Big Cousland Dig 2008

Big Cousland Dig

2007/2008 The Cousland Local History Project

With archaeological and historical advice and support from Connolly Heritage Consultancy Edinburgh Archaeological Field Society Scottish Detector Club AOC Archaeology Ltd CFA Archaeology George Haggarty Louise Yeoman East and Midlothian Young Archaeologist Clubs Iain Fraser

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

Table of Contents 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 5.1 5.1.1 5.1.2 5.1.3 5.1.4 5.1.5 5.3 5.3.1 5.3.2 5.3.3 5.3.4 5.4 5.4.1 5.4.2 5.4.3 5.4.4 6.0

SUMMARY INTRODUCTION OBJECTIVES METHODOLOGY RESULTS CASTLE FIELD – Area 1 Geophysics (Edinburgh Archaeological Field Society) Metal Detecting (Scottish Detector Club) (Appendix 4) Excavation (Figure 3) Historic Building Record Historical Research (Cousland Historical Society and Louise Yeoman) POTTERY FIELD– Area 2 Geophysics (Edinburgh Archaeological Field Society) (Figure 4) Field Walking (Figure 4) Excavation (Figure 4) Ceramic Report (George Haggerty) WINDMILL PLANTATION – Area 3 Clearance Excavation (Figure 9) Historic Building Record Historic Analysis (Iain Fraser RCAHMS) CONCLUSIONS

4 5 7 8 13 13 13 11 19 22 26 38 38 39 40 41 43 43 46 46 47 49

ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1: Location plan Figure 2: Site Investigation plan Figure 3: Area1 location of geophysics, detecting, trenches and elevations Figure 4: Area 2 location of fieldwalking grid, geophysics and distribution plot Figure 5: Area 3 location of trenches, elevations and area of clearance Figure 6: Southwest Elevation in Castle Field Figure 7: Castle Elevation Figure 8: 1750 Roy Map and 1st Edition OCS map (1854) Figure 9: Plans, elevations and details of windmill

3 6 10 11 12 23 24 44 45

Appendix 1: Trench List & Context List Appendix 2: Photograph List Appendix 3: Artefact List Appendix 4: Metal Detecting Artefact List Appendix 5: Ceramic List

page 1

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

page 2

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

North Sea

Inverness Aberdeen

Glasgow

Edinburgh

10 km

100 km

Area 1 Area 3 Area 2

Areas of investigation 1. Castle and Walled garden 2. Pottery Brae 3. Windmill Hill 1km Reproducion of Ordnance Survey map details with the permission of the Controller of HMSO Crown Copyright OS Licence AL 52480A0001

Figure No. 1: Site Location Map

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

1.0

SUMMARY

A community archaeology project was carried out at the village of Cousland in Midlothian. The sites that formed the investigations were located in a field to the west of Cousland, the environs of the castle and walled garden in the centre of the village and the windmill to the southwest. The work consisted of field walking and geophysical survey with the intention of locating the actual pottery site, geophysics to locate structures in the environs of the castle and walled garden and a metal detecting survey to pinpoint any metal objects in both the walled garden and the field directly to the south of the castle. Excavations were carried out to test the geophysics results in the pottery field, to locate the missing wall of the castle, the layout and walls of the residential structure adjacent to the castle, to locate the greenhouse and to investigate geophysics results inside the walled garden. Research was also carried out to place all the known structures into their historical context. The ruined windmill was cleared of vegetation and a test trench was put in to investigate the potential for subsurface structures. These works were commissioned by Cousland Local History Project and funded entirely by The Heritage Lottery Fund. The work was undertaken in October 2007, April 2008 and July 2008. The pottery field was restricted to one test trench due to time restrictions and excavation was limited to 2m away from the walls of the castle and walled garden due to their scheduled ancient monuments(SAM) status and safety considerations. The field to the north of the castle was restricted to geophysical and metal detecting surveys as limitation on time restricted any other work being carried out.

Topsoil removed in Trench 2, within the Castle.

The work will enable the interpretation of the known standing structures of Cousland and develop a research strategy for the newly discovered sites. This project will also form the basis for a future educational/artistic and interpretation project. Further work required includes continued excavation as well as documentary study and ceramic research of the pottery site. A strategy needs to be developed for further investigations of the residence adjacent to the castle and the castle itself requires more detailed architectural recording. Excavations will also be required to investigate the geophysics results in the south field and a conservation plan needs to be drawn up for the future protection of the windmill.

page 4

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

2.0

INTRODUCTION

2.1

Site location

T

he sites are located in three distinct settings within and in the immediate vicinity of Cousland village. The village itself lies some 4km to the northeast of Dalkeith and 10km to the east of Edinburgh (Figure 1). Area 1- Castle field (NT377683) an area roughly 150m x 100m in size, in the southwest corner of the village, containing the castle, walled garden and field directly to the south. Area 2- Pottery field (NT370677) the area of a field to the south west of the road leading to Dalkeith, and comprising the upper flat area before the field slopes down to the west. Area 3- Windmill Plantation (NT377681) defined by a circular wooded area to the south of the village. Figure 2 shows in greater details the areas and the scope of works carried out in each location.

2.2

Site History

A

large amount of historical research carried out previously by the Cousland Local History Project, looked closely at the lime works and the blacksmiths or ‘smiddy’. As a direct consequence of this research, the current project was envisaged to try to piece together the evolution of Cousland to be carried out as a community activity.

Crumbling corner of the castle, Cousland.

The village of Cousland has a long history documented as far back as 1160. It has however been difficult to place the village into a proper historical context, given the paucity of records, maps and archaeological investigations. There are several prehistoric enclosures located by RCAHMS in the surrounding countryside attributed to the Iron Age and Cousland is also known from a contemporary map of the battle of Carberry Hill. Little information exists for the 16th and 17th centuries save for reports of supposed witches from Cousland being tried in 1630 at Dalkeith. Cousland lime is also mentioned in the Edinburgh Burgh records of 1557 and appears to be quite a considerable industry at that time. Old maps of the area confirm the presence of several of the features investigated in this project. General Roy’s map from the 1750s clearly shows the ‘residence’ in the castle field and the presence of the windmill (Figure 8), though at this time there is no sign of the Pottery. The later first edition OS map of 1854 again shows no pottery structures, fitting the lifespan of the industry to between 1750 and 1850. The windmill is also shown as disused by this time, and the residence adjacent to the castle is no longer shown, suggesting demolition during the intervening time. Previous to this project there have only been two known archaeological investigations in and around Cousland. Most recently by CFA, an archaeological page 5

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project Area of investigation

Contours at 5m intervals

Wall

Building or structure 0

500 m

Area 1 Area 1

T2 T3

T5 T4

T1 Area 3

Metal detecting area

668000N Areas of trenching geophysics and detecting 0

Area 2

100 m

Area 2

Areas of trenching, geophysics and surface collection 0

100 m

Figure No. 2: Site Investigations

337000E

338000E

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

company, who carried out a survey in advance of the A68 bypass extension around 2005/6. Although mention of a site was first made in 1852, the first known scientific investigation took place in 1957, when “evidence of a number of burials was discovered when digging holes for a fence. One burial was fully excavated and found to be laid in a long cist. There were capstones about 1’ below the surface, and paving: the sides were of irregular stones, four on each side. The cist was 6’ long by a maximum of 1’9” wide internally, and was oriented ENE-WSW. There were certainly three more cists at the site, and probably a good many more.” The 1852 Ordnance Survey Name Book also noted cists containing human remains immediately adjacent to Windmill Plantation on the south side of the road. (Confusingly, the road in fact runs north-south, so the location of the cists still remain uncertain.)

3.0

OBJECTIVES

I

n order to ascertain the location of an 18th century pottery, known to exist from historical records, field walking was planned to collect surface pottery and associated items that was found to be present in large quantities within an area of a field near to Cousland. The collected finds were to be studied by a pottery specialist to confirm a type and date period. At the same time a geophysical survey (resistivity and magnotometry) was to take place over the same area to locate any kilns and associated buildings. There was some evidence to suggest that a structure, most likely a glass house existed near the west wall of the walled garden, and was deemed necessary to test this theory with excavation. The castle structure which forms part of the east side of the walled garden is in a ruinous state with a missing east wall. In order to obtain a better understanding of the castle structure itself the missing wall would need to be located. The lodgings, adjacent to the castle with only its west wall partially remaining required investigation to obtain a clearer picture of its extent and layout. It was also felt that there may be other structures located within the walled garden area. It was planned to carry out a geophysical survey to locate any unknown structures and to try to locate the presence of the glass house, castle wall and lodging walls. A metal detecting survey of the same area was also planned in order to detect any metal finds. It was decided to open trenches around the area of the glass house, the missing east wall of the castle and selected areas of the lodgings. Trenches would also be opened if the geophysics results showed up any anomalies within the site.

Setting out the grid for Fieldwalking

It was felt that there may be possible buildings or burials lying within the south field, given the close proximity to the castle and the evidence of the 1957 report1 and the mid 19th century OS Name Book2 both reporting on cist findings. A geophysical survey was to be carried out in this area in order to obtain some initial evidence to work from. A metal detecting survey was also to be carried out in this area to locate any surface metal objects.

1 Henshall, A S (1957 a) ‘Northland Farm, Cousland’, Discovery Excav Scot, 1957, 21 2 Ordnance Survey (Name Book) (1852) Object Name Books of the Ordnance Survey Book No.19, 46,

page 7

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

The windmill site containing the ruins of a 17th/18th century windmill and adjacent platform required to be carefully cleared of overgrown vegetation around the ruined arch. It was also deemed important to ascertain with test trenches whether there were any other structures associated with the site.

4.0

METHODOLOGY

I

n the castle field (Area 1) it was decided to carry out a range of activities and investigations that would suit both the site and the range of people who were to be involved in the project. Initially, a geophysical survey was carried out, in order to target any likely areas for excavation. (Figure 3) This was then followed by further work to extend the geophysics and also a series of five trenches to investigate both anomalies and potential features. The decision was taken to locate the greenhouse in trench 1, the east wall of the castle in trench 2, and to investigate a square feature found by geophysics in trench 3. Trench 4 was positioned to try to find the south wall of the ‘residence’ and trench 5 to provide an idea of the depth of deposits and perhaps the east wall of the same structure. At the same time, a metal detecting survey was carried out across the whole area, and two elevations of the castle and adjacent residence were drawn up by two volunteers from the Big Cousland Dig team. The results it was hoped would inform and evaluate for future work, and teach as wide a variety of techniques as possible, allowing all ages and abilities to be involved. Historian, Louise Yeoman provided valuable information gained from her historical research and held a workshop in the village hall to share the findings with interested parties. She also provided details of how and where to research historical records. The Area 2 pottery field was investigated in a similar multi disciplinary way, under the supervision of the project archaeologist, the Edinburgh Archaeological Field Society (EAFS) and ceramic specialist George Haggarty. A gridded area of 5 metre squares was surveyed in, and all pottery, bricks and other artefacts were collected, cleaned, logged and described. This was used in conjunction with a geophysical magnetometre survey3 most suitable for finding kilns and other heat affected structures, along with resistivity which was carried out by members of the EAFS. (Figure 4) Finally as a result of a positive resitivity report a small evaluation trench was opened to give an idea of the depth and preservation of the structures shown.

3 Every kind of material has unique magnetic properties, even those that we do not think of as being “magnetic.” Different materials below the ground can cause local disturbances in the Earth’s magnetic field that are detectable with sensitive magnetometers. Magnetometers react very strongly to iron of course, and brick, burned soil, and many types of rock are also magnetic, and archaeological features composed of these materials are very detectable. http://en.wikipedia.org

Left to right: Detecting, Geophysics, Survey, Excavation.

page 8

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

The windmill within the plantation was investigated by both a brief buildings record of the profile and vault elevation, as well as two small evaluation trenches to provide data on depth of soil build up and the survival and preservation of the structure. Prior to this, it was necessary to clear the covering of vegetation as well as remove two small dangerous tree stumps, threatening to destabilise the windmill vaulting. All these investigations were designed to provide a body of information to inform future decisions regarding continued research and excavation. It was also hoped to answer the initial questions concerning the shaping of the village of Cousland over the past thousand years.

page 9

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project Trench

Area 1: Castle field

Resistivity plot with features

Expected walls

Wall

Elevation

Cousland Area 1

Castle

Area 3

Feature

T2 Greenhouse

Area 2

T3

T5 T4 Residence

T1 a ed G l l a W

rden

Location of Area 1 Plan on left shows the areas subjected to Resistivity survey and the location of trenches 1 - 5. The suspected wall lines are shown in orange, based on both geophysical anomalies and structural features recognised in the upstanding walls. Southfield

Possible features are outlined in yellow. Metal detecting took place in the area that was covered by geophysics. Two elevations were recorded and are marked in red.

337900E 668200N

0

100 m

Figure No.3: Area 1 : Castle field, showing trenches and resistivity plots

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

Area 2 : Pottery field

Trench

Resistivity plot

surface collection grid

Magnetometer plot

Areas of trenching, magnetometer and surface collection

Cousland Area 1

Field walking results (statistical graph and sherd count)

Whiteware (18th century) evaluation trench

Whiteware (19th century)

Area 3

Redware (18th century) Kiln material and Kiln Furniture Anomalies visible on Magnetometer survey

Area 2

0 100 m

29 30

5

2

0

0

0 10

26

32

16 5

2

13 1

1

7 29

2

21

27 9

Area 2 : Pottery field

3 10

25

31

0

2 15

0

11 7

30

5

Plan on left shows the areas subjected to resistivity and magnetometer survey.

17

23

0

4 25

1

18 0

0

0

14 4

The clear magnetometer plot shows the location of 3 circular features, which are interpreted as kilns.

43 13

15 43 8 23

3 16

20

Areas of trenching, resistivity and surface collection

106 35 32

1

19 0

31

8 11 32

14 7 15 15

0

6

5 29

24

Location of Area 2

29

1 18

22

28

337300E 667700N

4

68 12 2

5 39

9

15

A trench was excavated as shown to investigate survival of sub surface features.

85 50 4 19

23 29 20 38

10

16

The Grid represents the area covered with gridded surface collection.

3

149 50 11 7

53 39 2 18

11

64 53 9 33

40 19 7 48

6

12

91 39 14 8

58 12 5 47

7

1 70 29 16 14

42 27 10 37

8

evaluation trench

5

2 42 34 18 39

3 62 28 30 38

4

0

100 m

337300E 667700N

Figure No.4: Area 2 : Pottery Field

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

Trench

area of clearance

Cousland

approx location of windmill

Area 1

Plan below shows the various activities carried out within the Windmill Plantation Area 3

The area of the windmill was cleared of vegetation and debris that directly impacted on the site The red line represents the drawn elevation of the vaulted structure Two trenches were excavated as shown to investigate survival of sub surface features and confirm the location of the windmill structure no longer visible above ground.

Area 2

Location of Area 3

Area 3: Windmill Plantation

platform?

evaluation trench

Windmill Plantation elevation evaluation trench 337800E 668000N windmill

0

100 m

Figure No.5: Area 3 : Windmill Plantation

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

5.0

RESULTS

5.1

CASTLE FIELD – Area 1

5.1.1 Geophysics (Edinburgh Archaeological Field Society) Summary

A

n area ground resistance survey, totalling 7,600 sq.m .. was conducted in the field in which the remains of Cousland Castle or Tower House stands. A further 3,200 sq.m. were surveyed in the field that lies immediately to the south of the castle field. In the area adjacent to the castle historical documents showed apparent ancillary buildings and Cousland Nunnery was reputed to lie further to the south. The field surrounding the castle appears to have been quarried for limestone reducing the field level by about 0.5m and thus destroying any foundations that were close to the castle. The eastern entrance to the castle stands on solid limestone bedrock some 0.5m.above present field level. It is presumed that the topsoil was replaced over the main area of the field subsequent to the quarrying. High resistance patches, to the east of the wall that runs southwards from the castle, looked as though there could however be some remaining demolition debris. Other areas of high and low resistance were amorphous in shape suggesting that holes left from excavation, infilled with possible topsoil and therefore low resistance, together with patches of high resistance where the limestone had probably not been removed, indicated quarrying activity rather than building. The 2,000 sq.m. surveyed beside the south fence of the field and the 3,200 sq.m. that were surveyed in the adjacent field to the south show rectangular and square features that are very suggestive of building footings. These extend to the east from the 20 by 20 metre squares beside the road for at least 50 metres.

Work on the resistivity survey within the Castle Field and Walled Garden.

page 13

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

Introduction

T

he remains of Cousland Castle NGR NT 3780 6830, stand in a field on the south side of the main street, unclassified, that runs approximately east-west through the village of Cousland. Butting on to the castle on the west side is a wall that appears to have enclosed a later walled garden. This area has been levelled, possibly in association with the removal of limestone and there are the remains of a disused lime kiln about 200m.to the south. The area is associated with the Macgill family, initially of Nisbet and Cranston Riddell who, by marriage into the Primrose family, later became of ‘Cranston Riddell and Drylaw’. Sir James Macgill was a Provost of Edinburgh and his great grandson was, in 1651, created Viscount Oxford and Lord Macgill of Cousland. He had held the position of Lord of Session since November) 1629. The survey objectives were firstly to ascertain, in advance of a programmed excavation, whether building footings could be detected in the area surrounding the castle and secondly to survey to the south of the castle to see whether any remains of the nunnery could be found. The use of area ground resistance survey equipment was deemed adequate to indicate whether there were any relevant foundations still in existence. Method

T

he field survey was started on 23 September 2006 on the western side of the castle. Ten 20 by 20 metre squares were laid out with the western side of four of these on a line 1.0m from the west wall. The north wall is not precisely at right angles to the west wall; this necessitated having to make the extreme northwestern corner of the survey 3.0m from the north wall. The first square surveyed was the one in this NW corner; the start point was adjacent to the west wall and twenty readings were taken proceeding northwards. The survey was then made zigzagging south and then north again across the three squares that have their north side adjacent to the north wall. The last row of these three squares was, at its northern end, I.6m. from the castle wall. The next three squares were surveyed in a similar manner starting adjacent to the west wall and proceeding zig-zag to the east. The final square surveyed on the 23rd was in the next row to the south beside the west wall. The two squares to the east of this and the fourth square beside the west wall were surveyed on 10 February 2007. The area to the east of the castle is just over 20m wide and four 20 by 20m squares were laid out and surveyed on 2 June 2007. Measurements were made starting at the SW corner and proceeding northwards and thence across the square zig-zag. The three squares to the north were surveyed in turn completing on the eastern edge of the most northerly square. The western edge of these squares is on a line 3.7m. from the face of the wall that runs south from the castle. The southern border of the (north) square is on the line of the north face of the south castle wall, see Figure 3 On 29 March 2008 five 20 by 20m. squares were pegged out with their southern border 1.0 m from the wire fence along the southern side of the field and their western edge on the same alignment as the 23 September 2006 survey. The most westerly of these was surveyed first and overlapped, on its north side, the final square surveyed on 10 February 2007, by 4.8m. The fifth square in this row was page 14

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

curtailed by the garden fences of houses to the east; thirteen metre rows were measured and seven entered as dummies. Four further squares were laid out, later in the day, on the south side of the wire fence; these are aligned with the four most westerly squares on the south side of the fence. Due to the difficulty of making measurements close to the fence there is a 2.0m gap between the squares measured in the morning and those in the afternoon. The final survey was made on 5 April 2008 of four 20 by 20m. squares that adjoined, on the south side, those that had been recorded on 29 March. As on previous surveys the start was made in the southwest corner and proceeded zigzag across the four squares. All 20 by 20m.squares are shown in the site plan (Figure 3) The TRlCIA area ground resistance measuring equipment was used throughout the survey. The equipment operates in the ‘twin’ configuration in which two of the probes are mounted on a portable frame 0.5m apart. They comprise one current input and one potential measurement probe. The two remote probes, again one for current input and one for potential measurement, complete the two circuits; they are inserted about 1.0 m apart and are positioned so that no reading is taken with the portable frame nearer than 15m to them. All readings were taken at 1.0 m intervals in lanes 1.0 m wide with the 400 measurements in each 20 by 20m. square recorded walking zig-zag north and south up and down the 20m. lanes. In surveying the larger area there was a requirement to move the remote probes due to the limited length of the cable. A final reading was taken with the probes in their initial position; the probes were then moved and their distance apart adjusted to obtain, as near as possible, the same resistance reading on the metre. A small resistance difference can be corrected during the print out process using the computer ‘edge matching’ facility.

Example of a resistivity plot - the darker areas show positive features. (North is to the right)

The unit on the frame generates the 137Hz signal current that flows through the ground and the potential drop is detected by the measurement probes; the computer in the unit converts this voltage reading in to a ground resistance value in ohms. Within the unit is the display, that indicates this resistance, together with the data store into which the readings are dumped for later processing and printing. The data were down loaded, via the RS232 interface, to a computer and printer running the programme ‘Snuffler’. The printout is in grey scale with the black and white limits chosen based upon the highest and lowest ohms readings recorded. It is normal practice to print high resistance (well drained areas and bedrock) as black and low resistance (infilled ditches and damp areas) as white. Computer processing of the data includes the facility to average between adjacent metre squares and thence to half metre /squares, this gives a printout that shows smoother gradation than would be the case if the pixel size had not been reduced from the original 1.Om square., It is normal to use a final processed sample size of 0.25m. The black to white ohms range is shown in the printouts as is the processed sample size.

page 15

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

Results

T

he large amorphous high and low resistance areas on both the east and west sides of the castle seem to confirm that the limestone bedrock, that originally lay close to the old land surface, has been removed in places, to a depth of about 0.5m. The eastern entry in to the castle, which now stands about this height above field level on a solid limestone foundation, would appear to confirm this supposition. The removed topsoil was probably spread back over the field and infilled the excavated areas. The infilling, due to holding more moisture, appears as lower resistance in the printouts. The British Geological Survey maps of the area, Ref. 8.1, support this interpretation. The Solid geology is shown as comprising sections of both the North Greens and Top Hosie Limestones that form part of the Carboniferous Group. On the Drift geology map ‘artificial deposits and worked ground’ together with ‘bedrock at or near the surface or beneath artificial deposits’ are recorded. The area between the west wall of the ‘walled garden’ and the castle has been levelled for about 65m.southwards from the north wall. At that point the ground rises quite sharply and incorporates a linear high resistance that could represent the south wall of the garden; this appears in the final 20 by 20m. square surveyed on 20 February 2007. To the south of this change in level of the field the ground slopes gently up to the southern fence with the field to the south of the fence being roughly level. Within the walled garden it is difficult to interpret any significant anomalous features. Two vague high resistance lines run parallel to the west wall and may relate to a series of socket holes on the wall suggesting that a lean-to greenhouse may have existed. The only other small feature appears within about l5m.of the west wall of the castle on a different alignment. There is historical record of buildings in the field to the south-east of the castle and features on the wall that runs to the south from the castle confirm that a range did exist in that direction. Two significant high resistance spots that lay to the east of butting points on to this wall could represent demolition debris. The five 20 by 20m. squares surveyed on the south side of the field show no obvious features at the eastern end where they were curtailed by garden fencing; the amorphous high resistance appears to be limestone bedrock. The two squares on the west side are significantly lower in resistance and show possible linear features that run north-south about 2 and 7 metres east of the road. A square structure, divided symmetrically into four, appears 20m. from the road and about 7m. south of the fence. The eight 20 by 20m. squares surveyed in the field to the south of the fence show a series of raised resistance lines, again mainly aligned approximately north south, parallel with and starting adjacent to the road. These could be linked, in the three most southerly squares adjacent to the road, by more pronounced high resistance lines aligned east west. The fmal square, in the extreme south east corner of the survey, has a high resistance line that runs almost parallel to its eastern edge with an apparent turn to the east at the northern end. It must be assumed that this feature extends outside the surveyed area.

page 16

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

Conclusion

T

he initial aim of attempting to detect ancillary buildings adjacent to the castle was relatively unsuccessful apparently due to the removal of limestone bedrock and its replacement by ‘worked ground’. The remains of an old lime kiln within the wood some 200m to the south suggest that this explanation is likely to be correct. The area to the southeast of the castle, alongside the wall that runs to the south, did indicate two high resistance areas that appeared to relate to buildings that had their west ends incorporated in this wall but most of the area appears to have suffered from limestone extraction. The area within the ‘walled garden’ shows no significant features and must have been excavated for limestone except at its southern end. The assumed south wall of the garden does not extend clearly to the wall beside the road and appears to stop some lam short of this wall in a square feature. The survey did not extend to the east to ascertain whether a similar square feature was detectable at this end. The survey at the southern end of the field and in the next field to the south was significantly more successful in detecting rectangular shaded higher resistance outlines that can be interpreted as man made structures. It was suggested that, due to small fids, the nunnery buildings could have been located in this area and the rectangular outlines are plausible foundations for these buildings. The main high resistance features run at right angles to the road which, at this point, is aligned about ten degrees west of grid north. The small subdivided square, that lies about 20m. east of the road and 8m north of the wire fence, is on this same alignment. The less pronounced raised resistance lines that run from the main high resistance features possibly extend over 30m.to the north and may have been detected on the edge of the field to the north. The linear high resistance, that lies on the edge of the square in the extreme south east corner of the survey, is aligned slightly differently. This ‘wall’ runs almost due north and south with a right angled turn to the east at its northern end. This could be construed as west wall of a building laid out more accurately on an east west axis and therefore more likely to be of ecclesiastical origin or possibly in a different building phase from those on the different alignment. Acknowledgements The Society records its thanks to all who made this project possible and successful. David Connolly, who issued the first invitation for the Society to become involved in the surveys in conjunction with the Cousland Local History Project. David was also instrumental in organising the grant aid from the Heritage Lottery Fund. This covered ground resistance equipment expenses, travel, administration, part of members insurance on site and the preparation and printing of this report. The data processing was carried out by Jan Hawkins who also supplied the ground resistance printouts for the illustrations. Fourteen Society members contributed to the 35 member days during the five days of survey; they are: Kathleen Allenach, Alan Calder, Graeme Collie, Charles Conner, Val Dean, Hugh Dinwoodie, Jan Hawkins, David lones, Bill Mac1ennan, Don Matthews, Tom Sharp, Denis Smith, Jill Strobridge and Brian Tait.

page 17

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

5.1.2 Metal Detecting (Scottish Detector Club) (Appendix 4) Members of the Scottish Detecting Club, kindly offered to help the Big Cousland Dig, by expertly sweeping the area for any metallic finds, both in the fields, and also in the trenches, to alert us to any missed items. Indeed it could be said that some of the best ‘artefacts’ came from their survey. No discernable pattern was picked up, and no significant concentrations were observed. However, the items that were recovered do in some way represent the later history of Cousland. From the 16th century came the buckle of a shoe (Find MD 008), from a person who would have known Cousland at the time of Mary Queen of Scots and the Battle of Carberry4 and when both the Castle and Residence were standing. The restoration of the monarchy can be seen from two 1670’s Charles II turners, (Find MD013 and MD 050) and then the disastrous end of the Stewart Kings with James II’s infamous Gun Money5 , how did this coin end up here? A 1797 George III Cartwheel penny6 (MD 075) brings us into the industrial age, when the pottery, windmill, smiddy and walled garden would all have been built only 5 to 25 years earlier. A link to World War II can be found in a fragment of a Mills Grenade (Find MD 001) which may have been used during a live ammunition exercise in the quarry to the south.

Above left: late 16th century buckle Above right: 1940s army issue webbing buckle.

Find MD 50 Scotish Turner with cleaned example below.

Find MD 52 James VI Gun money with cleaned example below.

4 On a hot sunny day on Carberry Hill in June 1567, Queen Mary spent her last few hours of freedom. It is suggested she was taken first to Cousland Castle – the Ruthven’s Residence – before she began her captivity, first in Scotland and then in England, which was only to end 20 years later in her execution. 5 Gun money was an issue of coins made by the forces of James II during the Irish Civil War between 1689 and 1691. Minted in base metal, these were designed to be redeemed for silver coins following a victory by James II and consequently bore the date in months to allow a gradual replacement. As James lost the war, that replacement never took place, although the coins were allowed to circulate at much reduced values before the copper coinage was resumed.They were mostly withdrawn from circulation in the early 18th century. 6 The first copper coins that Boulton minted for the British Government are know as ‘cartwheels’, because of their large size and raised rims. 500 tons of these penny and also twopenny pieceswere minted in 1797

page 18

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

5.1.3

Excavation (Figure 3)

Trench 1 Trench 1 was 10 x 2 metres long, designed to train people to excavate in an environment where skills could be taught with little damage to archaeology. It was expected that the footings and floor of a glasshouse as well as a path would be uncovered. However, after removal of the topsoil [1001] the underlying mixed clay showed that the entire area had been disturbed, and no sign of the glasshouse was found. Areas of dumping, including a car seat and other mechanical items were present, and pointed to later use of this area for burning rubbish. The glasshouse was thought to stand here, as rafter holes are evident in the wall directly above the trench 1, and a 1940s photograph clearly showed a whitewashed section of wall, relating to the interior of a building that had been removed not long before. A deeper test trench was sunk at the west end to a depth of 1.10 metres which provided evidence of a further subsurface layer of clay rich soil, which had most likely been imported from another location and used as a ‘base’ for the topsoil throughout the entire walled garden (proved in the similar deposits in Trench 3).

Trench 2 Trench two was located in an area to the east of the castle, with the intention of locating the missing east wall, and so give a definitive size to the castle structure. The 7 x 2 metre trench provided much in the way of archaeological highs and lows. The initial clearance down to the first archaeology [2002] contained rubble, clearly from the castle walls, located in a distinct line, and the hope of finding a robbed wall foundation trench was high. This soon proved not to be the case, as the stones were sitting on a mixed clay rich layer, that was similar to that found inside the walled garden. The complete lack of any foundations or floor levels became a source of great discussion on the site, and helped to explain the process of interpreting archaeological sites. The final activity was a deep 1.2 metre test hole at the west end, with a smaller 0.40 x 0.4m hole sunk to over 1.8 metres. This conclusively proved that the limestone bedrock on which the castle stood had been completely quarried away, and with it, much of the castle walls. The stone likely had been incorporated into the walled garden, and so any surviving deposits relating to the castle would lie within the remaining castle structure to the west. Of interest, was the fill of the ‘quarry pit’, which may be related to the phase of the walled garden construction. There were frequent lumps of pure clay suggesting the backfilling of the pit, and perhaps even the levelling of the walled garden, was with material used for pottery manufacture.

Above: Trench 1 with underlying mixed deposits and below, the final section showing the thick mid brown clay rich layer. Below: Trench 2 under excavation, , including our youngest volunteer.

page 19

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

Trench 3 Trench three was sited to investigate a square anomaly located by geophysics within the walled garden. The square 5 metre trench was extended to the north by a further 2 metre extension, but it soon became apparent that it contained the same deposits uncovered in trench 1. A topsoil horizon sat over a mixed layer before coming down onto a heavier clay rich soil at around 0.30 – 0.40 m depth. No sign of the feature was found, and no clue to what may have caused the anomaly was established.

Trench 4 Trench four turned into one of the most interesting and promising investigations, providing most of the finds, and several key pieces of evidence. One of the last trenches to be opened, all people who worked on it, of all ages, enjoyed exploring the evidence that came from the surviving layers. A layer of stones running east west [4006] soon became recognisable as the backfill of a robbed out wall some 0.90m wide. Although heavily truncated, it was clear that the entire building,

Above: Trench 3 under excavation. Below: Trench 4 directing the work.

page 20

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

dubbed the ‘Residence’ had been demolished completely, with only the west wall remaining as a clue to its existence (though it can be seen on General Roy’s map of the 1750s – Figure 8). Deposits excavated to the south (exterior) and north (interior) were clearly different, and from the interior deposits [4004] came several ceramic items dating to the late 17th and 18th centuries, confirming use and terminus post quem for the structure – it clearly did not survive into the 19th century. Several bones were recovered, and during the washing of the finds, it was ascertained that one, a right calcaneus Tarsus7 was human. This must represent disturbed burials from an earlier date, and raises once again the possibility of either a chapel and graveyard nearby, or that the soil used to level the area for agricultural use was brought from nearby, and we have previously recorded that human remains were found only 100metres away near the windmill plantation. Because the residence was obviously standing when the walled garden was built, it would have escaped the quarrying found in trench 2, and although the deposits were truncated by later agriculture, it is obvious that in situ deposits still survive here. Above: Trench 4 exposing the robbed wall, with volunteers of all ages. Left: The human calcaneus, and location within the foot. Below: Recording the final levels of Trench 5 .

Trench 5 Trench five was excavated, only to a depth of 0.30m, however, it too came down to the top of a robbed out wall, with rubble fill within a presumed foundation cut. It was decided that given the time, it was reasonable to record the presence of archaeological deposits surviving beneath 0.30m below ground surface. Again, it seemed there had been a deliberate and total demolition of the residence, and further examination if possible would provide further archaeological evidence concerning this building.

7 A large bone in the human foot above the heel.

page 21

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

5.1.4 Historic Building Record Two Elevations were picked to best represent the architectural and chronological phasing of the walled garden / castle site. The first long elevation (Figure 6) was created along the south north wall leading to the castle, and continued through the castle as a cross section. The second was a section of castle wall in the southwest corner (Figure 7) that showed the relationship between the earlier windows and the courtyard wall that was built against the castle to the south. All the drawing was carried out by the project volunteers, and photographic images were used to enhance the base drawings, that were produced at 1:50. From these records it was possible to produce accurate stone by stone CAD elevations. The three main phases of construction were as follows.

Phase 1. The castle, consists of thick rubble filled walls of local limestones with sandstone quoins. Internal features include aumbries and within the thicker north wall, there is evidence for the existence of a large fireplace with a water spout to the side, leading from an external source (probably from the roof ). The surrounds of the doors and windows are all of high quality grey quartzite rich sandstone, with thick chamfered mouldings on the jambs. The walls are built directly onto a bedrock outcrop. The vaulted chamber is unusual, as it seems to be a first floor feature, and corbels that run along the south internal face of the wall, as well as joist holes, indicate that the surviving remains are two stories of a possible four story structure. The style of castle appears to be of a late 15th century design.

Careful recording of the ‘Residence’ elevation.

Phase 2. The residence and courtyard wall are constructed of sandstone and rough angular local stone, and the thickness of walling does not exceed 0.60m. To the south of the wall there is ample evidence of a mid/late 16th century structure thought to be a residence. Tusking stones show the northern boundary of the main building, with the gap between this structure and the castle, being filled with a skin wall that effectively forces the blocking of the two windows in the castle south wall. Two blocked windows with chamfered jambs and angled ingoes, that would have let light in through the small window openings, suggest that although there would not have been a requirement any longer for defensive castled structures, the building is still semi-defensible. There are two aumbries or cupboards set in the wall, and between these features is a door jamb which shows the building was two rooms deep. Given the standard constructional measurements of similar buildings of the period it would measure approximately 10 metres wide by 30 metres long (or more appropriately in feet and inches, as this was how it was built- c. 30ft wide and 90 ft long). A central stair would have been flanked by rooms on either side, with apartments above. It is too early to conjecture the precise layout, and we can only be sure it stood from a period of approx. 1500 to a time between 1750 and 1800. page 22

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

Phase3 Walled Garden

Phase2 Residence

Phase 1 Castle Phase3(?) later entrance to walled garden

northwest

southeast

158.48 MaOD

Rear wall return Window Aumbry/Cupboard

Window

door jamb

Tusking stones Aumbry/Cupboard

floor surface interior of castle cut bedrock

door jamb

0

5m

Figure No. 6: soutwest external h elevation

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

southwest

northeast

158.48 MaOD

0

5m

Blocked window

Figure No. 7: southwest external elevation of castle

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

Phase 3. This segment of the wall to the south, is a butt joint that is not tied into the residence. This wall represents the massive walled garden, that is now securely dated to a period when the Dalrymple family had taken over the estate around 1690 and began a series of improvements. It is of interest that the lower courses of the massive north wall of the garden, is of the same material as the castle, and it is suspected that the castle was robbed of stone, and then a quarry extended beneath it, until all rock was exhausted, with only the walls incorporated into the walled garden remaining. After the available local stone was used, the garden was completed with material from another location, which is still to be found, though it could be close to the pottery site to the west of the village.

Measured recording of the Residence

page 25

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

5.1.5 Historical Research (Louise Yeoman) There is a wealth of historical documentation that has been collected from various sources, but it is also clear that there is a vast untapped resource to be found both in the Stair papers of the Dalrymples, and within the National Archives. It is most interesting that the archaeology has independently correlated with historical events. These events themselves are fairly complex and will take more time to precisely document, however, a timeline can be constructed, which includes footnotes for significant events that Cousland either witnessed or was directly or indirectly involved in.

Timeline of Cousland 1180 - 1476 - St Clairs of Roslin William St. Clair was the Fourth Baron of Roslin; Third Baron of Pentland; and the First Baron Cousland, inherited in 1180, died 1214. There is mention of Cousland in a charter of William The Lion around the late 12th century, that may relate to the lands, being in some way connected with the Abbey of Dunfermline. Henri Fifth Baron of Roslin; Fourth Baron of Pentland; Second Baron Cousland Inherited 1214, died 1222. Henri Sixth Baron of Roslin, Fifth Baron of Pentland, Third Baron Cousland Inherited 1222, died 1270 William Seventh Baron of Roslin; Sixth Baron of Pentland; Fourth Baron Cousland Born 1220; inherited 1270; died 1296 Henry Eighth Baron of Roslin; Seventh Baron of Pentland; Fifth Baron Cousland Born 1270, inherited 1296, built Roslin Castle 1304, died 1335 William Ninth Baron of Roslin; Eighth Baron of Pentland; Sixth Baron Cousland Born 1328, inherited 1335, died 1358 Henry Tenth Baron of Roslin; Ninth Baron of Pentland; Seventh Baron Cousland; First Earl of Orkney Born 1347, inherited 1358, died 1400 Henry Eleventh Baron of Roslin; Tenth Baron of Pentland; Eighth Baron Cousland; Second Earl of Orkney Born 1384, inherited 1400, died 1420 William the Chapel-builder; Twelfth Baron Roslin; Eleventh Baron Pentland; Ninth Baron Cousland; Third Earl of Orkney; First Earl of Caithness; First Baron Dysart, First Lord Sinclair Born 1404, inherited 1420, built Roslin Chapel 1446, estates broken up 1476, died 1480. In 1483 Janet Yeoman, William’s widow tries to claim from the barony as her ‘terce’ (her widow’s life rent of a third of her husbands lands) against the new Lord Sinclair. This is tried in Parliament, she succeeds at first but they then find against her. page 26

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

“

In the action and cause pursued by William [Sinclair], lord Sinclair, against Janet [Yeoman], the spouse of the late William [Sinclair], earl of Caithness and lord Sinclair, and against Sir Oliver Sinclair, that is to say against the said Janet for the wrongful collection and withholding of the third of the lands of Cousland, Dysart, Ravenscraig, Wilston, Carbar and Dubbo totalling the sum of £134 silver and 53 bolls of wheat and barley, and against the said Sir Oliver for the wrongful withholding from the said William of the charters and sasines of the said lands in contradiction to his bond and obligation, and to deliver the same to him according to the form of the said bond, the said parties being present in person, their rights, reasons and allegations seen, heard and understood at length, the lords auditors decree and deliver that the said Janet does no wrong in collecting [from] her third of the lands of Cousland, because she is lawfully served with it before the sheriff by our sovereign lord’s brieves, and that therefore she shall use and enjoy the same forever and until it is lawfully recovered from her. And as regarding her terce of the lands of the barony of Dysart, Ravenscraig, Wilstoun, Carbarr and Dubbo, the lords decree and deliver that the said Janet shall cease in the future from collecting the thirds from there forever and until she is lawfully served with them by our sovereign lord’s brieves. And also that the said Sir Oliver is free of the claim and challenge by the said William regarding the said charters and evidence, because the said William admitted in the presence of the lords that with both their consents the said evidence was delivered to the elect of Glasgow to be destroyed and was destroyed with their own consent

“

“

In the action and cause pursued by William Sinclair against the persons who passed on the serving of a brieve of terce purchased by Janet [Yeoman], the spouse of the late William, earl of Caithness and lord Sinclair, for the lands of Cousland, for their error and wrong determination in the serving of the said brieve because they served her for the terce of the whole barony of Cousland, as was alleged, and thereupon showed a confirmation from our sovereign lord under the great seal made to Sir Oliver Sinclair for feu-ferme of the said lands, and an act of the lords of council of the same, both the said parties being present in person, and their reasons and allegations seen, heard and understood at length, the lords auditors decree and deliver that the said persons have done wrong† in serving the said brieve because they found that she should have a terce of the whole barony of Cousland, the said Sir Oliver being saised of it by the said confirmation of feuferme before the death of the said late William, earl of Caithness, and decide that the serving of the said terce is of no value in the future. And if the said Janet can prove by reservation or any other means that she has a right to the terce of the said lands, that she pursue her right where it is fitting and justice shall be administered. 9

“

8 NAS, PA2/4, f.13r-v. [1483/6/42] 9 NAS, PA2/4, f.30r. 1483/10/72

page 27

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

1494 - 1600 - The Ruthven Lords In 1494 Cousland passes to the Ruthvens – William 1st Lord Ruthven d.1528 (his mother was a Cranstoun of that ilk which explains a connection to the area. His eldest son died at the Battle of Flodden in 1513 )10 In the presence of the lords auditors David Balfour of Cariston and Patrick Hepburn, procurators for William [Sinclair], lord Sinclair, agreed to warrant William [Ruthven], lord Ruthven and Isobel, his spouse, the lands of Cowsland, with their pertinents, according to the form of the charter and infeftment made to them for that, and agreed the same charter and infeftment in all points according to the tenor of it, whereupon the said Isobel, lady Ruthven requested a note. 11 Note: The castle that now stands within Area 1, could indeed have been built at this point, as the style does indicate a late 15th century origin, and would correlate well with a new lord of the lands of Cousland. Interestingly in 1509 there is mention of a dedication of a chapel at Cousland to St. Catherine by William Lord Ruthven and his wife, Isobel Livingston.

“

“Rex ad manum mortuam confirmauit cartam Willelmi Ruthvene de eodem militis, domini feodi terrarum de Cowsland, et Willelmi dom. R. ac Isobelle Levingstoun eius sponse dominorum liberi tenementi earundem, qua in puram elemosinam concesserunt uni capellano in capella S. Katerine infra uillam de Cowsland diuina imperpetuum celebraturo, annuum redditum 12 mercarum de terris uille de Cowsland, uic. Edinburgh “ The King has confirmed in mortmain a charter of William Ruthven, of that Ilk, knight, feudal lord of the lands of Cowsland, and William, lord Ruthven, and Isabella Livingston, his wife, lords of the free holding of the lands of Cowsland --- by which, they granted in pure alms, to one chaplain in the chapel of St Catherine, within the town of Cowsland, who will celebrate divine service, for ever, the yearly income of 12 marks from the lands of the town of Cowsland, shire of Edinburgh.12

“

10 This conflict began when King James declared war on England, to honour the Auld Alliance with France by diverting Henry VIII’s English troops from their campaign against the French king Louis XII. England was involved in a larger conflict; defending Italy and the Pope from the French, (see Italian Wars), as a member of the “Catholic League”. Using the pretext of revenge for the murder of Robert Kerr, a warden of the Scottish East March, who had been killed by John “The bastard” Heron in 1508, James of Scotland invaded England with an army of about 30,000 men. The battle actually took place near the village of Branxton, in the county of Northumberland, rather than at Flodden — hence the alternative name of Battle of Branxton. The Scots had previously been stationed at Flodden Edge, to the south of Branxton. On September the 9th 1513, the battle was fought, and the slaughter of the Scots was great, with James IV dying on the battlefield after leading a doomed charge, his body was only discovered the following day, and only after some difficulty, stripped, as it was, of his armour and mangled by several wounds. James was the last British monarch to be killed in battle. Every noble family in Scotland was supposed to have lost a member at Flodden. The dead are remembered by the song (and pipe tune) “The Flowers of the Forest”; We’ll hae nae mair lilting, at the yowe-milking, Women and bairns are dowie and wae. Sighing and moaning, on ilka green loaning, The flowers of the forest are all wede away. 11 NAS, PA2/6, 2nd part, f.36r. [1494/11/134] 12 RMS II/James IV/3358 (Great Seal) from the Database of Dedications to Saints in Medieval Scotland http://webdb.ucs.ed.ac.uk/saints/

page 28

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

William 2nd Lord Ruthven succ.1528 d.1552, grandson of the above, married Jonet, eldest daughter and coheir of Patrick, Lord Haliburton of Dirleton. Although he was a supporter of James V he refused to sit on the trial of Lady Glammis for treason and was an early supporter of the vernacular Bible but was also loyal to Mary of Guise. He was probably born ca.1500. On the 25th February 1529 there is a reference to the “Burning of Cousland” by Patrick Charteris as part of a feud with Lord Ruthven (almost certainly stemming from burgh politics in Perth). Patrick Charteris of Cuthilgurdy, a near kinsman of the laird of Kinfauns, and who had been provost of Perth, from 1521 to 1523, both inclusive, and in 1525, and again in 1527 provost and sheriff, found Robert Maule of Panmure as his cautioner that he would underlie the law for art and part of the fire-raising and burning of the village of Cowsland and houses therof, and for the plunder of oxen, cattle and other goods, from the tenants thereof, and from William Lord Ruthven; and on 28th of the same month, John Charteris, his brother, and eleven others, found security to answer for the same crime. 13 Only 18 years later, Cousland would have witnessed the terrible Battle of Pinkie in 1547. The Ruthven’s do not seem to be involved at Pinkie as the now elderly William, the second Lord is active in Perth and Patrick, his son, is pro-English at this point and is even trying to surrender Perth to the English. Therefore the story that the English burn the castle at Cousland would not make sense, given that, at this time, the Ruthven are friendly with the English. Patrick 3rd Lord Ruthven – born ca.1520, succ.1552 died 1566. is an early and committed Protestant. And in 1553 there was a contract between him and Isobel Mauchane concerning the Magdalen Chapel. The Magdalen chapel was a chapel/ charitable institution in Edinburgh’s Cowgate - a pre-reformation foundation with a chaplain and seven bedesmen, for the benefit of Edinburgh’s hammermen (metal workers). It looks like Patrick gives them a permanent endowment but without examining the original documents this has yet to be confimed, and interestingly Patrick seems keen on helping craftsmen.

“

“Ruthven played a critical role in upholding the interests of Perth’s craftsmen burgesses and in negotiating a compromise with the queen regent, Mary of Guise, which protected at least some of the craft privileges. His actions appear to have won him crucial support in the burgh, especially among the craftsmen burgesses, support which persisted into 1559 and the conversion of Perth to the Reformation.” 14

“

The documents belonging to this mortification include some twenty-one contracts, sasines, decreets, etc., and one of them, dated 4th May 1553, sufficiently explains the transaction.

13 See Pitcairn’s Criminal Trials, vol.1, part 1 p.85 14 Dictionary of National Biography

page 29

“

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

“Contract betwixt Patrick, Lord Ruthven and Issobelle Mauchane relict of Gilbert Lawder,burgess of Edinburgh, whereby the said Lord Ruthven for the sum of £1000 Scots lent to him by the said Issobelle Mauchane obliged himself to infeft her in the Barony of Cousland”. 15

“

This is the tenor of the original contract, and it was predated by one day by a renunciation by Lady Ruthven of her conjunct fee and life rent of the lands of Cousland. The whole being finally confirmed under the Great Seal on 23rd May 1553. On the 29th April 1554 was given a precept of sasine by the said Issobelle in favour of the bedemen, in which she mortified the sum of £50 Scots (£4, 3s. 4d. sterling) from the lauds of Cousland, followed by a contract between the said Issobelle Mauchane and the Hammermen, dated 24th July 1555, for employing the said sum to the bedesmen’s use 1553 - 58 there are several records of lime production in Cousland16 Extracts from the Accounts: Town Treasurer, 1553-4’ Heir followis the expensis maid be Robert Grahame, compter, the yeir of his office, on the bigging of the Schoir of Leyth, quhilk begane in the moneth of Aprile the yeir of God Jm vc liiij yeirs, particularie as efter followis:— The expensis of the first oulk, whilk wes the viij dayis precedand the vij day of the said moneth of Aprile:— Item, for ane dozone [loads] Cousland lyme, xvi shillings Accounts of Dean of Guild 1554 Heirefter followis the Compt of Johne Symsoun, Dene of Gild, of his Charge in the yeir of God Jm vc fifty foure yers; his entres beand the viij of October the yeir of God Jm ve and liij yers precedand:— Item, bocht the xij day of October, foure laids (loads) of Cousland lyme,vs iiijd (5s 4d) ( This would make a load 1s 4d) 6th March 1558 – Edinburgh Council agreement with Lime men of Cousland Lindesay, Makdougall. My lordis presidentis baillies and counsale forsaid ordanis maister James Lindesay baillie, and Sir William M’Dougall maister of werk, to contract and aggre with the lyme men of Cousland for furnessing of lyme to the wallis of the toun, and thay to be the price makaris thairof allanerlie.

15 Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland 2002 vol 061 pp.251-8 16 J. D. Marwick (editor) Extracts from the Records of the Burgh of Edinburgh: 1528-1557 (1871)

page 30

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

1566 Patrick, Lord Ruthven, Cousland and the Riccio Murder “On the evening of 9 March 1566 Ruthven made a dramatic appearance in the queen’s chamber in Holyrood House while Mary was at supper with her friends. Ash-white from his illness, visibly wearing full armour under his nightgown, he demanded, ‘Let it please your majesty that yonder man David come forth of your privy chamber where he hath been overlong’ (Fraser, 252), before giving a barely coherent recitation of the secretary’s misdeeds. His accomplices then dragged Riccio out of the room and stabbed him to death, after which Ruthven returned to the queen’s presence and asked for wine. Ruthven remained on guard with his men at the palace for two days, assuring the queen’s attendants and the burgesses of Edinburgh that no harm was intended to the queen. Furthermore, he reassured those who questioned what was happening by telling them that he was acting at the insistance of Lord Darnley. Mary soon escaped, however, and regained the upper hand, and Darnley equally quickly denied any part in or knowledge of the affair. Consequently Ruthven and his accomplices were forced to flee to England, after which they were tried in absentia and subjected to forfeiture for treason and non-compearance.” 17 Some of Ruthven’s force guarding the palace came from Cousland and there are records of at least two of his tenants being there. April 6th 1566 John Hunter in Cowsland and John Smith elder in Cowsland (among others from Dalkeith Musselburgh etc) found surety to underlie the Law for the treasonable watching ,warding and imprisoning of our sovereign lady in her Palace of Holyrood18 Patrick Lord Ruthven flees to England where he writes his account of the Riccio murder and dies 16th May 1566. William his son was also involved in the murder and also fled to England.

1567 William , Lord Ruthven, Cousland and Carberry Hill William 4th Lord Ruthven later 1st Earl of Gowrie. born ca.1543 succ. 1566. is executed 4th May 1584 for his part in the Ruthven Raid kidnap of James VI 1567- Mary surrenders to the confederate lords at Carberry Hill. The army of the lords halts at Cousland for about eight hours. 15 June 1567 “the lords made great haste until they came to the Magdalen brig at Musselburgh and there the two armies being in each others sight strove continually from five o clock in the morning till noon against each other to have the advantage and pre-eminence of the sun and there after the lords strove so for the sun that they passed to Cousland, and the Queen’s grace and her army remained on the height at Carberry where they stayed til eight hours at night” William 4th Lord Ruthven is one of the confederate lords, when Mary was imprisoned in Loch Leven castle and he was also one of those entrusted with securing her abdication 17 Dictionary of National Biography 18 Pitcairn’s Criminal Trials vol 1 part III pp.482-483

page 31

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

Walter Scott tells the story of Ruthven telling Mary to abdicate.

“

Madam,” said Ruthven, “I will deal plainly with you. Your reign, from the dismal field of Pinkie- cleuch, when you were a babe in the cradle, till now that ye stand a grown dame before us, hath been such a tragedy of losses, disasters, civil dissensions and foreign wars, that the like is not to be found in our chronicles. The French and English have, with one consent, made Scotland the battle-field on which to fight out their own ancient quarrel. Forourselves, every man’s hand hath been against his brother, nor hath a year passed over without rebellion and slaughter, exile of nobles, and oppressing of the commons. We may endure it no longer; and, therefore, as a prince, to whom God hath refused the gift of hearkening to wise counsel, and on whose dealings and projects no blessing hath ever descended, we pray you to give way to other rule and governance of the land, that a remnant may yet be saved to this distracted. Walter Scott, The Abbot, p.72

“

Ruthven is active at the battle of Langside against Mary and after in the post 1570 civil war as a King’s man. As warden of the East march he is active in Lothian in 1573. As treasurer he finds himself liable for overspending by the Duke of Lennox – this will lead to him ‘wadsetting’ Cousland to raise cash (using it as security for loans) In 1580 Cousland is used as security again and life rent to James Richardson of Smeaton from 1585.19 This is registered in the Books of Council and session the Register of Deeds at NAS. James Richardson of Smeaton really and with effect disbursed and paid to the late William [Ruthven], earl of Gowrie, lord Ruthven and Dirleton, the sum of £4,000 of his own proper money and bestowed by the said late earl upon his own affairs, tending to his utility and profit; for security of the which sum of £4,000, the said late William, earl of Gowrie, bound and obliged him to infeft the said James in liferent and Robert Richardson, his son lawful, his heirs and assignees, in fee and heritage in all and whole an annualrent of £400 usual money of this realm yearly, to be uplifted at two terms in the year, Whitsunday [May/June] and Martinmas [11 November] in winter, by equal portions, of all and whole the town and lands of Cousland, with the parts, pendicles and pertinents thereof, lying within the sheriffdom of Edinburgh, to be held of him and his heirs as in the contract made between them thereupon at Edinburgh on 24 May 1580, registered in the books of council, at more length

19 NAS, PA2/13, ff.52v-53r.

page 32

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

1581- William 4th Lord made 1st Earl of Gowrie

The Ruthven raid 1582 - in increasing financial trouble, Gowrie kidnaps the King20 “The duke [of Lennox’s] regime had spent lavishly on the royal household, moreover, and as treasurer Gowrie was obliged to cope with the resulting deficits, to the extent of having to wadset his own lands (including Cousland) in order to support the financial burdens of his office. The result was the coup d’état of 23 August 1582 known as the Ruthven raid , whereby Gowrie, supported by the earls of Angus and Glencairn and by many lairds and ministers, seized the person of the king and ousted Lennox from power. As befitted the man who gave his name to the raid, Gowrie was a leading figure in the regime that followed. He took steps to protect his own interests—one of the purposes of a tax imposed in April 1583 was to repay the crown’s debts to himself—but his administration also made efforts to control royal household expenditure.” New Dictionary of National Biography 1583 Wiliam and Dorothea Stewart his countess infeft (place in control) James Johnston of Elphinstone in the mains of Cousland, Holyroodhouse on 24 December 1583 21 1584 – The execution of Gowrie, forfeiture of Cousland and other lands to Earl of Arran Though Gowrie is intially pardoned after he falls from power, his enemies soon move against him. He’s accused of witchcraft, treason and and conferring with a sorcerer, found guilty of treason, Gowrie was executed at Stirling on 4 May 1584 and all his lands were forfeited. “the property of the lands of Carnock and of the lands of Wells, and also the feu mails of the lands of Dirleton, Cousland and Kirknewton and others contained in the infeftment made to his grace’s right trusty cousin, James [Stewart], earl of Arran,” 22 Act of Parliament confirms 1583 charter and grants that the said James Johnston of Elphinstone, his heirs and assignees peaceably possess and enjoy the said mains and lands of Cousland. A charter of the Great Seal is to confirm this. 23 However in 1586 we see the restoration of the Gowries with James 2nd Earl of Gowrie (5th Lord Ruthven) with him unfortunately dying in 1588 On the 14th February 1586 letters of Horning at the bedemen’s instance were taken out against the Earl of Gowrie and his tenants at Cousland, and on the 14th April following a precept by the Countess of Gowrie on her factors was granted 20 On August 22, 1582, the Raid of Ruthven conspiracy composed of several Presbyterian nobles, led by William Ruthven, 1st Earl of Gowrie, abducted King James VI of Scotland and kept him for almost a year. The earl of Gowrie remained at the head of the government. The Gowries favoured an ultra-protestant regime but were also prompted by an urge to curb excessive spending at court. A number of cost saving measures for the royal household were proposed by Gowrie and his exchequer colleagues. These were described as ‘havand respect to the order of the hous of your hieness goudsire King James the fifth of worthie memorie and to the possibilitie of your majesties present rents’ a reference to the thriftiness of James V.[1] The king gained his freedom at St Andrews in July 1583. The earl of Gowrie was pardoned in 1583, but kept plotting and was later beheaded for high treason. 21 NAS, PA2/13, ff.53r-v. 1585 22 NAS, PA2/13, ff.11v-13r. Parliament records 23 NAS, PA2/13, ff.53r-v.23

page 33

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

to the bedemen of £25 Scots for the Martinmas term by past, and the like yearly and termly in all time coming. The result of this was an increase of pension to three bedemen; Adam Gibson received a money payment of £3 Scots, and in addition a bedemanship during all the days of his life, “ and that for guid thankful dilligent service done by him heretofore and to be done hereafter.” The patrons were greatly benefited by the advice of Mr David Macgill as their law agent in the matter. 24 1588 - John as the 3rd Earl and 6th Lord Ruthven. In the year 1600 is the infamous but little known ‘Gowrie conspiracy’ 25 with John alleged to have been involved in a plot to assassinate James VI – a plot that left him and his younger brother and heir Alexander dead after which he was posthumously attainted for treason. Once again, only 14 years after their lands had been returned, the Gowries forfeit everything.

1600 - 1620 - The Herries ownership Cousland is forfeited and gifted by the Crown to Sir Hugh Herries for his part in rescuing the King from the supposed assassination attempt but the lands are still in the hands of Dorothea Stewart the widowed countess, so he is given a pension from Scone until he can possess the lands fully. As likewise excepting and reserving out and from the said annexation all and whole the lands and teinds of Cousland with all and sundry their pertinents, which lands and teinds with their whole pertinents are likewise ordained by his majesty and estates to be conveyed heritably to his highness’s faithful and trusty servant Sir Hugh Herries, knight, for great, seen, profitable and necessary causes of the realm at length expressed in the said Sir Hugh’s infeftment and security of the said lands and teinds granted to him in this present parliament, which are held as specially expressed herein, and also excepting and reserving out of this present annexation the yearly pension of 20 chalders of victual thereof, 10 chalders, 10 bolls of barley, 9 chalders and 6 bolls of meal to be yearly uplifted and taken by the said Sir Hugh Herries, his heirs and assignees out of the best and readiest payment of the whole fruits, rents, mail, ferms, kanes, customs and other duties whatsoever of the lands and lordship of Scone and Gowrie until the infeftment of the lands and barony of Cousland may take full effect by possession in their persons, either by decease of Dame Dorothy Stewart, countess of Gowrie, or by the eviction of the same lands and barony of Cousland from her by the law, and as soon as the said Sir Hugh Herries or his foresaids shall happen to recover or enjoy all and whole the said lands and barony of Cousland and teinds thereof that then the said letter of pension to remain with his highness’s crown for ever. 26

24 PSAS 1927 25 Although the Gowrie conspiracy is shrouded in mystery, three solutions have been proposed. Firstly, that Gowrie and his brother lured King James (at that time king only of Scotland) to Gowrie House for the purpose of either murdering or kidnapping him, that James paid a surprise visit to Gowrie House with the intention of murdering the two Ruthvens, or that the events were the outcome of an unpremeditated brawl between the king and the earl, or his brother. Although all three theories have had historical proponents, the most modern scholarship suggests that there was a genuine conspiracy by Gowrie and his brother to kidnap King James. 26 NAS, PA2/16, f.12v-13v.

page 34

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

Teinds continue to go to Dunfermline the Abbey revenues now belong to Anne of Denmark, The Queen, and this teind, or debt, indeed stretches back to the medieval period and is only fully paid off by the Dalrymples in the mid 19th century. Within an Act in favour of Sir Hugh Herries regarding an infeftment to be made to him of the lands of Cousland and 20 chalders of victual out of Scone we find the following line, which clearly states the tower and fotalice is still standing, and obviously roofed. The full document can be found online. 27

“

….to the said Sir Hugh, his heirs and assignees in special security and warrandice of the said town, lands and barony of Cousland, with the teinds thereof and their pertinents principally conveyed as said is; and also that the same infeftment shall contain an union and erection of the said town, lands and barony of Cousland, with the tower, fortalice, manor place, houses, buildings, yards, orchards, dovecots, mills, multures, tenants, tenancies, service of free tenants thereof, advocation and donation of the chaplainry thereof and all their pertinents in a whole and free barony, to be called in all time coming the barony of Cousland,….

“

Sir Hugh dies by 1602 and he is succeeded briefly by his brother David who was a ships Captain and burgess of Dundee but he dies of the plague at ‘Ratleiffe’ near London in 1603. He is succeeded as baron of Cousland by his young son and heir George. But unbelievably outliving everyone so far, Dorothea Stewart Countess of Gowrie is still alive in 1605 and clinging onto Cousland, as it cannot pass on fully until her death. On 15th March 1620 George Herries is confirmed as heir to Sir Hugh and to the Barony of Cousland, but he quickly sells the property to Sir George Hay, later Earl of Kinnoull 28

27 http://www.rps.ac.uk/search.php?action=fc&fn=jamesvi_trans&id=id6931&query=cousland&type=tra ns&variants=Cousland#n2 28 Miscellanea Genealogica Et Heraldica: Fourth Series, edited by W. Bruce Bannerman, republished 2001 by Adamant Media Corporation pp.249-252)

page 35

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

1620 - 1635 Hays of Kinfauns, Earls of Kinnoull Sir George Hay was an influential and powerful man and also an early industrialist with patents for iron manufacture and glass manufacture, he was also the Lord Chancellor of Scotland (1622) When Cousland was under his ownership they have a witch-hunt in the year 1630! The accused witches were April 1st 1630 Elizabeth Selkirk – commission to try her granted to Sir James McGill of Cranstoun Riddel 29 April 21st 1630 Margaret Allane, Margzret Veitche, Janet Patersoun ‘prisoners in the Tolbooth of Cowsland’ - commission to try them to Sir Samuel Johnestoun of Elphinstoun. 30 May 26th Commission to Sir Samuel Johnestoun of Elphinstoun to apprehend and examine John Phenick tailor in Cousland, Marioun Bankes his spouse, Agnes his daughter, Janet Richardson, Marion Anderson, Christian Steill, Giles Swintoun (this could be the female name Geillis ) long suspected of witchcraft’. They’ve been accused by others who have now been executed. The examination is to be reported in writing to the Privy Council. 31 July 8th Commission to Sir Samuel Johnestoun of Elphinstoun to try John Phenick who’s been apprehended32 We know they were held in the tollbooth in Cousland, which could have been the castle, given that it is the only secure building in the settlement. The suggestion is that the number of people involved represents a local dispute behind the accusations George Hay 1st Earl of Kinnoull dies in 1634 and is succeeded by George Hay 2nd Earl of Kinnoul d.1644, the Hays hold the lands until 12th September 1639 after which it passes to the Macgills

27 http://www.rps.ac.uk/search.php?action=fc&fn=jamesvi_trans&id=id6931&query=cousland&type=tra ns&variants=Cousland#n2 28 Miscellanea Genealogica Et Heraldica: Fourth Series, edited by W. Bruce Bannerman, republished 2001 by Adamant Media Corporation pp.249-252) 29 Register of the Privy Council 2nd series vol 3 p518 30 Register of the Privy Council 2nd series vol 3 p.534 31 Register of the Privy Council 2nd series vol 3 p.544 32 Register of the Privy Council 2nd series vol 3 p.602

page 36

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

1635-1690 Oxfurd

The Macgills of Cranstoun Riddell, later Viscounts

The is an original charter to Sir James Makgil August 16th 1639 and when the Gowries are restored (yet again) in the person of Patrick Gowrie, MacGill has Cousland confirmed to him and a new charter is created in 8th September

“

And it is hereby expressly provided and ordained that the foresaid rehabilitation granted by our said sovereign lord to and in favour of the said Patrick Ruthven, with the ratification above-written of the parliament interposed thereto, shall be in no way hurtful nor prejudicial to George [Hay], earl of Kinnoull and Sir James MacGill of Cranstoun-Riddel, knight, one of the senators of the college of justice, of their rights and possession of the lands of Cousland and teinds and whole pertinents thereof, and of a lodging and dwelling house in the town of Perth, but that notwithstanding of the rehabilitation and ratification and reduction of the act of parliament in the year 1600, the said Earl of Kinnoull and Cranstoun-Riddel, their heirs and successors, shall hold and possess the said lodging and dwelling house in Perth and the said lands of Cousland, whole teinds and pertinents thereof, according to their rights, securities and possession, which the said Patrick Ruthven, his heirs nor successors shall never be heard to quarrel nor impinge in any sort. 33

“

1641, as an Act of parliament in his favour James Macgill becomes Viscount Oxfurd 1651 but his patent of nobility is not read in parliament till 13th March 1661, of course at this time we have the small matter of the Civil War, and in 1650, there is the great defeat of the Scots at Dunbar. He dies 5th May 1663 and is succeeded by his son Robert Makgill, 2nd Viscount of Oxfuird d.1706 It is now in the 1690s that the Dalrymples of Oxenfoord & Stair take possesion of the lands of Cousland as is listed here It may be no coincidence that the Dalrymples take the lands in the 1690s, the

“

“Titles of estates other than Stair: Cousland writs. Disposition by John, Earl of Lauderdale, to Sir James Dalrymple of Kinloch, one of the principal clerks of session, of 100 merks yearly of teind duty payable furth of the lands and barony of Cousland, this duty being part of the lordship of Mussillburgh, now to be disjoined therefrom; with obligation by Lauderdale to deliver to Dalrymple an inventory of progress of the lordship of Musselburgh since 1649, 26 November 1701.” 34

“

same time as the collapse of Scotland’s fortunes with the Darien Adventure And perhaps it is here that we can see the origins of a new life for Cousland, with the construction of a model village, blacksmith, windmill, pottery and Walled garden. It is here that we leave the history of Cousland, as with the archaeology, more work is needed to piece together the fragments. The groups have learned greatly from the studies conducted, and with access to further documentary evidence, married to archaeology, the story to the present is possible.

33 NAS, PA2/22, f.341r-343r. 34 In 1698 the Scots tried to set up a trading colony in Darien (now part of Panama) in an attempt to evade the increasingly negative effects of the English Navigation laws on the Scottish economy. The Darien Adventure failed with disastrous implications for the Scottish economy. Its failure became one of the contributory economic factors in the abolition of the independent Scottish Parliament and the Act of Union in 1707.

page 37

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

5.2

Pottery Field – Area 2

It was understood that a pottery works stood in or near Cousland, and an advert in the Edinburgh Courier gave a clue to its size, if not its actual location. A road to the west of Cousland is still known as Pottery Brae, and so it was decided to concentrate an investigation in this area to confirm location, date and type of pottery works that may have existed. 5.2.1 Geophysics (Edinburgh Archaeological Field Society) (Figure 4) The completed report for the geophysics in the pottery field is still to be produced by the EAFS, however, using the initial results from the magnetometre it was possible to pinpoint sub surface features. Six circular targets were identified in the survey area, and the main concentration of these are tentatively identified as kilns or perhaps pits for dumping wasters, kiln furniture and kiln bricks. The magnetometre is sensitive to heat affected areas, and so structures like kilns would be highly likely to appear on a survey. The resistivity survey has still to be completed to the northwest, this form of geophysics is best suited for walls and certain features were recognised in the initial plot. This survey was conducted simultaneously with the field walking, and both were able to feed into the evaluation trench.

Above: Magnetometer Survey Left: Magetometer Plot Below: creating the site grid for the geophysics and fieldwalking

page 38

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

5.2.2 Field Walking (Figure 4) The area was divided into 5 metre squares, 4 deep, and parallel to the road. 28 squares were examined in total. All artefacts were collected, cleaned, examined and plotted on a computer to view distributions and types of material recovered. By the careful collection of everything in those squares, the plotted material showed a real correlation with the geophysics results. Most interestingly, the types and dates of the material began to show a possibility that we were dealing with an early industrial pottery, perhaps related to the period when Scottish redwares were being replaced with the new type of pottery – the Whiteware. 18th century whitewares, of the type found in the second half of the century, continued into early 19th century forms, though not in the same abundance. Kiln furniture, used to stack pottery in kilns, as well as the bricks used in the construction of these structures, confirmed that this was not material brought in, but was related to the geophysical annomolies that had been observed. The potential existed that this was indeed the lost pottery, and we had located the Cousland works, it was felt that excavation would confirm the survival and presence of structures beneath the ploughsoil Left: Collection of artefacts in the grid Below left: Finds ready for processing Below right: Working together to ensure everything is found

page 39

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

5.2.3 Excavation (Figure 4) Excavation was carried out on the following day after the locations of a suitable feature was confirmed. A small trench 4 metres by 2 was opened over an area where kiln material and bricks as well as geophysics suggested surviving structures. Only 0.20m beneath the surface, a course of handmade bricks was uncovered, and further investigation revealed they formed a wall, two bricks wide, bonded with mortar. To the south was a clay surface, while to the north, the wall continued down for 3 courses, and a heat affected area was uncovered over what is thought to be a floor surface at a depth of c. 0.40m. The main purpose of this exercise was to confirm the survival of structures, and possible function. Stratified material was removed from the base level, a partial hemispherical lead glazed redware bowl which was in situ, as all the sherds were conjoining, dated to the 1760s which would suggest this was indeed an early East Coast Pottery, and the remarkable survival was exciting, given its location in a ploughed field. This is a site worth excavating further.

Below left: : Opening the evaluation trench Below right: Solid evidence of the pottery; a brick wall and floor.

page 40

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

5.2.4 Ceramic Report (George Haggarty) Analyses of the ceramic material recovered from the episode of field walking carried out over the possible 18th century creamware pottery production site near Cousland in Midlothian (blocks A to AB), shows that it falls into a number of distinct groups. 1. (18th century whiteware 1064 shards) 447 glazed & 585 bisque: This group suggests that either there was at least one 18th century whiteware kiln in the vicinity or that there was large scale dumping of 18 century ceramic material on the site. Glazed shards of this ware are not commonly recovered during normal fieldwalking as it is still a bit expensive and has not filtered down the social ladder. 2. (19th century whiteware 525 shards) 235 glazed & 297 bisque: Although some of this material was the normal types of later Victorian pottery found while fieldwalking, this group suggests either there was at least one early 19th century whiteware kiln in the vicinity, or that there was large scale dumping of 19 century ceramic material on the site.

3. (18th and 19th century redware 242 shards) 192 glazed & 50 bisque: Much of this material can be hard to date accurately but I am sure that most of it is of late 18th century date, although some shards are the normal types of late Victorian pottery found while fieldwalking. Again this group suggests that either there was at least one late 18th century redware kiln in the vicinity or that there was large scale dumping of redware on the site. From the trial trench a number of stratified conjoining red earthenware shards from a small thrown bowl, dating to c. 1780 were recovered. All 18th century whiteware potteries excavated to-date in the Forth littoral, also produced using the local red firing clays, a range of both coarse, and as this example, more refined red earthenware.

Below: Shards which conjoin to form fragments of a hemispherical lead glazed redware bowl: Decorated internally with white slip over which can be seen splodges (almost certainly manganese). A common form and similar to material recovered from the excavations carried out at Morrison Haven, Prestonpans: presently dated to c 1765-78.

4. (18th and 19th century kiln furniture 177 fragments) Again often hard to date accurately but definitely all pre c1840 when whiteware potteries began to use high fired bought in industrially produced examples none of which are in this assemblage: page 41

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

5. (18th 19th & 20th century brown stoneware 13 shards) Common finds type when fieldwalking and this group probably has no real significance: 6. (18th century white salt glazed stoneware kiln furniture, 2 examples) These are arguably the most interesting ceramic finds as they are of a very rare type which to-date have only been recovered in Scotland: Two sites on the coast, Prestonpans and Bankfoot, which both produced a range of White Salt Glazed Stoneware and which date from 1750 c.1775: What is strange that no shards were recovered from the wares?

This assemblage probably posses as many questions as it answers. Certainly there is a significant quantity of 18th century pottery from the site in both white creamware and redware bodies, and much of this in the form of kiln furniture and unglazed shards, indicative of ceramic production. Although there is no documentary evidence for ceramic production into the early 19th century there is evidence for this from the shard material. Again the limited documents give us no hint that White Salt Glazed Stoneware was produced in the area but although unlikely it is not impossible but something like the possibility of 19th century production only archaeology can answer.

Above left: A white salt glazed stoneware kiln stand like the two found on the pottery site. Above: Example of Scottish white stoneware and the marks these stands make on a plate, presently the only way which we can distinguish Scottish from Staffordshire examples.

Wash, dry, sort, plot and record

page 42

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

5.3

Windmill Plantation – Area 3 (Figure 5)

The main purpose behind this investigation was to clear the area of damaging ivy and a dead tree which was threatening the surviving fabric. Due to the vegetation, it was difficult to understand the layout, form and size of the Windmill structure. The intention was to understand the surviving remains, assess the condition, and investigate the depth of deposits that may survive beneath the surface 5.3.1 Clearance Using hand tools, the ivy was carefully removed from the walls, pruning back until it was safe to expose the stonework. Nettles and other vegetation was cut back to expose the platform and vault, and to allow clearance of loose tree limbs and rubbish. A dead tree that was located on the southwest corner of the vaulting was removed, to ease the pressure on the stonework. This was completed and allowed further investigation. It is worth mentioning that after clearance it was evident that the windmill mound stood on a larger more rectangular prominence that stretched to the north. This is definitely worth further investigation, to understand its purpose and date.

Before clearance During clearance After clearance

page 43

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

Area 1

Area 2 Area 3

Area 1

Area 3 Area 2

Figure No. 8: General Roy circa 1750-52 1st Ed OS map: 1854

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

northwest facing internal elevation

evaluation trench 2 platform?

northeast

southwest

rubble build behind vault

front wall located in excavation

elevation

evaluation trench 1

0

10 m

vaulting

Front wall

Arch spring 0

5m

reconstructed cross-section northeast facing

5m

0

5m

Figure No. 9: Northwest facing internal elevation of Windmill vault Plan of site and trenches Reconstruction of principal elevation.

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

5.3.2 Excavation (Figure 9) Excavation was limited to two exploratory trenches. A small 4 x 2 metre trench was excavated on the top of the mound to confirm if the wall of the windmill survived. Only just beneath the topsoil, around 0.05m below the surface, a layer of rubble was uncovered, on the line of the wall. No further excavation was required, as this confirmed the presence of the structure. In the north east corner of the collapsed vaulted chamber, a deep test pit was sunk to investigate the depth of deposits and the potential makeup of a floor surface. It was found that over 1.20m of deposit fills the vaulted chamber, and that the opening of the vault, had a wall running across it, as with other similar East Lothian Windmills, such as the Balgone windmill at North Berwick. Far left: debris from the collapsed wall of the windmill Left: Investigating the vault infil.

5.3.3 Historic Building Record (Figure 9) A basic record of a single elevation was carried out, and details of the size and layout were also recorded. Local limestone and sandstone was used for construction of a low vaulted chamber c. 7.50m in length and 4.70m wide. An extrapolated height of c. 3.50m has been assumed, with the vault springing from circa 1.50m above the ground surface. The vaulting is of rubble built slabs of masonry with a rubble core behind, mixed with mortar. Either side of the vault is buried with soil and held in check with two flanking walls. The Windmill structure sits to the southwest of the vaulting, and measures some c. 6m in diametre. It is difficult to suggest a height. This is a very typical windmill structure of early/mid 18th century date and it is safe to assume that its construction coincides with Dalrymple ownership of the land.

page 46

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

5.3.4 Historic Analysis (Iain Fraser RCAHMS) The remains of a windmill survive in a small plantation on the W edge of the summit (170m OD) of a ridge on the S edge of the village of Cousland.

Vaulted tower mill , Balgone, East Lothian

The remains are set into the E side of an artificial mound: irregular in plan, the mound is approximately 20m broad E-W, and 35m N-S. On its S side it rises to about 1.0m; on the NW, down slope side, it rises to about 1.8m in height. Flattopped, it falls steeply on its W side. Set into the E side of the mound are the remains of a vaulted structure, aligned NE-SW. The opposing N and S walls, of lime mortar-bonded rubble indicate a vault of at least 8.0m in length, and 4.2m in breadth. The walls survive to a maximum height of 1.8m. Much of the facing stonework has been lost, but what survives preserves the springing of a semi-circular arch. There are no indications of a return wall at the E end of the structure, and the W ends of the walls merge into the mound. No visible remains survive of the tower on the top of the mound. However, the root plates of wind thrown trees reveal considerable quantities of loose stone and lime mortar in the area that it would have occupied. This form of windmill, comprising a low tower set upon a vaulted substructure, is conventionally attributed to the late 17th or early 18th centuries. Some indication of the date of construction may be provided by Adair’s 1682 map of East Lothian, which depicts both the Penston and Prestonpans windmills, but not that of Cousland. On the other hand, although he did mark the village itself, as Cousland lay outwith the boundary of the shire, Ainslie may not have regarded the mill’s omission as important. Its omission from the 1736 published version of the map is not significant, as this was based upon the earlier manuscript. More significantly, however, Adair’s 1683 map of Midlothian does not represent the mill, although if it had existed it would surely have been a conspicuous element of the landscape. The site is widely visible today from across the Midlothian coastal plain to the west, and distantly from the East Lothian coast to the north-east. It is now an anonymous cluster of trees on the hillcrest to the south of the plantations of the Carberry estate, but prior to the growth of the trees the windmill would have been a conspicuous landmark on the Lothian skyline. The building is first recorded on Roy’s map of c.1750, (Figure 8)which shows it as a circular structure, within a circular enclosure, and annotated as ‘Windmill’. Whether this implies that it was still intact and in use is, however, not apparent. It is next shown on John Lawrie’s map of 1763 as an unannotated circular building, and again in that of 1766, this time as an unannotated rectangular building, apparently standing in an area of pasture. Armstrong’s 1773 ‘Map of the Three page 47

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

Lothians’ depicts the mill in a small perspective view, as a small tower set on a low hill, annotated ‘Old Wind Mill’. Probably significantly, it is not portrayed as mounting sails, and presumably was now derelict. James Knox’s map of 1816 does not mark the building of the mill, although it does show the outline of the present circular plantation, annotated ‘Old Wind Mill’. In 1828 Sharp, Greenwood and Fowler’s map depict the plantation, and within it, a ‘Tower’. The earliest Ordnance Survey depiction, the 1:10560 scale map of 1854-6, shows a circular structure, presumably intended to represent the tower, within the tree grown enclosure, named ‘Windmill Plantation. The annotation, ‘Windmill remains of’ confirms that the mill was, by now, ruinous. The 1:2500 map of 1894 clearly depicts the rectangular vaulted structure, by then unroofed, set into the NE side of the mound. The tower is not shown, and had presumably been demolished since the 1st edition map. The function of the mill is unclear: the existence of lime quarries and mines in its vicinity might point to its use as a pump, but its obsolescence by the later 18th century, when mining and quarrying continued, might rather point to its agricultural function, a point further confirmed by the vaulted substructure, a feature elsewhere explained as part of the grain-milling process.

page 48

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

6.0

Conclusions

In terms of success in answering the initial questions that were posed, this HLF funded project has exceeded expectations. It would be true to say that the history of Cousland has been effectively rewritten from the early Medieval period around 1110 AD to the beginning of Scotland Industrial Renaissance in the 18th century, some seven hundred year of history is now compiled. The importance of Cousland as a place, where decisive events in Scottish History not only affected, but happened, has been confirmed. Taking each area in turn, the results for each have been remarkable. Area 1: The Castle field We have confirmation that the castle is likely to have been built by the Ruthven lords around the end of the 15th century. Later, they constructed a Residence, which hosted the Confederate Lords, and perhaps even Mary Queen of Scots, in 1567. The Walled garden was built much later in the early 18th century, and in the process, quarried away most of the castle, though the residence remained until at least 1760. There is definite proof of structures in the south field, though these may be connected with later quarry works. The Residence, although demolished, does have surviving archaeology remaining to the south, and could provide evidence for construction, use and layout. Area 2: The Pottery field Examination of the pottery and kiln furniture recovered in the fieldwalking, and from the small evaluation trench confirm the presence of surviving archaeology. We now are sure that this is the pottery mentioned in the 1796 Edinburgh Advertiser as being for sale. This must also be the pottery that James Belfield arrived at in the mid 18th century from Staffordshire, before moving to Prestonpans, where his son, Charles set up the Belfield Pottery. This remarkable find is of great importance, as not only has geophysics shown the presence of kilns and possible waster pits, but the works themselves will be one of the earliest whiteware potteries in Scotland, and the beginning of the industrial period. Careful examination of the technologies used, as well as the pottery produced here, will be of immense value to the study of Ceramics in Scotland. Area 3: The Windmill Plantation The windmill as a standing monument to the history of 18th century Cousland, stands well alongside the Smiddy and the Walled Garden, as another of the Dalrymple improvements. However, the mound it sits on, is unusual, and has been examined for the first time. Nearby are known long cist burials of possible Early Historic date (9th-11th century) and this could at last be the final clue to the location of an early Christian religious establishment. Further Geophysics, detecting and careful excavation could confirm this extremely important conclusion.

page 49

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

The knowledge gained in this project has been of great importance, and the outcome has been most satisfactory. The option for extending the work to cover the period 1700 – 2000 and the pre 1100 occupation cannot be discounted. It is one that must be seriously considered – along with the continued examination and display of what has already been found. The number of people who have been involved, and the varied ages and abilities has been a great benefit to the project. Learning and enjoyment were easy companions, and as a community project, supported by the community of Cousland it has been a great success. The involvement of other groups and societies allowed exchanges of knowledge and experience that can be used in the future. This is a project that has a future, and with the skills gained by all involved, this is one that can provide a future for the village itself. The site has attracted interest from several bodies, and short publications have been made in the Scottish Vernacular Buildings Working Group yearly journal, the Archaeology Scotland magazine is running an article on the project, as is the Past Horizons Magazine. Notable figures in the RCAHMS and Historic Scotland are taking an interest in what is found, and the report will be disseminated widely, to ensure that the maximum number of people is made aware of what is found. In November 2008, a full evening event is taking place with lectures, and discussions as well as an informal celebration of what has been achieved. There is much still to learn, and all the individuals and groups involved are keen to continue this discovery of Cousland’s past. August 2008

page 50

Cousland Big Dig

Appendix 1 Trench list and Context Register Trench List – Cousland Big Dig – CBD07 Pottery Field Trench Description Evaluation – north end of field – abandoned due to bedrock (2m x 2m) Final depth: .1m 1 East - West Orientation (2m x .6m) Final depth: .4m 2

Trench List – Cousland Big Dig – CBD08 Castle Field Trench 1 2 3 4 5

Description East - West Orientation (2m x 10m) Final depth: .4m (sondage at west end to 1.2m) East - West Orientation (2m x 6m) Final depth: .6m (sondage at west end to 1.8m) Square of 5 m with small 2 m x 1 m extension to north .3m (sondage to 1m East - West Orientation (2m x 5m) Final depth: .3m North- South Orientation (2m x 5m) Final depth: .3m

Trench List – Cousland Big Dig – CBD08 Windmill Plantation Trench Description East - West Orientation (1m x 5m) Final depth: .2m 1 East - West Orientation (1m x 1.2m) Final depth: .9m 2

Context List – Cousland CBD08 – Castle Field Context Description 1001 Topsoil 1002 Mid brown clay Silt subsoil infil 1003 Orange brown slightly silty clay with occasional inclusions of degraded sandstone (redeposited natural infil – not bottomed 2001 Topsoil 2002 Dark brown clay silt with occasional angular limestone fragments 2003 Mid brown silty clay with frequent angular stone fragments and rubble 2004 Mid to light brown clay silt with occasional shale and stone fragments 2005 Orange brown silty clay with inclusions of pure clay, - quarry backfill 3001 Topsoil 3002 Mid brown clay Silt subsoil infil 3003 Orange brown slightly silty clay with occasional inclusions of degraded sandstone (redeposited natural infil – not bottomed 4001 Topsoil 4002 Dark brown clay silt with occasional angular limestone fragments 4003 Dark brown clay silt with frequent stones and mortar 4004 Mid brown clay silt with frequent stones and mortar (interior of structure?) 4005 Mid brown silty clay with frequent mortar (exterior of structure?) 4006 Stone backfill 4007 Base of wall robber cut 5001 Topsoil 5002 Dark brown clay silt with occasional angular limestone fragments 5003 Dark brown clay silt with frequent stones and mortar 5004 Mid brown clay silt with frequent stones and mortar (interior of structure?)

Cousland Big Dig

Appendix 2 Photo Register (Digital.) Photo Record List – Cousland Big Dig (Pottery Field)– CBD07 Photo Site Code ID 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

CBD07_001 CBD07_002 CBD07_003 CBD07_004 CBD07_005 CBD07_006 CBD07_007 CBD07_008 CBD07_009 CBD07_010 CBD07_011 CBD07_012 CBD07_013 CBD07_014 CBD07_015 CBD07_016 CBD07_017 CBD07_018 CBD07_019

20 21 22 23 24 25

CBD07_020 CBD07_021 CBD07_022 CBD07_023 CBD07_024 CBD07_025

26 27 28 29

CBD07_026 CBD07_027 CBD07_028 CBD07_029

30 31 32

CBD07_030 CBD07_031 CBD07_032

33

CBD07_033

34

CBD07_034

35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42

CBD07_035 CBD07_036 CBD07_037 CBD07_038 CBD07_039 CBD07_040 CBD07_041 CBD07_042

Description Setting out grid Setting out grid Magnetometer survey - EAFS preparing Geophysics Grid - EAFS Collection of surface finds Collection of surface finds Collection of surface finds Collection of surface finds Resistivity survey under way Setting up survey points Working on the finds Working on the finds Working on the finds Ceramics being processed Ceramics being processed Working on the finds Working on the finds Working on the finds Working on the finds George Haggerty and David Connolly Evaluations of Pottery field in area of anomaly Evaluations of Pottery field in area of anomaly Evaluations of Pottery field in area of anomaly Evaluations of Pottery field in area of anomaly Evaluations of Pottery field in area of anomaly Evaluations of Pottery field in area of anomaly first brick appears Evaluations of Pottery field in area of anomaly Evaluations of Pottery field in area of anomaly Evaluations of Pottery field in area of anomaly Evaluations of Pottery field in area of anomaly wall is exposed Evaluations of Pottery field in area of anomaly Evaluations of Pottery field in area of anomaly Evaluations of Pottery field in area of anomaly wall is exposed Evaluations of Pottery field in area of anomaly sample taken Evaluations of Pottery field in area of anomaly depth of walls checked General shots General shots General shots General shots General shots General shots Trench shots - wall exposed Trench shots - wall exposed

Direction to SW

Date 28/11/2007 28/11/2007 28/11/2007 28/11/2007 28/11/2007 28/11/2007 28/11/2007 28/11/2007 28/11/2007 28/11/2007 28/11/2007 28/11/2007 28/11/2007 28/11/2007 28/11/2007 28/11/2007 28/11/2007 28/11/2007 28/11/2007 29/11/2007 29/11/2007 29/11/2007 29/11/2007 29/11/2007 29/11/2007 29/11/2007 29/11/2007 29/11/2007 29/11/2007 29/11/2007 29/11/2007 29/11/2007 29/11/2007

E vert

29/11/2007 29/11/2007 29/11/2007 29/11/2007 29/11/2007 29/11/2007 29/11/2007 29/11/2007 29/11/2007

Cousland Big Dig

Photo Record List – Cousland Big Dig (Pottery Field)– CBD07 Photo Site Code ID 43 44 45 46 47

Description

Direction to

CBD07_043 CBD07_044 CBD07_045 CBD07_046

Trench shots - wall exposed backfill George Haggerty and potwashing bedrock beneath surface of plough, north investigation CBD07_047 bedrock beneath surface of plough, north investigation

Date

vert

29/11/2007 29/11/2007 29/11/2007

vert

29/11/2007

vert

29/11/2007

Photo Record List – Cousland Big Dig (Castle)– CBD08 Photo Site Code ID 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

CBD08_001 CBD08_002 CBD08_003 CBD08_004 CBD08_005 CBD08_006 CBD08_007 CBD08_008 CBD08_009 CBD08_010 CBD08_011 CBD08_012

13

CBD08_013

14

CBD08_014

15 16

CBD08_015 CBD08_016

17

CBD08_017

18

CBD08_018

19

CBD08_019

20

CBD08_020

21

CBD08_021

22

CBD08_022

23

CBD08_023

24

CBD08_024

25

CBD08_025

26

CBD08_026

27

CBD08_027

Description Trench 1, general shot, note beam holes in wall Trench 1, topsoil removal, context [1002] Trench 1, topsoil removal, context [1002] General shot, Midlothian YAC in trench 1 General shot, Midlothian YAC in trench 1 General shot, Midlothian YAC in trench 1 Trench 3, topsoil removed [3002] exposed Trench 3, topsoil removed [3002] exposed Trench 3, topsoil removed [3002] exposed General shot of East Lothian YAC and team General shot of East Lothian YAC and team Trench 3, context [3003] a clay rich layer exposed in extension Trench 3, context [3003] a clay rich layer exposed in extension Trench 3, slots cut through [3002] down to [3003] at southwest end of the trench Trench 2, record shot prior to deturfing Northwest wall (internal) of Building 2. Series of for photo retification (see elevation) Northwest wall (internal) of Building 2. Series of for photo retification (see elevation) Northwest wall (internal) of Building 2. Series of for photo retification (see elevation) Northwest wall (internal) of Building 2. Series of for photo retification (see elevation) Northwest wall (internal) of Building 2. Series of for photo retification (see elevation) Northwest wall (internal) of Building 2. Series of for photo retification (see elevation) Northwest wall (internal) of Building 2. Series of for photo retification (see elevation) Northwest wall (internal) of Building 2. Series of for photo retification (see elevation) Northwest wall (internal) of Building 2. Series of for photo retification (see elevation) General shot of trench 2 showing location in relation to castle (Building 1) General shot of trench 2 showing location in relation to castle (Building 1) General shot of trench 2 showing location in

Direction to

Date

SE

29/03/2008 29/03/2008 29/03/2008 29/03/2008 29/03/2008 29/03/2008 29/03/2008 29/03/2008 29/03/2008 30/03/2008 30/03/2008 30/03/2008

SE

30/03/2008

SE

30/03/2008

9

SW NW

31/03/2008 31/03/2008

9

NW

31/03/2008

9

NW

31/03/2008

9

NW

31/03/2008

9

NW

31/03/2008

9

NW

31/03/2008

9

NW

31/03/2008

9

NW

31/03/2008

9

NW

31/03/2008

W

01/04/2008

S

01/04/2008

S

01/04/2008

SW E SW

SE SE SE

Cousland Big Dig

Photo Record List – Cousland Big Dig (Castle)– CBD08 Photo Site Code ID 28

CBD08_028

29

CBD08_029

30

CBD08_030

31

CBD08_031

32

CBD08_032

33 34

CBD08_033 CBD08_034

35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44

CBD08_035 CBD08_036 CBD08_037 CBD08_038 CBD08_039 CBD08_040 CBD08_041 CBD08_042 CBD08_043 CBD08_044

45

CBD08_045

46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55

CBD08_046 CBD08_047 CBD08_048 CBD08_049 CBD08_050 CBD08_051 CBD08_052 CBD08_053 CBD08_054 CBD08_055

Description

Direction to

relation to castle (Building 1) Trench 2, turf removed and [2002] a dark brown stony layer exposed Trench 1, final deep sondage at northwest end, note 3 layers Trench 1, final deep sondage at northwest end, note 3 layers Trench 1, general trench shot showing re-instating of turf Trench 1, general trench shot showing re-instating of turf Trench 2 after removal of [2002] with [2003] At far end (the rubble) and [2004] a lighter and less stony layer Trench 4 after removal of topsoil Trench 2. Rubble layer [2003] exposed and [2004] Trench 2. Rubble layer [2003] exposed and [2004] Trench 2. Rubble layer [2003] exposed and [2004] Trench 2. Rubble layer from above Trench 5 after removal of topsoil [5001] General shot General shot General shot Trench 4 after removal of [4002] robbed wall exposed Close up of trench 4 after removal of [4002] robbed wall exposed Trench 2, layer [2005] clay Trench 2, layer [2005] clay, southwest end Southwest wall external shot of castle Southwest wall external shot of castle General shot of child in a cupboard Trench 4, [4002] General shot of Lodgings General shot of Lodgings General shot of Lodgings, Trench 5 General shot of Lodgings, Trench 4

Date

SW

01/04/2008

SW

01/04/2008

SW

01/04/2008 01/04/2008 01/04/2008

SW SW

01/04/2008 01/04/2008

SE SW SW SW NW SW

SE

03/04/2008 03/04/2008 03/04/2008 03/04/2008 03/04/2008 04/04/2008 04/04/2008 04/04/2008 04/04/2008 04/04/2008

SE

04/04/2008

SW SW S S SE SE SE SE

04/04/2008 04/04/2008 04/04/2008 04/04/2008 04/04/2008 04/04/2008 04/04/2008 04/04/2008 04/04/2008 04/04/2008

Photo Record List – Cousland Big Dig (Windmill Plantation)– CBD08 Photo ID

Site Code

BCG08W01 BCG08W02 BCG08W03 BCG08W04

BCGW BCGW BCGW BCGW

BCG08W05 BCG08W06 BCG08W07 BCG08W08

BCGW BCGW BCGW BCGW

Description General view of windmill pre clearance General view of windmill during clearance General view of windmill during clearance General view of windmill during clearance General view of windmill during clearance and trench 2 trench 2 being excavated trench 2 being excavated trench 2 being excavated

Direction to

Date

SW NE NE E

05/07/2008 05/07/2008 05/07/2008 05/07/2008

NE vert vert vert

05/07/2008 05/07/2008 05/07/2008 05/07/2008

Cousland Big Dig

Photo Record List – Cousland Big Dig (Windmill Plantation)– CBD08 Photo ID

Site Code

BCG08W09 BCG08W10 BCG08W11 BCG08W12 BCG08W13 BCG08W14 BCG08W15 BCG08W16 BCG08W17 BCG08W18 BCG08W19 BCG08W20 BCG08W21 BCG08W22 BCG08W23 BCG08W24 BCG08W25 BCG08W26 BCG08W01 BCG08W02 BCG08W03 BCG08W04

BCGW BCGW BCGW BCGW BCGW BCGW BCGW BCGW BCGW BCGW BCGW BCGW BCGW BCGW BCGW BCGW BCGW BCGW BCGW BCGW BCGW BCGW

Description Gereal shot Gereal shot Gereal shot General view of windmill during clearance General view of windmill during clearance General view of windmill during clearance trench 1 - rubble collapse of windmill trench 1 - rubble collapse of windmill trench 1 - rubble collapse of windmill General view of windmill after clearance Internal elevation showing vault Internal elevation showing vault Internal elevation showing vault Internal elevation showing vault Internal elevation showing vault Internal elevation showing vault trench 2 showing wall foundations trench 2 showing wall foundations General view of windmill pre clearance General view of windmill during clearance General view of windmill during clearance General view of windmill during clearance

Direction to

SW SW SW VERT VERT VERT NE SE SE SE SE NW NW VERT VERT SW NE NE E

Date 05/07/2008 05/07/2008 05/07/2008 05/07/2008 05/07/2008 05/07/2008 05/07/2008 05/07/2008 05/07/2008 05/07/2008 05/07/2008 05/07/2008 05/07/2008 05/07/2008 05/07/2008 05/07/2008 05/07/2008 05/07/2008 05/07/2008 05/07/2008 05/07/2008 05/07/2008

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

CBD07 Pottery Field

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

CBD07 Pottery Field

CBD08 Castle Field

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

CBD08 Castle Field

CBD08W Windmill Plantation

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

CBD08W Windmill Plantation

Cousland Big Dig

Appendix 3 Artefact List Artefact Record List – CBD08 - Cousland Castle Field Trench Context Description Various FE objects including nails, screws, springs, brackets and fittings 1 1001 4 fragments terracotta pantile 8 fragments of shell 3 glass body fragments and 1 bottle rim 1 clay pipe bowl fragment and 1 stem attached to partial bowl Various small pottery sherds

1

1002

2

2001

2

2002

Various small pottery sherds 2 FE nails and 1 small bracket 3 fragments of terracotta pantile 1 piece slag 9 oyster shell fragments and 3 other shells 2 fragments clay pipe bowl and 1 stem Assorted small bone fragments Assorted small glass body fragments 2 fragments slate/shist 1 bone/ivory toggle/peg

2

2003

1 lump of kiln brick 5 bone fragments 3 fragments of oyster shell and 1 other shell Various glass body fragments 5 small pottery sherds 2 fragments slate 1 snapped (2 pieces) pipe stem with glaze 1 piece slag

Various glass body fragments 1 piece melted plastic Various small pottery sherds and 1 small waster 3 lumps of kiln waster material 9 oyster shell fragments and 1 whole oyster shell 3 fragments of coal and 1 fragment of industrial material 12 fragments of terracotta pantile 2 bone fragments 1 blackened clay pipe stem 1 button Various FE objects including nails, screws, springs, brackets and fittings and 1 horse harness buckle Various pieces of wood , some showing evidence of burning 1 large FE bracket Various small glass fragments 1 fragment terracotta pantile 3 shell fragments 1 clay pipe stem Various FE objects, nails, 1 bracket and top of gun cartridge Various small pottery sherds 1 small piece lead

Cousland Big Dig

Artefact Record List – CBD08 - Cousland Castle Field Trench Context 2 2004 1 large FE nail and 1 small bracket

Description

7 small ceramic sherds 1 small fragment glass 4 fragments oyster shell 4 bone fragments and 1 tooth

3

3001

8 oyster shell fragments and 1 other shell 1 clay pipe stem and 1 stem attached to bowl fragment 1 FE nail Various small pottery sherds

3

3002

Various pottery sherds, 1 green glaze handle, 1 clay bottle stopper 1 glass fragment Various oyster shell fragments 3 fragments of terracotta pantile and 1 piece of brick 1 fragment pottery extrusion 1 clay pipe stem (cutty) 4 FE nails and 1 piece of barbed wire 1 piece white painted wood

3

3003

Various fragments of shell 2 FE nails, 1 steeple and 1 button 3 glass body sherds 2 fragments terracotta pantile Various small pottery sherds Various fragments charcoal 5 small bone fragments

Cousland Big Dig

Appendix 4 Artefact List Detecting Artefact Record List – CBD08 - Cousland Castle Field and Southern Field MD Number MD001 MD002 MD003 MD004 MD005 MD006 MD007 MD008 MD009 MD010 MD011 MD012 MD013 MD014 MD015 MD016 MD017 MD018 MD019 MD020 MD021 MD022 MD023 MD024 MD025 MD026 MD027 MD028 MD029 MD030 MD031 MD032 MD033 MD034 MD035 MD036 MD037 MD038 MD039 MD040 MD041 MD042 MD043 MD044 MD045 MD046 MD047 MD048

Description Mills grenade fragment 1940's Lead disc Machine part Lead object Cut quarter coin 18th century St. George token Lead shot Late 16th century shoe buckle Georgian penny Apostles spoon early 20th century Lead disc Georgian penny Scottish turner 17th century Horse buckle No Find No Find No Find No Find No Find No Find Waistcoat button Horse bridle bit No Find No Find No Find Horse terret bell No Find Iron door stud No Find No Find No Find No Find No Find No Find No Find No Find No Find No Find No Find No Find Possible Cu weight Lead object Horse harness buckle Cu horse shoe nail Victorian buckle Lead object No Find No Find

Cousland Big Dig

Artefact Record List – CBD08 - Cousland Castle Field and Southern Field MD Number MD049 MD050 MD051 MD052 MD053 MD054 MD055 MD056 MD057 MD058 MD059 MD060 MD061 MD062 MD063 MD064 MD065 MD066 MD067 MD068 MD069 MD070 MD071 MD072 MD073 MD074 MD075

Description No Find Charles II turner 1677 Decorated fragment James II gun money one shilling 1689 No Find Decorated Cu object Prob. Tractor part Pierced lead weight No Find No Find No Find Waistcoat button No Find No Find No Find No Find No Find 1940's military webbing buckle No Find No Find No Find No Find No Find No Find No Find No Find 1797 cartwheel penny

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

Big Cousland Dig - Community Archaeology Project

Cousland Big Dig

Appendix 5 Pottery Field – Ceramic record Artefact Record List – CBD07 – Pottery Field Type Whiteware Rims G Bases G Body G Handles G Others G Rims B Bases B Body B Handles B Others B

Whiteware

Date

“ “ “ “ “ “ “ “ “ “

Others B

Redware

18th Century

Bases G Body G Handles G Others G Rims B Bases B Body B Handles B

Rims G Bases G Body G Handles G Others G Rims B Bases B Body B Handles B Others B

49 47 334 17 4 43 59 478 5 4

19th Century

“ “ “ “ “ “ “ “ “ “

Rims G

Total from Fieldwalking (see Figure 4)

18th Century

“ “ “ “ “ “ “ “ “ “

32 40 155 8 0 23 20 246 4 4

16 15 146 14 0 11 9 29 1 0

Cousland Big Dig

Artefact Record List – CBD07 – Pottery Field Type Kiln Furniture Saggers Spacers HM Extruded White Extruded Red L Shaped

Other Material Kiln Flooring Bricks Fireclay Tiles Roof Tiles Floor Tiles Drainage

Date

Total from Fieldwalking (see Figure 4)

th

18 /19th

“ “ “ “ “

106 18 26 18 9

18th/19th

“ “ “ “ “

77 47 337 13 6

Cousland Big Dig

References Maps: Ordnance Survey Map 1854 Haddingtonshire surveyed 1852 General Roy Military Map, surveyed 1750-55