Old Irish text Míniugud senchasa fher nAlban is a survey of Dál Riata naval obligations.9 It lists the constituencies from where levies could be drawn giving an estimated 2,100 infantry and oarsmen. Whether these levies were similar to the capacities of Pictish naval musters is unknown, but there are compelling references to fleets from Fortriu (loingius a Fortreanoibh). One suggestion is that this census was created at the instigation of Onuist. Evidence from across the Latin west indicates that the privileges of free status depended on land that was tied to obligations of military service and/​or food render. The ability to draw on a militia was fundamental to a king’s exercise and maintenance of coercive control. There is also evidence that young warriors took up military service in foreign courts to learn combat skills and win land and wealth. Sources indicate that Pictish kings were not always active military leaders although military defeat could result in loss of kingship. Scholars suggest that the most able military tactician, Onuist, was initially a mormaer; a role with affinities to the contemporary Frankish comes or Anglo-​Saxon ealdorman in their capacity to act as the king’s military leader. While we could assume from the chronicles that northern Britain was in a state of continual battle, recent research emphasizes the importance of the king’s ability to maintain peace. Outright war was only one avenue for retaining territorial control. Diplomacy, marital alliances, hostage sureties, tribute, and treaty were alternate strategies. Traditionally historians equated a king’s military proficiency with a successful rule, but recent research suggests that it was the achievement of peace that legitimized kingship. Hostages were perhaps the most versatile method to coerce compliance. Comparative

96

96  Chapter 4 data shows the practice was regularly employed by rulers to ensure political ascendency. Taking high-​status hostages was particularly helpful in managing rival provinces and dynasties, as seen in Bridei son of Mailcon’s possession of hostages from Orkney. Marital alliances were also fundamental in extending advantageous personal and familial networks; particularly for the Pictish kings who could call on the support of their Strathclyde and Dál Riata paternal kin. In terms of coercion

Figure 7. Detail of rider on Dupplin Cross. Photo by Stephencdickson, CC BY-SA 4.0, wikicommons.

97

Twilight of the Picts  97

through tribute, significant gaps remain in our understanding of how and what was extracted from subjugated groups. The Anglo-​Saxon subjugation of southern Pictland and the later Viking invasions were certainly opportunities for extracting tribute, and it is presumed that this usually comprised cattle. The Viking predilection for extortion of more durable items is better reported. Scandinavian hoards, for example, contain large numbers of penannular brooches and late Celtic hanging bowls—​manufactured across Britain and at Pictish sites such as Craig Phadraig, Inverness. Tribute arising from local subjugation, such as the Pictish control over Dál Riata, was probably little different from the regular renders required by local lords from their tenants. Tribute conditions had longer-​ term psychological and economic advantages along with peaceful borders. Alternatively, treaties suggest a more equal relationship between combatants, such as the one Bede claimed existed between Northumbria and Pictland. They were also one of the few routes to territorial stability in which ecclesiastics could participate.

Kingship and the Church From at least the seventh century ecclesiastical leaders issued directives on the ideal king as a peacemaker, enacting just rule for the happiness of his people and the fertility of the land. Peace was materially beneficial to economic prosperity and, the church taught, legitimized the authority of the king. It is clear from the reign of Bridei son of Derelei that Pictish kings allied themselves with ecclesiastics for mutual advantage. For Necton onwards, Pictish kings were patriarchs of the churches within their kingdom. It is conjectured that under the king’s auspices churches extended their territorial influence through saints’ cults and became embedded within the social hierarchies. For the king this resulted in political support that expedited his authority over territories outside of his usual purview. The propagation of speculum principum (mirror of princes) texts by clerics justified an increase in the effective powers of kings. With its control over cultural messaging,

98

98  Chapter 4 the evidence suggests that churches drew parallels between Pictish kings and the Old Testament exemplar of King David. David was a flexible model for kingship—​ combining military tactician and nation-​builder with that of lyrical psalmist and scholar—​which contributed to the reconstruction of the character of kingship along theocratic lines. The kingdom of Alba continued to develop sculptural iconography of David; transforming aspects of the martial David, seen on the St. Andrew’s sarcophagus, to the psalmist David.10 Research is beginning to investigate the implications of this imagery on the operation of Pictish kingship. By the end of the Pictish period there are signs that churches across Pictland were less willing to concede their rights to secular rulers. The tenth-​ century merger of the Scots and Picts revived Columban Irish ecclesiastical influence, which arguably diminished the patriarchal role of the king over churches in his kingdom. Pictish culture was neither precocious nor backward. It embraced social and technological change, participating fully in the cut and thrust of northern British politics. The Pictish symbols and origin myth indicate a conscious attempt to develop a national identity, one specifically defined by the appearance of difference. While discussions on the sophistication of its constitution are often mired in technical definitions—​of when and whether Pictland could be considered a nation or a state—​Pictland consistently demonstrated a flexible approach to communal identity. The reconstruction of Pictland (Prydyn) as the kingdom of Alba (Albain) displays the extent of their political adaptability. For the people of later medieval Scotland, forgetting their Pictish past was as expedient a political act as the initial construction of Alba. Notes 1  Sally M. Foster, ed., The St Andrews Sarcophagus: A Pictish Masterpiece and Its International Connections (Dublin: Four Courts Press, 1998). 2  Dauvit Broun, “Pictish Kings 761–​839:  Integration with Dál Riata or Separate Development?,” in The St Andrews Sarcophagus, 71–​83.

9

Twilight of the Picts  99 3  Benjamin T.  Hudson, “The Scottish Chronicle,” Scottish Historical Review 77 (1998): 129–​61; David Dumville, “The Chronicle of the Kings of Alba,” in Kings, Clerics and Chronicles in Scotland, 73–​86. 4  Benjamin T. Hudson, Prophecy of Berchán: Irish and Scottish High-​Kings of the Early Middle Ages (Westport: Praeger, 1996). 5  Dauvit Broun, “Alba:  Pictish Homeland or Irish Offshoot?,” in Exile and Homecoming:  Papers from the Fifth Australian Conference of Celtic Studies, ed. P. O’Neill (Sydney: University of Sydney, 2005), 234–​75. 6  Thomas O.  Clancy, “Iona, Scotland and the Céli Dé,” in Scotland in Dark Age Britain, 111–​30. 7  Nick Aitchison, Forteviot: A Pictish and Scottish Royal Centre (Stroud: Tempus, 2006). 8  David Dumville, “ ‘Primarius Cohortis’ in Adomnán’s Life of Columba,” Scottish Gaelic Studies 13 (1978): 130–​31. 9  Translated in J. Bannerman, Studies in the History of Dalriada (Edinburgh:  Scottish Academic Press, 1974); see also Richard Sharpe, “The Thriving of Dalriada,” in Kings, Clerics and Chronicles in Scotland, 47–​61. 10  Isabel Henderson, “Towards Defining the Function of Sculp­ ture in Alba: The Evidence of St. Andrews, Brechin and Rosemarkie,” in Kings, Clerics and Chronicles in Scotland, 35–​46.

01

01

Conclusions

Until recently, the history of the Picts had seemed unrecoverable. Not only did they completely disappear as a people, but their art was ambiguous, their succession system singular, their isolation ubiquitous, and they failed to leave behind texts. They were deemed a people without history and therefore without importance. With new evidence and methodologies to re-​examine old sources, many of these assumptions are being overturned. This research is sculpting a new image of the historical Picts as a vigorous and culturally innovative nation whose political trajectory was in lock-​step with the rest of the Latin west. Perhaps the biggest challenge is the persistent perception that the Picts were isolated. Certainly Adomnán and Bede’s emphasis on their remoteness had a discouraging effect on interpretations of Pictish history and archaeology. The evidence, however, presents a different picture. Critical analysis of our historical sources reveals the extent to which the Picts actively shaped and intervened in northern political developments. Similarly we have archaeological evidence of the Picts’ participation in the dynamic social changes that swept the post-​ Roman west: the uptake of new monumental funerary rites in the fifth century; new agricultural technology; Christian religious conversion; the expansion of saints’ cults, and the later reform movements. The religious images employed on Pictish

021

102  Conclusions sculpture also demonstrate their engagement with eastern Christian theology, while the Picts’ origin myth reveals their scholastic knowledge of Latin texts. Furthermore, increasing evidence of trade can no longer be dismissed as the occasional diplomatic gift; nor can we ignore their maritime capabilities. A perceptual shift which considers the Picts, even in Orkney, as being connected into a mobilized western culture is resulting in a new understanding of the processes that drive social construction. The Picts’ conceptualization of identity is a case in point; revealing the flexibility of this political construct to externalize the exigencies of shifting alliances and invasion. The uniqueness of the corpus of Pictish symbols is now interpreted as the valorizing of difference and an expression of participation in a political “Pictish” identity. By the eighth century, they were integrated into the design schema on cross-​ slabs which held their own exegetical messages to the devout. Recent analysis of their imagery reveals the liturgical interests of Picts and something of the stories they told themselves. Added to the excavation of a monastery at Portmahomack, with its plethora of cross-​slabs, we can now demonstrate the existence of Pictish monasticism with attendant scriptorium and artisans. This allows us to contextualize the evidence for ecclesiastical institutions that were previously considered in isolation or as foreign foundations. We also have significant metalworking sites along with brooches, pins, bells, and shrines that indicate a thriving specialist industry of skilled artisans. Studies of the penannular brooch suggest that this was a Pictish design innovation with a mobile political function. Its use among neighbouring polities indicates its versatility in social mobility and transactions suggesting a socio-​legal correspondence between northern political groups. Similarly, where Anglo-​ Saxon and Irish artistic influences were once detected in Pictish art, we now see that the borrowing went both ways. One of the favourite theories regarding the selection of Pictish kings was that they were matrilineal. It led to some advances in our understanding of Pictish dynastic alliances, but a return to the source confirmed that kingship selection through the female line was an occasional practice. Scholars

013

Conclusions  103

now view the Pictish origin myths and king-​lists as idealized constructions of the identity they wished to promote. Studies on Pictish kingship and succession also suggest the title king of Fortriu functioned as a descriptor for centralizing dynastic kingship which began with the reign of Bridei son of Bili. They suggest the consolidation of Pictland into a single kingdom with structural institutions supporting the centralization of power. This corresponds to an emerging picture of territorial organization with administrative centres, sites of governance, and the regulated division of the productive landscape. How and when this collective organization occurred is yet to be resolved and debate continues as to whether Pictland had the requisite governing apparatus contingent with statehood. The royal ceremonial complex at Rhynie, with its attendant pre-​ Christian potential, is challenging our most recent assessments of Pictish political cohesiveness. Further analysis of northern Pictish sites is already noting significant collective practices in the fifth century that may indicate the earlier emergence of authoritative kingship than historians currently assert. The process underlying the Picts’ conversion to Christianity still remains unclear, but the insistence that St. Columba and Iona held a monopoly on churches in Pictland has undergone revision. Rather, conversion is now seen as gradual, with Saints Ninian and Columba epitomizing a monastic revolution that sat alongside episcopal arrangements. Likewise, Iona’s control of churches is now seen as dependant rather than independent of its relationship with the Pictish king. Portmahomack has also endorsed the importance of Pictish cross-​slabs in determining Early Medieval ecclesiastical sites. Pictish material culture, particularly its incised and carved symbol stones, is being appreciated for its potential to elucidate the cultural priorities of the past. They point us towards important Pictish sites and the significance of the wider landscape to decisions of location. Artefacts encourage us to approach the Picts, share their tactile experience, and appreciate the virtuosity of their creation and their invested meaning. The disappearance of the Picts from the records is an unavoidable fact. Sometime in the late ninth century, Pictland

041

104  Conclusions is replaced in the documents by the name Alba. But what was once interpreted as evidence for the annihilation of a people is now seen as an astute political construct; a response to changing circumstances that made a union between the Picts and the Dál Riata Scots both desirable and necessary. Appropriating the old poetic name for Britain, Alba, expressed the coalition of two kingdoms reduced by Viking depravations. It was accompanied by new ceremonial rituals and sites, such as Scone, where coherent narratives of the new identity were communally ratified. The scholastic milieu entrenched the idea of Alba as a political reality with its own dynastic kings and destiny. The political creation of Alba is a lesson in the way identity and nationhood can be constructed. With foundations laid by over a century of careful scholarship, Pictish studies is a robust discipline. Historically the requirement to demonstrate objective reasoning in the absence of documentary proof encouraged the production of carefully edited source material and intensive local studies. This set a high benchmark for future research. Arguably, while some interpretations are taken up with more conviction than the evidence merits, the testing and critique of our assumptions and conclusions are necessary steps in evolving a nuanced understanding of Pictish history. This will undoubtedly result in replacing or rejecting some of the current explanatory narratives. By bringing the Picts into communion with their neighbours, we enliven their culture rather than destroy their mystery. Moreover, the study of the Picts has broader implications for how we study cultures through their material repositories, how communal identity operates, and how power and authority is constructed and socially reproduced. Bede’s conceptualization of four linguistic nations connected by their knowledge of Latin reminds us that the Picts were similarly linked into a competitive northern political realm:  one which shared a dynamic form of scholastic Latin Christianity. At the same time, these linguistic nations materially defined their differences to construct oppositional identities that modern research continues to entrench.

015

Further Reading

Primary Sources Adomnán of Iona: Life of St Columba. Translated by Richard Sharpe. London: Penguin Books, 1995. Translation, with discursive notes, of an important seventh-​ century Irish perspective on the Picts.

Annals of Ulster and Tigernach, CELT: The Corpus of Electronic Texts, University College Cork:  https://​celt.ucc.ie/​publishd. html A database of the main Irish chronicles of the period, as well as other early Irish texts and literature.

Bede: Ecclesiastical History of the English People. Translated by Leo Sherley-​Price. London: Penguin, 1990. An accessible translation of the key contemporary source for Early Medieval Britain.

Early Sources of Scottish History, A.D. 500 to 1286. Edited and translated by Alan Orr Anderson. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd, 1922. Available on the Internet Archive:  https://​archive.org/​ details/​cu31924028144313 A useful compilation of all the early textual records on the Picts, note that the historical interpretations are in places dated.

016

106  Further Reading Nennius: British History and the Welsh Annals. Translated by John Morris. Arthurian Sources 8. London: Phillimore, 1980. For the ninth-​century Welsh perspective on the Picts.

The Triumph Tree:  Scotland’s Earliest Poetry AD 550–​1350. Translated by Thomas O.  Clancy. Edinburgh:  Canongate Press, 1998. For English translations of the principal Early Medieval British and Irish poems.

Histories Aitchison, Nick. The Picts and the Scots at War. Stroud: Sutton, 2003. An analysis of the Picts’ military potential, equipment, warbands, and battles.

Fraser, James E. From Caledonia to Pictland: Scotland to 795. The New Edinburgh History of Scotland 1. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2009. A detailed history of the Pictish period that foregrounds current academic debates.

Grigg, Julianna. The Philosopher King and the Pictish Nation. Dublin: Four Courts Press, 2015. An examination of Pictish political and ecclesiastical develop­ ments in the late seventh to early eighth centuries.

Hudson, Benjamin. The Picts. Chichester: Wiley Blackwell, 2014. An accessible overview that takes a traditional view on some of the recent key historical contentions.

071

Further Reading  107

Woolf, Alex. From Pictland to Alba, 789–​1070:  The New Edinburgh History of Scotland. Vol. 2.  Edinburgh:  Edinburgh University Press, 2007. Provides a detailed examination of the current historical views regarding the end of the Pictish period.

Archaeology Carver, Martin, Justin Garner Lahire, and Cecily Spall. Portmahomack on Tarbat Ness: Changing Ideologies in North-​ East Scotland, Sixth to Sixteenth Century AD. Edinburgh: Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, 2016. This detailed excavation report on Portmahomack usefully provides the latest interpretations of the site, some of which differ from the authors’ previous publications.

Forteviot excavations, SERF, University of Glasgow:  www. gla.ac.uk/​schools/​humanities/​research/​archaeologyresearch/​ projects/​serf/​ The online project site for the excavation at Forteviot, as well as the recent discoveries in the surrounding district.

Canmore catalogue, Historic Environment Scotland:  https://​ canmore.org.uk/​ An accessible, searchable database of archaeological sites with explanatory notes, images, and bibliographies.

Foster, Sally M. Picts, Gaels and Scots: Early Historic Scotland. Rev. ed. Edinburgh: Birlinn, 2014. The revised edition of this popular book incorporates the latest historical and archaeological analysis alongside an excellent array of images of Pictish objects.

081

108  Further Reading Northern Picts Project, University of Aberdeen:  www.abdn. ac.uk/​geosciences/​departments/​archaeology/​the-​northern-​ picts-​project-​259.php This online project site includes details of the Rhynie excavation, the Gaulcross hoard discovery, as well as useful links to current excavations.

Art Clarke, David, Alice Blackwell, and Martin Goldberg. Early Medieval Scotland:  Individuals, Communities and Ideas. Edinburgh: National Museums of Scotland, 2012. A collection of articles discussing key Pictish artefacts held in the National Museum of Scotland.

Henderson, George and Isabel. The Art of the Picts: Sculpture and Metalwork in Early Medieval Scotland. London: Thames & Hudson, 2004. A well-​illustrated exploration of Pictish art, derived from a lifetime study of Pictish objects.

Place-Names Database of place-​name dedications to saints, University of Glasgow: http://​saintsplaces.gla.ac.uk/​ This is a searchable database of Scottish place-names which include a saint name, or associated dedication to a saint.

Taylor, Simon, and Gilbert Márkus. The Place-​ Names of Fife. Vol. 5:  Discussion, Glossaries, Texts. Donington:  Shaun Tyas, 2012. Volume 5 of this series is a critical source for any Scottish place-​ name investigation, with the first comprehensive “elements glossary” as well as discussions on Pictish language and toponyms, not limited to Fife.