Souterrains and dates | Forum — The Modern Antiquarian

T

tiompan Oct 8, 2007 16:05:41

Replying to Rhiannon

Rhiannon wrote:

Your nice plan of Crichton Souterrain, Paulus, made me look at Martin's notes about the site. Then I realised, well if it includes stone with Roman carvings, then well it's got to be later than Roman has it not. But I am right in thinking that some souterrains are genuinely Iron Age? or is it all wishful thinking?
some photos of the carved stones here
http://www.rcahms.gov.uk/pls/portal/NEWCANMORE.NEWCANDIG_COLL_LIST_IMAGES.show?p_arg_names=pnumlink&p_arg_values=54797&p_arg_names=pcat&p_arg_values=I&p_arg_names=puid&p_arg_values=59566

Little doubt that the majority are IA but they certainly went in for re-use of marked rocks , more usually N-EBA rather than Roman though .

M

Martin Oct 9, 2007 12:13:06

Replying to Rhiannon

Yeh, Crichton is one of the few that I can remember which has re-used both Roma dressed and Roman carved blocks. I'm sure there's a Roman fort/signal station nearby which was obviously plundered! So, yes, Crichton is post-Roman. However, there are many others which I believe are genuine IA (older?) such as Pitcur in Perthshire which has, within it, two cup and ring marked stones;
http://www.themodernantiquarian.com/site/604/pitcur_souterrain.html

There are many otheres with cup/ring carvings, now, whether these were re-used stones of carved in-situ I guess we'll never know...

V

Vybik Jon Oct 9, 2007 13:10:16

Replying to Rhiannon

At risk of being shouted at, surely they built them for more than storage of dates?