wideford

The mound is outside of the field fence, an unenclosure. Coming from Unstan I thought of going along the coastline but I reckon Dead Sand could well be quicksands, and the land beyond looked patchy – also I wasn’t sure where the mound lay in relation to the fields where kie were grazing. Instead I decided to go via Corn Hillock, taking the track that goes down to the north end of Cumminess Bay. Walk the shore as the clifftops though low are broken up in places. The planticru on the landward side is out of proportion to the surviving mound, and I wonder if has a more direct connection to earlier features than simple re-use of stones. Coming to the exposed fraction of the broch the cutting looks way too regular for erosion by sea. There is an area at the front of the cut covered by stones that could either have come from the wall or might possibly be a floor exposed by erosion. Standing above the wall still present gives the impression that it is only faintly curved near the mound’s periphery and then sweeps in where it is more fragmented, and then following on there are a few slabs (rather than blocks) in a line above the level of the wall top. Walked the grassy mound top directly behind the wall and found myself stumbling over hidden stones – the smal structure ?? – so watch your step there. Then in front of you there’s a big depression, a rounded hollow almost down to ‘ground level’, open seaward, that is probably an ovoid stroke lens-shaped area like those you’d expect between an outer broch wall and the tower. At the back can be seen just two courses of a wall, just two stones with another one a few inches away barely peeping out. Another, say, six inches to thesouth and there’s a brown stone behind a grassy veil and and another couple of feet another similar. Not much of a wall line but its there [just now I’m reminded (for the brown stones) of the two near the top of Howie o’ Backland in Deerness]. A couple of stones at the bottom of the hollow may or may not be loose. Between the mound and the shore the ground is flagstone with a slight incline and it is obvious that the broch has been built straight onto the rocks. Unlike Inganess and Berstane there is no cliff beneath, so it must have stood further back from the coastline than them. Near the base the odd brown stone can be seen, these being more obvious and frequent near the cut. If the mound has always been about its present height then the broch can never have been much more than three metres, perhaps four metres at most. So my thinking is more central tower than high tower.
I wonder if this entire stretch of coast could actually have once been called Gammi Sea, from the Knowe of Gemashowe (lost but near the Hall of Ireland) through Cummi Ness and the knowes of Gimme’s Howe to [or including] Gorrie Knowe just north of here.

From the hill above the Mill of Ireland this and Cummi Howe broch and The Cairns ‘Danish fort’/castle look equidistant – though it is 8m from the cliff edge the other sites could have suffered more erosion, one tideswept and the other ? subject to undercutting – and there were three brochs on the other side of the water too. From the road the hollow appears less central. Short of Outbrecks I followed the track down to the north end of Cumminess Bay. There is a gate into the NW corner of the field containing Corn Hillock but my main purpose was to see the known broch, so as yet I have only viewed it from the coastal fence. At this end of the bay there is a rather lage area covered by loose large stone blocks of fairly regular shape that have all the appearance of being artificial, which made me think of the the stones dumped into the sea from the Work Broch in St.Ola (and from whatever lay by/under St.Nicholas Church in Holm). Though I then walked along the low clifftop it is a little intermittent and I would suggest going along the shore mostly. It simply has not the feel of a broch in my mind. Only a few stones can be seen in the coastal side until you approach the north end, where I noticed what seems to be an overgrown trench (either excavated or for sheltering stock I think) with various sorts of stone around the likely sides. These are mostly horizontal slabs, perhaps evidence of drystane walling – but I wish I had gone in to inspect as my images show up on the southern end a large ? orthostat and low down on the northern end a rectangular sandstone block that may have an incised line around the face of it. The orthostat’s position is an unlikely one in a broch (my hazard would be pre or post “Broch Age”) and the block resembles ones I connect with early kirks (there is one in a wall by Long Howe that has to come from St.Ninian’s Chapel and another in the Sands of Wideford bridge I take to have come from Essonquoy). Best guess from me is that Corn Hillock is the result of two periods of construction.

Don’t really see how a defensive structure this size could escape mention in the sagas or later, more historical, chronicles. Strangely the most obvious defensive feature isn’t mentioned in EASE survey (at least in the NMRS description from this) – as I approached from Corn Hillock at the north edge there runs a long deep trench like a burn that has been made into a rather rough slipway, some stones apparent in the sides. At two places I managed to scramble up the cliff. Nothing doing. At a third looking back from the south The Cairns only had a few stones visible but there is a rather small peak near the centre of the profile.

The 1958 newspaper report on the Tomb of the Eagles reports a little disturbed long grass-covered mound (smaller than Isbister) between the tomb and the burnt mound settlement, with a few protruding stones. This can be found where North Taing appears on the O.S. as you are in close sight of the Tomb of The Eagles, inside a field.

It is a low bolster shape of earth with a few stones of varying size, and ends just before the modern fence. It is most striking that a only a few metres to its south is the angled top of a very regular-shaped stone, projecting a couple of feet or so and about six inches thick.
My rough measurements give NGRs for the stone at ND46938423 and the eastern end of the mound at ND46958425.

After the first fortnight of John Hedges recent survey of the area including the Tomb of The Eagles he found many dfferent Bronze Age sites.

A fellow brochaholic, an actual archaeologist, has noted the narrow neck to the promontory that this stands on as strongly resembling other broch sites he has visited, saying that if it isn’t a broch it has to be something else significant.

Coming from the Dounby direction what can be mistaken for a second stone is the end of a ‘Nissen hut’ barn

Almost opposite the Viewpoint grounds on the right-hand side of the road the footpath is better marked now – though the sign is smaller it now looks to go all the way. So up in front of the house and turn the corner it is the second field from the road. I thought my eyes were playing tricks on me but the fence is indeed ‘missing’ a lower half, and as the ground was virtually dry one not so low roll and I was in (maybe you will find the proper way in further along the track). Not much marshy now. Stands out a little better closer to. A mound like a jelly mould with two tiers, the official record a mound with platform [as with Howe Harper] but they are of about equal depth so I hae my doots. Perhaps the upper part once stood as high as Howe Harper and a covering cairn has been robbed. But what looks to be an excavation on the top indicates it has always been about this height [unless the livestock are responsible]. Like that cairn exposed areas show an earth matrix with some small irregular stones (fragments?) and other stoney material. With the surrounding shallow ditch and encircling low bank it now presents a certain Henge-like appearance. The latest official record castigates the earlier report but I think the conflict arises from confusion about what exactly the dimensions recorded now and then include or exclude [perhaps this is why Hillhead outside Kirkwall has been seen as two banks and a ditch or v.v depending on what area the eye takes in – and ? over time ditches fill in as banks erode]. What looks to be what’s left of the standing stone, a split orthostat with one side above the other as if thumped, is now certainly behind the present bank. One end of this comes up against a (aligned?) short low ‘bank’ with a few middling stones showing and a few more of these in this general area too. Further back there are loose collections of well-sized stones. They don’t look right for a demolished drystane wall but they are over towards the other mounds which have bigger stones yet, some about the ‘burn’. A busy few fields and rather ‘messy’ for a ritual site [on the other hand it doesn’t overlook anywhere itself].

This last week I have taken new digital images used my SLR (slide film not used up yet) and a mini-DV camcorder to record various features in this area [including a ?land-drain which ends partway down the cliff with six foot depth of narrow drystone wall forming its top]. Coincidentally it has been announced today that the land between Hatston pier [read Lower Saverock] and the main road is being taken into development. To do this they have also bought “a field on the Finstown side”. Presumably not disturbing archaeology ?
The conglomerate/puddlestone on the burnt mound’s uphill side is becoming buried, probably by the same over-vigorous machining that has further eroded the top. More of the small stones, mostly burnt [though some slightly larger pieces may have been shiny once] are showing now. But more interestingly the polished dark tops of possibly square stones are presently coming level with the surface, and these seem to have some kind of order to them. I managed to get my fingers two or three inches down the side of one without finding a base, though it is too early to be talking of pillars yet. On the top at the Finstown side I’m sure there is some kind of ridge – evidence for a wall beneath or simply a by-product of early digs ? I am reminded a little of the Hawell burnt mound.