Picts E-Book

Gordon Noble

• Herausgeber: John Donald
• Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 693

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2022

Beschreibung

Shortlisted for the EAA Book Prize and the Current Archaeology Book of the Year Award The Picts have fascinated for centuries. They emerged c. ad 300 to defy the might of the Roman empire only to disappear at the end of the first millennium ad, yet they left major legacies. They laid the foundations for the medieval Scottish kingdom and their captivating carved stones are some of the most eye-catching yet enigmatic monuments in Europe. Until recently the Picts have been difficult to trace due to limited archaeological investigation and documentary sources, but innovative new research has produced critical new insights into the culture of a highly sophisticated society which defied the might of the Roman Empire and forged a powerful realm dominating much of northern Britain. This is the first dedicated book on the Picts that covers in detail both their archaeology and their history. It examines their kingdoms, culture, beliefs and everyday lives from their origins to their end, not only incorporating current thinking on the subject, but also offering innovative perspectives that transform our understanding of the early history of Scotland.

Leseprobe

Gordon Noble is Professor of Archaeology at the University of Aberdeen and has undertaken award-winning landscape research and field projects, working on projects from the Mesolithic to Medieval periods. He is author of Neolithic Scotland: Timber, Stone, Earth and Fire (Edinburgh University Press 2006), Woodland in the Neolithic of Northern Europe: The Forest As Ancestor (Cambridge University Press, 2017) and coauthor of King in the North: The Pictish Realms of Fortriu and Ce (Birlinn, 2019). He works on two current major projects: Northern Picts and Comparative Kingship, the research for which won the Current Archaeology Research Project of the Year 2021, a highly prestigious accolade. His research has featured on BBC 2 Digging for Britain, BBC Radio 4 In Our Time and many other media outlets.

Nicholas Evans is a Research Fellow on the Leverhulme Trust funded Comparative Kingship: the Early Medieval Kingdoms of Northern Britain and Ireland project at the University of Aberdeen. A historian whose research and teaching have focussed on the medieval Celtic-speaking societies of Britain and Ireland, he is the author of The Present and the Past in Medieval Irish Chronicles (Boydell Press, 2010), A Historical Introduction to the Northern Picts (Aberdeen University/ Tarbat Discovery Centre, 2014) and co-author of King in the North: The Pictish Realms of Fortriu and Ce (Birlinn 2019).

First published in

Great Britain in 2022 by

Birlinn Ltd

West Newington House

10 Newington Road

Edinburgh

EH9 1QS

www.birlinn.co.uk

ISBN: 978 1 78885 506 8

Copyright © Gordon Noble and Nicholas Evans 2022

The right of Gordon Noble and Nicholas Evans to be identified as the authors of this work has been asserted by them in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored, or transmitted in any form, or by any means, electronic, mechanical or photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the express written permission of the publisher.

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available on request from the British Library

Typeset by Mark Blackadder

Printed and bound in Britain by Bell and Bain Ltd, Glasgow

This book is dedicated to Anna Ritchie, an inspiration to any archaeologist studying Pictland. Her work has enriched Pictish studies for many decades and will do so for many more to come.

This book is also in memory of Caroline Wickham-Jones, another equally inspiring archaeologist, a great friend and sorely missed colleague.

Contents

List of Illustrations

Acknowledgements

1   ‘From Every Cranny of the North’: The Picts

2   ‘The Smoke of Habitations’: Everyday Life in Pictland

3   ‘And in thy Majesty Ride Prosperously’:

Citadels, Kings and Warriors

4   ‘The Book of Life’: From Pagan Magi to

Early Medieval Saints

5   ‘Performing the Sorrowful Funeral Rites’:

Ways of Death and Burial

6   ‘Marking the Sign’: Symbols of Identity

7   Destroyed by ‘the Strength of Spears and of Swords’?

The End of the Picts

8   Coda: The Pictish Legacy

Bibliography

Sites to Visit

Index

List of Illustrations

In-text illustrations

1.1   A Pictish symbol stone from Broomend of Crichie

1.2   Ptolemy’s Geography (AD 140×150) and Roman fortifications of the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD

1.3   Picts and their neighbours in early 7th century

1.4   Picts and their neighbours c. AD 700

1.5   The geography of Pictland and the probable location of Pictish regions

1.6   Sites in Pictland referenced in early sources

1.7   Aerial image of Dundurn hillfort

1.8   Craig Phadrig hillfort

1.9   Dwelling within Dunnicaer promontory fort

1.10   Craw Stane complex aerial photo

1.11   The Craw Stane complex under excavation

1.12   Aerial photograph showing the traces of the Pictish barrow cemetery at Tarradale

1.13   Long cist under excavation at Portmahomack

1.14   A reflectance transformation image (RTI) of a Pictish symbol stone from Dandalieth

1.15   The Maiden Stone cross-slab with symbols

1.16   Pictish symbol stone and symbol-bearing cross-slab

1.17   Examples of Pictish symbols

1.18   Discovery of new Pictish stone at Aberlemno

1.19   Fragment of decorated cross-slab from Portmahomack with inscription

1.20   Newton Stone, Aberdeenshire, with inscriptions

1.21   Metalworking crucible sherds from the Craw Stane complex, Rhynie

1.22   Ingot mould, Rhynie

1.23   Metalworking tongs, Rhynie

1.24   Axe pin, Rhynie

1.25   A sherd of Roman Samian Ware from Dunnicaer

1.26   A small sherd of a fine Anglo-Saxon glass claw beaker from Rhynie

1.27   The zones of Pictland used in the book

2.1   Main sites referenced in Chapter 2

2.2   Pitcarmick-type and Pictish-era sub-rectangular structures

2.3   Reconstruction of the longhouse settlement at Lair

2.4   Schematic reconstruction plan of the Pitcarmick longhouse

2.5   Lowland Pictish structures

2.6   Cropmarks of buildings at Lathrisk, Fife

2.7   Traces of a large building at the Craw Stane complex

2.8   Hill of Keir, Aberdeenshire

2.9   Tap o’ Noth hillfort aerial view of excavations

2.10   The complex defences of East Lomond hillfort

2.11   Longhouses at Wag of Forse

2.12   Comparative plan of rectangular structures in Atlantic Pictland

2.13   Gurness settlement

2.14   Comparative plan of cellular structures from Atlantic Pictland

2.15   Comparative plan of figure-of-eight structures from Atlantic Pictland

2.16   Plan of the wheelhouses at Scatness

2.17   Wheelhouses Jarlshof

2.18   Settlement change through time in Pictland

2.19   Dunnicaer – ashes from raking of the fire

2.20   A barrel padlock from one of the longhouses at Lair

2.21   A Pictish stone from Bullion, Angus

2.22   Drawing of the cart shown on a lost stone from Meigle

2.23   Boats depicted on carvings from Pictland

3.1   Principal power centres and hoard sites referenced inChapter 3

3.2   Dunnicaer as it survives today

3.3   Pictish stone from Dunnicaer

3.4   Rhynie Man

3.5   Plan of the enclosures and buildings identified at the Craw Stane complex

3.6   Animal figurine mould from the Craw Stane complex

3.7   Tap o’ Noth LiDAR survey

3.8   Dundurn hillfort 3D model

3.9   Plans of a number of complex early medieval forts from Scotland

3.10   Aerial view of Mither Tap o’ Bennachie hillfort

3.11   Animal bone middens at Mither Tap o’ Bennachie

3.12   Drawing of the surviving Burghead bulls

3.13   Burghead bull held in Elgin Museum, Moray

3.14   The Burghead well

3.15   Part of a massive building and activity area Burghead fort

3.16   Dunnottar Castle

3.17   Upper Gothens, a possible lordly residence

3.18   Dupplin or Constantine’s Cross, Forteviot

3.19   Plan of the main features of the royal centre at Forteviot

3.20   A silver sword pommel from Rhynie

3.21   The warrior carvings from Tulloch, Collessie and Rhynie

3.22   Aberlemno churchyard cross-slab

3.23   Sueno’s Stone

3.24   Sculptural fragment from Dull, Perthshire

3.25   The Moss of Auquharney deer trap

3.26   Wild animals shown on Pictish symbol stones

3.27   Hunt scenes from Pictish cross-slabs

3.28   Drawing of images scratched into the Portsoy whetstone

3.29   The back of Dunfallandy cross-slab

3.30   The Gaulcross hoard

3.31   Late Roman amphorae sherds from Rhynie

4.1   Rosemarkie Cave

4.2   Metalworking tongs from Rhynie

4.3   The carving of a bullock from Inverness

4.4   Major ecclesiastical sites referred to inChapter 4

4.5   The front panel of the St Andrew’s shrine

4.6   St Andrews

4.7   Dunkeld Cathedral and the King’s Seat hillfort

4.8   Carved stone from Dunkeld

4.9   Plans of vallum enclosures at churches in Pictland compared

4.10   The modern church of St Vigeans

4.11   The Forteviot arch

4.12   Plan of the monastic vallum and settlement at Portmahomack

4.13   The calf stone, Portmahomack

4.14   Roof finial Portmahomack

4.15   Parc-an-caipel

4.16   Altar frontal from Papil

4.17   Raasay cross

4.18   Carved stone with four human heads from Abernethy

4.19   Harp-playing figure on the Dupplin Cross

4.20   Incised crosses at Caiplie Caves

4.21   The cross-slab from Nigg

4.22   Meigle 26

5.1   Square and round barrows and cairns and long cists with major sites inChapter 5

5.2   Examples of barrow cemeteries identified from the air or upstanding

5.3   Plan of three barrows excavated at Greshop

5.4   Plan of the cemetery at Lundin Links

5.5   Lundin Links under excavation

5.6   The cemetery at Redcastle

5.7   The Pictish cemetery at Bankhead

5.8   Rhynie square barrows under excavation

5.9   Plan of Rhynie square barrows

5.10   Circular barrow at Croftgowan under excavation

5.11   The Tarradale, Highland, Pictish cemetery under excavation 5.12   Tarradale log burial

5.13   Hallow Hill long cist cemetery

5.14   Plan of the barrow cemetery adjacent to the Collessie warrior stone

5.15   Rosemarkie Man facial reconstruction

5.16   Isle of May cemetery and later church

5.17   St Ninian’s Isle cemetery and church

6.1   Distribution of symbol-bearing stones and objects

6.2   A range of animals shown on Pictish symbol stones

6.3   Pictish beasts

6.4   A selection of abstract symbols along with mirrors and combs

6.5   The Rossie cross-slab from John Stuart’s Sculptured Stones of Scotland

6.6   The Pictish symbol stone from Dairy Park

6.7   Pool settlement and symbol stone

6.8   Decorated ox phalange and bone pin from Pool

6.9   Gurness settlement

6.10   Symbols at Covesea Cave

6.11   19th-century woodcut image of the Laws of Monifieth plaque

6.12   Cross-slab from Rosemarkie

6.13   Examples of symbols labelling people on Pictish stones

7.1   Scotland around AD 1000

7.2   Distribution of ogham inscriptions

7.3   Distribution of Pictish symbols in relation to Atholl

7.4   Distribution of pett names

7.5   Distribution of Scandinavian place-names across Scotland

7.6   Non-Norse place-name survivals in the zone of Scandinavian settlement in Pictland

7.7   King Alfred coin discovered at Burghead

7.8   Scandinavian-style furnished burials from Scotland

Colour plates

1   Dice tower from Vettweiß-Froitzheim

2   Bankhead, Perthshire, barrow cemetery

3   Norrie’s Law plaque

4   Mould for a brooch from the Brough of Birsay

5   Penannular brooch from Clunie

6   The St Ninian’s Isle hoard

7   Roman glass from Dunnicaer

8   9th-century building under excavation at Burghead

9   Woollen hooded shawl from St Andrews Parish, Orkney

10   Reconstruction of the promontory fort and settlement of Dunnicaer

11   The Craw Stane, Rhynie, with Tap o’ Noth hillfort in the background

12   Recreation of the Dundurn leather shoe

13   Aerial image of Burghead

14   3D reconstruction of the fort at Burghead

15   Hilton of Cadboll cross-slab

16   Silver chains

17   The well at Mither Tap o’ Bennachie

18   Painted pebbles

19   The cross-slab from Papil

20   The Monymusk reliquary

21   Stages of excavation of the long cist at Rhynie

22   The skeleton of Rosemarkie Man

23   Carving of a bear from Scatness

24   Silver chain from Parkhill

Acknowledgements

This book contains a study of multiple facets of Pictish society from archaeological, historical and other perspectives, seeking to present a rounded analysis from the emergence of the Picts c.ad 300 to their disappearance in the 10th century. It is based on years of research and work by the authors and many individuals, both scholars and other members of the public, who have contributed in various ways.

Sincere gratitude to Anna Ritchie for reading through the entire book, providing timely comments and help. Isabel and George Henderson and Adrian Maldonado also read through chapters and provided very helpful comments. Obviously all errors and opinions remain our own.

This book would not have been possible without generous funding and support through the University of Aberdeen Development Trust from Don and Elizabeth Cruickshank, both born and educated in the north-east of Scotland and graduates of the University of Aberdeen, who helped establish the Northern Picts project. The generous funding of Iain and Nancy McEwan also through the University of Aberdeen Development Trust, along with funding from the McKay–Ardmay Fund, will open a new chapter in Pictish studies in the coming years.

The new discoveries outlined in this volume have also been generously funded by the Historic Environment Scotland Archaeology Programme, the Leverhulme funded Comparative Kingship project, the Strathmartine Trust, the British Academy, the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland and Aberdeenshire Council Archaeology Service. In particular, the writing of this book was supported by a Leverhulme Trust Research Leadership Award (RL-2016–069).

Many thanks to all those who provided images or facilitated access: Andy Hickie, Matt Ritchie, Kelly Kilpatrick, Hugh Levey, Holger Becker, Margaret Wilson, James O’Driscoll, Davy Strachan, Martin Cook, AOC Archaeology, Steve Birch, Eric Grant, Jane Geddes, Cecily Spall, Ian Tait, Mark Hall and Gail Drinkall. Sesilia Niehaus helped with some of the image production. Alastair Reid also provided a very fine gift that helped with the research for the book.

GN: To all at the University of Aberdeen who make our research possible – our wonderful students and volunteers who work on our projects, to my colleagues who provide inspiration, knowledge and fun! Thanks to all at Birlinn, especially Hugh and Andrew, and Patricia Marshall, who produce these wonderful books at affordable prices. To Jane Geddes who started this journey in Pictish studies. Thanks to colleagues who have either worked on the projects highlighted here or for amazing Pictish chats or both: Meggen Gondek, Ewan Campbell, Gemma Cruickshanks, Martin Goldberg, Daniel Maclean, Cathy MacIver, James O’Driscoll, Edouard Masson-MacLean, Samantha Jones, Kate Britton, Andy Seaman, Paddy Gleeson, John Borland, David McGovern, Zack Hinckley, Derek Hamilton, Simon Taylor and many others. No thanks whatsoever to anxiety which has attacked body and soul throughout this Pictish journey. Finally and most of all, love and gratitude to Marianne, Elliot, Magnus and Stella. I couldn’t do this without you.

NE: Thank you to everyone in Archaeology at the University of Aberdeen and those involved in the Comparative Kingship project – especially Gordon, Samantha Jones, James O’Driscoll, Edouard Masson-MacLean and Patrick Gleeson – for providing a very welcoming and stimulating environment for a textual historian, albeit at a distance in the last few years! I am also very grateful to everyone at Birlinn for their enthusiasm and industry. I really appreciate more than ever the chances I have had to discuss the subject with so many over the years, most notably Dauvit Broun, Thomas Clancy and Simon Taylor among many others. I am also grateful for the kindness and help of our local community in Stirling but, above all, for the support of my family, especially Sarah, Lachlan and my parents, and the contribution of Pangur, whose paws have made their mark all over this work.

CHAPTER ONE

‘From Every Cranny of the North’

The Picts

Originally those islands were inhabited by Peti and Pape. One of these races, the Peti, only a little taller than pygmies, accomplished miraculous achievements by building towns, morning and evening, but at midday every ounce of strength deserted them and they hid in fear in underground chambers.

This is how the writer of the late 12th-century Historia Norwegie described the Peti, the Picts, who, along with the Pape, presumably clerics, had inhabited the Orkney, Shetland and the Western Isles of Scotland before supposedly being wiped out by the Scandinavians in the reign of the semi-legendary Norwegian king, Harald Fairhair (c.870–932) (Ekrem and Mortensen 2003, 64–67). By the 12th century, the Picts were, at best, a very dim memory so Orcadians assumed that they had inhabited the prehistoric monuments, like Maes Howe, on their islands, while perhaps building the pre-Viking settlements whose foundations still survive in the landscape today. Combined with ideas about strange peoples and monsters on the edge of the world, the Picts became the ‘wee dark folk’ of folklore, a creative, enigmatic, strange, lost people, located out of time, but still present through their creations.

We can chuckle at this Norwegian depiction, but the Picts have long been a puzzle, the creators of a fascinating society that have both intrigued and confounded. Even now, while scholars explode myths built over centuries with evidence-based analysis, the attraction of the Picts is not just academic. When people encounter Pictish sculpture (Figure 1.1), with the patterns, symbols, monsters and people inscribed in stone, it often sparks once again a need to understand this ancient society and to connect with those who created these wonderful carved stones over a thousand years earlier. And it is easy to comprehend why people desire to find out more about the creators of such monuments, for one fundamental issue is why the Picts, the last major ethnic group to disappear from Britain and Ireland, are no longer with us.

This book sets out some of the major advances that have been made which enable us to say much more than was possible even ten years ago on many aspects of Pictish life, but first, in this chapter, we set the scene, introducing the evidence for the Picts, both textual and archaeological, and providing a historical framework up to the Viking Age, since we discuss the end of the Picts in Chapter 7.

1.1 A Pictish symbol stone from Broomend of Crichie, Aberdeenshire.

The nature of the written evidence

The literacy of the Picts has been questioned in the past, with little surviving in the way of a written legacy apart from a small collection of difficult to interpret inscriptions alongside the enigmatic symbol tradition. There is, however, one surviving group of texts, the Pictish king-lists, which originated in Pictland, and there is good evidence that the Picts wrote in Latin and perhaps Gaelic too (Forsyth 1998; Evans 2011). It is true that most of our documentary evidence for the Picts was produced by writers based elsewhere, but sometimes we can assume that, like the Iona chroniclers recording Pictish events, information from Pictland was utilised for contemporary records (Evans 2017; Evans 2018), or that an actual Pictish source was adapted, as was the case with Bede’s account of Pictish origins (Fraser 2011). We are lucky to have such evidence, since it means that we can build up a partial picture about the Picts, to an extent not possible for all parts of Britain in this era.

However, there are still large gaps for some geographical areas – for example, there are virtually no records for the Western Isles or mainland Scotland north of Ross – and for certain periods, especially c.ad400–550. The texts often mainly just enable us to reconstruct a sequence of kings. There were many barriers to the survival of Pictish sources, including the disappearance of the Pictish language, culture and the political ideology related to it, political upheavals, such as the rise of new dynasties like the descendants of Alpin c.842/3, and Scandinavian attacks and settlement, while later substantial transformations of the 12th and 13th centuries meant that Gaelic culture in turn was less prestigious, and there were substantial changes in the state. Where there are such discontinuities, it is not surprising that few Pictish documents survive, the exceptions being texts or fragments linked to the royal dynasty and Church institutions, as well as historical texts of interest outwith Scotland.

The texts we have were often written considerably after the events they described, for various purposes, and the past was often re-imagined to explain later situations. An exception might be the Irish chronicles, containing brief descriptions of secular and ecclesiastical events from a source written at the monastery of Iona from the late 6th century to about AD 740 (Evans 2018). This source includes a string of often quite tantalising references to Pictish events such as the following:

Annals of Ulster (hereafter AU) in the year 558

(repeated in 560): ‘and the flight before the son of Maelchon’

AU 580: ‘Cennalath, king of the Picts, dies.’

AU 664: ‘The battle of Luith Feirnn, that is, in Fortriu.’

AU 681: ‘The siege of Dunnottar.’

AU 682: ‘The Orkneys were destroyed by Bruide.’

While the lack of detail in these accounts is frustrating, sources such as these are extremely important in providing us with a chronological framework for understanding Pictland. The Pictish king-lists, including kings with reign lengths, offer us an alternative viewpoint, mixing a royal ideology with the perspective of the monastery of Abernethy by the Tay, where it was kept in the 9th century and later. It survives in later medieval and early modern manuscripts from Scotland, Ireland and England, being altered over time for various purposes, but comparison of the surviving copies enables us to often reconstruct the form of the text before AD 900, when it was a Pictish document. Its evidence, therefore, can be combined with the Irish chronicles to enrich our understanding of Pictish politics, while also giving us useful insights into how the Pictish past was perceived. In addition to these, other sources then occasionally supplement these partial records, allowing us to understand some broader developments, the richest of which is Adomnán’s Life of Columba, written c.700.

Some potentially valuable evidence for the Picts can also be derived from sources for later Scotland, usually created in the period after 1100, when the number of surviving documents increases exponentially. This includes charters which describe transactions in many areas of Scotland, providing invaluable local detail. We can often use such texts to reconstruct the society of the 12th and 13th centuries and place-names can be helpful in indicating not only the earlier linguistic situation, but also in providing us with useful evidence for settlement, uses and perceptions of the landscape. Such documents can be difficult to interpret and date, as several centuries separate them from the time of the Picts, so considerable caution is needed, but they offer important alternative methods of shining light on the earlier period. Saints’ dedications can also be helpful (Clancy et al. 2022), though scholars are now more likely to regard them as evidence for the veneration of particular saints over many centuries, than for the contemporary world of the actual holy people. This means that, in practice, extreme caution is needed when suggesting that such dedications, nearly always first attested in the later medieval or modern eras, can be dated to the Pictish period. However, in a few cases, especially if combined with other evidence such as place-names, it is possible to produce a plausible explanation of dedications as early and Pictish (see Chapter 4).

When investigating our surviving sources, scholars are now much more sceptical about accepting texts at face value. Texts were written, copied and adapted for various reasons, reflecting different interests, mindsets and genre expectations, as well as the available sources. Therefore, we should regard our texts as primarily evidence for the time of composition and for later societies as they were subsequently maintained and altered. Nevertheless, through considering different fragments of evidence, we can sometimes build up a picture that is likely to be closer to the reality behind their subject matter. Thus, while our surviving textual sources are often difficult to interpret and are very limited, considerable advances are still possible, especially when they are studied in combination with archaeological and other evidence.

The painted people

But at that time Britain was not prepared with ships for any kind of naval contest . . . In addition to this, the nation of the Britons was still at that time uncivilised and used to fighting only with the Picts and the Hibernians, both still half-naked enemies; and so they submitted to Roman arms so easily that the only thing that Caesar ought to have boasted of was that he had navigated the Ocean.

In this anonymous panegyric for Constantius Caesar, written in AD 297 or 298, possibly at Trier, the Picts, Picti in Latin, first enter the historic record (VIII (V), 11, 4: Mann and Penman 1996, 46). The author, in their praise prose, back projected the Picts to the time of Julius Caesar’s invasions of Britain in the 1st century bc. However, prior to the late 3rd century ad, the people of northern Britain had been known as Britons and Caledonians and in Ptolemy’s Geography, of mid 2nd century AD date, the area of Scotland that became the mainland territory of the Picts was listed as being inhabited by various groups – the Creones, Carnonacae, Caereni, Cornavii, Caledonii, Decantae, Lugi, Smertae, Vacomagi, Venicones, Taexali and the Damnonii (Rivet and Smith 1979, 140–41) (Figure 1.2). The Romans, during the invasion of Scotland in the late 70s to about AD 86 or 87, would have encountered some of these peoples. However, shortly after they made gains in north-east Scotland, the Romans withdrew south of the Firth of Forth. Later, the empire expanded north again, most notably with the creation of the Antonine Wall after a new advance in 138 and the destructive campaigns led by the Emperor Septimius Severus and his son Caracalla in AD 208–211, but Roman gains were often followed by tactical retreats, usually back to Hadrian’s Wall (Maxwell 1989). Despite this, Roman influence on the areas north of the frontier was ever present. Military campaigns, outpost forts and imperial agents provided direct contact, bribes and gifts to favoured or troublesome local groups, having both a stabilising and destabilising effect on the composition of local society (Hunter 2007a).

As elsewhere on Roman frontiers (Heather 2009, 36–93), one result of the Roman presence may have been the amalgamation of polities bordering Roman Britain, into fewer but larger units. While describing the major Roman campaigns under Septimius Severus and Caracalla north of Hadrian’s Wall from AD 208–211, against the Maiatai and beyond them the Calidones, that is the Caledonii, Cassius Dio, in the mid 3rd century, noted that ‘the names of other British groups had been merged’ into these two main polities (Cary 1927, 262; Fraser 2009a, 15–17, 23–29). As a result of the Roman intervention, the Maiatai seem to have lost land, perhaps territory south of the Forth given to other, more compliant groups, resulting in them being focussed more around the Forth in what became Manaw. Here, their name was remembered, surviving in the place-names Dumyat, on the south side of the Ochils, and Myot Hill, west of Denny (Taylor et al. 2020, 52), both prominent hilltop sites. They continued to exist until at least around AD 600 when Adomnán states that they lost a bloody battle against the Gaelic Argyll dynast Áedán mac Gabráin (Taylor et al. 2020, 52–54). Ultimately, into the medieval period, the inhabitants of the Maiatai territory predominantly continued to speak British – also known as Brittonic – a P-Celtic language from which modern Welsh, Cornish and Breton are descended. In this book, adhering to medieval practice, the terms ‘Britons’ and ‘British’ will be used specifically to relate to these Celtic-language speakers rather than to the general inhabitants of Britain. The use of British as far north of the Ochils was perhaps due to cultural connections with southern neighbours, until most of the former Maiatai territory was conquered by the Pictish kingdom of Fortriu after 685.

1.2 Population groups, oceans and selected islands in Ptolemy’s Geography (AD 140×150) and Roman fortifications of the 2nd and 3rd centuries ad.

By the end of the 3rd century, the name Picti had come into use, representing a still more encompassing term for people in northern Britain, but other groups remained. Ammianus Marcellinus, writing c.ad 392 about the Picts involved in what he described as the ‘Barbarian Conspiracy’ of 367–368, stated that they were divided into two gentes, ‘peoples’ – the Verturiones and Dicalydones. The Verturiones were probably based around the Moray Firth, where their successors, the early medieval kings of Fortriu, were based. Ptolemy called the sea to the west or north of Scotland Duecaledonius, a name related to the later Dicalydones, which in turn seems to have meant something like ‘twin’ or ‘double’ Calidones (Rivet and Smith 1979, 132, 338). The term Calidones – or the earlier Calidonii – does not occur frequently in the ancient era but the related adjective Caledonia, ‘Caledonian’, is common in classical sources for the ‘Caledonian forest’ and, in Tacitus’s Agricola, written in the 90s ad, in relation to the inhabitants living north of the Firth of Forth.

It has been argued (Hind 1983; Fraser 2005a, 33–35, 48) that the Calidones lived in the eastern Lowlands north of the Forth, partly on the basis that not enough people inhabited the Highlands to make that a viable powerbase. However, that downplays the population and potential of the Highlands (Southern 1996, 384), which contains a number of straths with potential for both arable and pastoral farming, and the extent to which these interconnect with their Lowland hinterlands. The textual evidence also places the Calidones firmly in the Highlands, since Ptolemy stated that they occupied the land from the Varar estuary (Beauly Firth, near Inverness) to Loch Long off the Clyde estuary. References to the Calidones survive inland in place-names in Perthshire, at the edge of the Highlands at Dunkeld and Rohallion, and at its heart, at the mountain of Schiehallion (Watson 1926, 21–22). The most natural explanation of all the evidence is that the Calidones were located primarily in the Highlands and neighbouring Lowland areas, such as around the Tay, but that the term could also be used for wider confederations north of the Forth, including some of the other Lowland polities mentioned by Ptolemy. At the time of the ‘Barbarian Conspiracy’ of 367–368, it may have been the Dicalydones who were able to impose their leadership over many of the others in this Caledonian zone, though perhaps the Verturiones also included lands and peoples which had previously contributed to earlier confederations.

Unlike the Maiatai and the Verturiones, the Calidones and related terminology do not appear in medieval sources, apart from one 9th-century reference in the Welsh Historia Brittonum to a battle by King Arthur in the Caledonian Wood, Coit Celidon (Morris 1980, 35, 76). Why the Calidones disappeared is uncertain; perhaps the term lost its appeal, as different confederations, like the Verturiones and Dicalydones, emerged and, as its former territory north of the Forth was divided among the Gaels, Britons and Picts. Both would explain why it was a new term, Picti, not Calidones, that emerged as the name for the main enemies of the Romans.

From the late 3rd century to the 6th century, Picti was an ethnic term in wide circulation in the Late Antique world (Evans 2022). Fifteen texts by eleven different authors refer to the Picts in this period, from poems produced for elite audiences, such as the florid and bombastic poems of Claudian composed around AD 400, to cataloguing works, like a version of Nomina Provinciarum Omnium, ‘The Names of All the Provinces’, (written AD 312–314), which lists the Picti among the barbarian gentes which had emerged under the emperors. In these sources Picti is found either on its own or in combination with other large ethnic groups, like the Hiberni (Irish) or Scotti (Gaelic-speakers, perhaps particularly raiders) primarily in negative contexts, fighting the Roman Empire or slave trading for example. The term Picti was used as an ethnic term, the Picts being described as a gens by Ammianus, albeit one that was divided into two groups, the Verturiones and Dicalydones.

One notable event in the 4th century suggests the Picts were powerful enemies of the military and cultural might of the Romans in Britain. Ammianus Marcellinus records the Picts taking part in the ‘Barbarian Conspiracy’ of AD 367–368 when the Picts colluded with the Scotti, the Attacotti, Saxons and Franks, as well as Roman scouts beyond Hadrian’s Wall, to attack Roman Britain and neighbouring territories (Res Gestae xxvii.8.1– 10; Seyfarth et al. 1979, II. 46–48). During this episode, Hadrian’s Wall was overrun, a Roman general was killed and many of the Roman outposts and settlements of Britannia were overwhelmed. The strife lasted for around a year before order was restored. Ammianus is likely to be a relatively reliable source as he was a high-ranking soldier in the Roman military and member of the ruling curial class in Rome who wrote his Res Gestae after his retirement from the army. He wrote the work using military sources, including his own contemporary notes, dating back to at least the mid 4th century AD (Evans 2022). Ammianus’s text suggests the Picts were a highly effective foil to the Roman Empire – a significant group capable of participating in coordinated attacks on provincial areas, causing extensive disruption to the Roman province.

Material culture of the 4th century also points to the wide currency of the term Picti and their infamy in Roman circles. A dice tower from a Roman rural settlement at Vettweiß-Froitzheim, near Cologne, of 4th century date, has the inscription ‘PICTOS VICTOS HOSTIS DELETA LVDITE SECVRI’ inscribed on it – ‘The Picts are beaten, the enemy annihilated, let us play without a care’ (Hunter 2007a, 4–6) (Colour Plate 1). The Vettweiß-Froitzheim dice tower indicates that the Picts were not just a literary phenomenon but an identity that had made an impact on popular culture and the empire’s mindset near the Roman frontiers (Hunter 2007a, 4–5).

Indeed, the term Picti itself was probably Roman, meaning ‘painted people’ in Latin and perhaps referring to the practice of tattooing or body painting. It has been suggested that the Romans encountered a Pictish word which was similar sounding and reinterpreted it as Picti (Watson 1926, 67– 68; Evans 2022), but it was more likely a Roman pejorative name in origin, coined for the more ‘barbaric’ people outside of the Roman cultural zone (Fraser 2009a, 44–54; Fraser 2011). In the period before the late 3rd century, the Romans had used the general ethnic name Britanni, later Brittones, for all the inhabitants of the island they called Britannia, including those, like the Calidones, living in the northern part of the island (Rivet and Smith 1979, 39–40, 280–82). However, a new term was needed once the Britons inside the Roman province (and in the area south of the Forth which had a substantial Roman presence) ceased to seem as ‘barbaric’ or were identified as less of a threat to Rome; the inhabitants of the island were now divided into those inside the Roman cultural sphere and those still regarded as living outside the empire to the north. Though the earlier, broader use of ‘Britons’ (Britanni or Brittones) did persist in some texts, often the name no longer seemed adequate for all inhabitants of the island, so a new word was needed for those beyond the Britons who were still ‘barbaric’ and more hostile in the eyes of Rome; Picti filled that gap.

It has been argued that that there is no evidence that people in northern Britain called themselves Picti until the late 7th century (Fraser 2009a, 44– 54; Fraser 2011; Woolf 2017b). However, the Roman origin of the word Picti does not mean that it was unknown amongst those beyond Hadrian’s Wall. In other regions beyond the frontier, for instance in Germany, Ireland, and even further away in Scandinavia, the Romans had a substantial political, economic and cultural impact, including the spread and use of Latin. Scotland north of the Forth has been considered to have been less connected to the Roman Empire but there is increasing archaeological evidence for contacts (see Chapter 3). We can, therefore, suggest it is plausible, if not provable, that Picti came to be adopted as an ‘endonym’, a name applied by people in northern Britain to themselves, in the 4th century by those most in contact with the Romans, and that its use, alongside vernacular ethnic names, survived due to the adoption of Christianity, which more firmly established Latinity in the region (Evans 2022).

After the end of Roman rule in Britain in the early 5th century, there is a dearth of reliable sources for over 150 years, until we start to get a substantial corpus of medieval texts written in Britain and Ireland. This lack, combined with narratives of the fall of the Roman Empire which stressed its cataclysmic nature, has led to the assumption that the immediate post-Roman period saw a similar decline among the Picts. However, recent archaeological discoveries indicate that such a perception needs to be at least qualified, if not rejected (for example, Noble et al. 2019b; Hall et al. 2020; see also Chapter 3). Indeed, in spite of the paucity of the surviving textual evidence, the Picts continue to appear in Late Antique sources such as the Gallic Chronicle of 452 (Burgess 2001, 67) and Constantius’s Life of Germanus, a hagiographical biography of Bishop Germanus of Auxerre (Levison 1920). What both these texts demonstrate is that the Picts were still clearly part of the Roman view of Britain in Christian elite circles at the time when the Church was attempting to incorporate Britain and Ireland into orthodox Christendom.

Moreover, there are contemporary references to the Picts from Britain. St Patrick, in his Letter to the Soldiers of Coroticus, railed against those who had seized his followers in Ireland and were about to sell them to apostatae identified as Picti (Hood 1978, 35–40, 55–59). This text implies that some Picts at least had knowledge of Christianity at this stage (see Chapter 4; Fraser 2009a, 112). In Gildas’s De Excidio Britanniae – On the Ruin of Britain written in the mid 6th century – the Picts make several appearances (Winterbottom 1978). Gildas was a monk from western Britain and his book was a lengthy sermon that included a history of Roman Britain and the century following Roman withdrawal, as part of an extended diatribe against five western British kings and members of the clergy for poor conduct. In the De Excidio, the Picts are described as a ‘savage nation’ living in the northern part of the island of Britain who, along with the Scotti and Saxons, are depicted as barbarians taking advantage of the Britons’ weaknesses, both during the Roman occupation of southern Britain and afterwards. In contrast to Roman sources that refer to the Picts in the late 3rd century, Gildas claimed that the Picts had settled in the north of mainland Britain at the end of the Roman period. His account thus reflects knowledge of the contemporary people called Picti alongside ignorance of their origins: clearly by the 6th century the term had a role in contemporary society that had a life of its own beyond Roman era literate sources.

Language

What language or languages the Picts spoke has long been a matter of great debate, and importance, since it has been regarded as a significant aspect of Pictish identity, distinguishing them from their British, Gaelic, English and later Scandinavian neighbours. Partly this derives from Bede’s famous statement (HE I.1, Colgrave and Mynors 1969, 16–17) that there were five languages in Britain, which were English, British, Gaelic and Pictish, alongside the universal language, Latin. The view articulated by the great linguist, Kenneth Jackson, that the Picts spoke a non-Indo-European language alongside a P-Celtic tongue closest to ancient Gaulish (Jackson 1955) also indicated that the Picts were very different from their neighbours, including the Britons (who spoke British, the ancestor of Welsh, Cornish and Breton). However, this interpretation is deeply problematic for various reasons (Rhys 2015).

Jackson’s analysis of the Pictish language was partly a reaction against a wild variety of opinions expressed previously but it was not a complete study of the evidence. In particular, his argument for a language unrelated to any previously known had a wholly negative basis, used to explain words and texts that he could not identify as Celtic or from the broader Indo-European language family. For example, Jackson made much of the fact that ogham inscriptions from Scotland were very difficult to interpret but it may be that we simply have not found the correct key to unlocking the evidence of undeciphered parts of Pictish ogham inscriptions, where there may have been unusual spelling and abbreviation systems in use (Forsyth 1997a, 32–36). On occasion, Jackson also sometimes stated that a word used in sources was unintelligible when it was probably Celtic (Forsyth 1997a, 20–26, 29), and he did not really consider sufficiently the place-name evidence, which makes it clear that a P-Celtic language was in use from the Forth to at least Sutherland (Taylor 2011). The non-Indo-European hypothesis still has its adherents and it cannot be completely dismissed since such languages, for instance Basque, did survive into the medieval period, and some of the earliest names of peoples, islands, rivers and coastal features in northern Britain in Ptolemy’s Geography (ad 140×150) do not seem to be Celtic in origin (Isaac 2005). However, it is possible that such pieces of evidence are relics of earlier linguistic strata, which is likely to be especially the case for names of rivers and islands which can be very conservative throughout Europe. In the absence of positive evidence for another, otherwise unknown language being spoken in Pictland, it is best to focus on what we do know.

The most recent studies have shown that there was, indeed, a Celtic language spoken in ancient Pictish territory and that, in the medieval period, this was clearly closest to British rather than Gaulish (Rhys 2015). The similarities with British render it possible that it was simply the most northern form of British (James 2013; Rhys 2015). In terms of place-names, there are many features which are found on both sides of the Forth – for instance, aber, ‘river- or burn-mouth’, ecles, ‘church’, and pen, ‘head, end, promontory’ (Taylor 2011; Taylor with Márkus 2012, see Elements Glossary). The only element not found outside Pictland is *cuper, ‘confluence’, which appears in Cupar in Fife and Coupar Angus, Perthshire (Taylor with Márkus 2012, 347). Therefore, place-names indicate that Pictland formed part of a linguistic continuum with British lands to the south. However, when British changed in the period from the 4th century AD to c.600 ad, partly under the influence of Latin, medieval Pictish speech did not always follow that of the Picts’ southern neighbours, instead becoming more divergent (Rhys 2020a; Rhys 2020b). It is likely, therefore, that Pictish was in essence a dialect of British that was less Romanised than its southern neighbour, perhaps on the route to becoming a separate language.

Understanding that the Picts predominately spoke a Celtic language enables us to gain further insights into how they perceived themselves and their relationships with their neighbours. We can presume that Latin Picti had a vernacular equivalent. A Pictish version of the Celtic word for Britons, originally *Priteni, is the most likely candidate, since the Britons (Pryden meant ‘Pictland’ and ‘Britain’) and Gaels (Cruithni meant ‘Picts’) both used such words for them while the Romans adapted the same name, creating Britannia for the island, Britanni for the inhabitants (Jackson 1954; Broun 2007, 81–84). Cruithne also appears as the name of the first Pictish king in the Pictish king-lists (Anderson 2011, 79–84), placed deep in the ancient past, so it may be that, in being *Priteni, the Picts could stress their own antiquity. They were the ‘real’ Britons who remained unconquered by the Romans, both giving their kings a right to rule and a prior claim on the land of northern Britain, using a word known to their neighbours.

The Late- and immediate post-Roman period, whether regarded as a period of dramatic social, cultural and economic decline or not (Esmonde Cleary 1989; Dark 1994; Fleming 2010, 22–29; Halsall 2013, 87–101, 174–81), involved a number of crucial transformations in Britain and Ireland, with which northern Britain was intrinsically engaged (Charles-Edwards 2003). Roman culture survived in many respects but was modified. Many Britons who had inhabited the Roman province continued to speak Latin until the 7th century but increasingly the British (Celtic) language became dominant again (Charles-Edwards 2013). Anglo-Saxons also settled in the south and east of former Roman Britain and, by AD 700, their kingdoms came to dominate nearly all of what became England – apart from Cornwall and some land by the Welsh border – as well as most of Scotland south of the Forth, except for the lands of the remaining kingdom of the Britons centred on the fort of Dumbarton Rock by the River Clyde. This supremacy resulted in the spread of the English language over the bulk of the island’s territory formerly in the Roman Empire.

In the west, there was also settlement in Cornwall, Wales and the Isle of Man, this time by Gaelic speakers (Charles-Edwards 2013, 174–81) who spoke a Celtic language which, by around AD 600 and probably centuries earlier, was very different from British. In Scotland, by this time, Gaelic speakers inhabited Argyll and the southern Hebridean islands but there has been considerable debate regarding when and how this took place (Campbell 2001; Woolf 2007a, 332–40). By the end of the 6th century, the dynasty of Dál Riata was clearly also established in western Scotland as well as in County Antrim in Ulster. By 700, it was claimed that this Gaelic royal dynasty had seized land in Britain from the Picts around AD 500, but we should be very sceptical – migration and conquest were frequent, often erroneous, explanations for ethnic change in early sources. Ptolemy described the population group in Argyll as the Epidii, using a PCeltic form closer to Pictish and British than Gaelic, but that is slender evidence for their language in the 2nd century ad. The classical sources suggest that some Scotti, the Latin term used for Gaelic-speaking raiders in the 4th and 5th centuries, are likely to have been settled in northern Britain by the end of Roman Britain, as they also were on the Isle of Man. If, as seems most likely, the Gaelic language did expand in Scotland in the Late Antique period, it was probably the result of close cultural contacts with Ireland and the Irish Sea area, as much, or more so, than political conquest and settlement.

The existence of these neighbours of the Picts in the Late-Roman and post-Roman periods in turn casts important light on the Picts. In the classical and later sources, the description of Picti as a gens and the term’s use alongside other identities such as the Saxons, Scotti and the obscure Attacotti imply that the Picts were a recognised ethnic group. This is not to say Pictish identity was unchanging, nor that the Pictish identity fully supplanted a range of regional and local identities, or that the Picts always lived within the same geographic boundaries. Classical writers could often generalise when writing about their neighbours, but the Picts were not simply a catch-all term for ‘barbarians’ of northern Britain, as the texts distinguish them from the Britons and Scotti also living north of Hadrian’s Wall. The Picts were clearly an identifiable group throughout the period, although, as with modern identities, we are unlikely ever to be able to fully categorise or single this group out using a rigid set of criteria.

Picts and Christianity

In addition to ethnic change, the early medieval period in which the Picts lived was also marked by the spread of Christianity, a far-reaching process of change that affected world-view, culture and the economy. It has been argued (for example, Grigg 2015) that the Church also supported royal power, partly by claiming that kings acting in their favour were divinely blessed. However, conversely the Church could become a drain on royal resources and a potential rival power source, and was sometimes antipathetic to the violence that was a key feature of the political sphere and the success of powerful kings. As will be discussed more fully in Chapter 4, the process of Christianisation in Pictland was probably lengthy and its impact is uncertain, though we are gradually gaining a greater understanding of the belief systems that were replaced, altered or continued, and we have fragments of evidence for the uptake of the new religion. Our perceptions are clouded by later accounts which attributed the conversion to a few key saints, particularly Columba and Ninian, but it is likely that many early Christians were involved and that the origins of the missionary activity lay in the twilight of the Roman Empire, especially the 5th century, when there was a strong evangelisation campaign in Britain and Ireland coming from the papacy, Gaul and Britain itself (Evans 2022). The success of the missionary activity is difficult to trace, partly because the early Church did not create many distinctive building, burial and sculptural practices, until the growth of Insular monasticism in the mid 6th century. However, it is clear that, by the later 7th century at the latest, Pictland had been converted and was characterised by substantial ecclesiastical institutions and settlements, like Abernethy by the Tay, Ner near Fetternear in Aberdeenshire, Kinneddar in Moray, Rosemarkie on the Black Isle, Portmahomack in Easter Ross and Applecross in Wester Ross.

The magnificent sculptures at such locations and at Meigle, St Vigeans and St Andrews, along with single finds at other sites, stand as testimony to the resources, artistry, ideology and contacts of Christian Pictland (Henderson and Henderson 2004). These connections were multiple, even though it is clear from the names of local saints’ cults that Pictish holy figures were themselves significant. The Gaelic world was probably especially important in the conversion process and early Church life. By 700, Iona had a significant role in the Pictish Church with a network of subordinate institutions among the Picts and a series of dedications of places to Ionian clerics in the later 7th and early 8th centuries indicates a continued Gaelic influence in local Pictish communities (Taylor 1997; Taylor 2000a). However, by the late 9th century, Pictland also had other connections – to Bangor in Ireland (County Down) at Applecross and to Kildare through the cult of St Brigit at Abernethy. The cults of Palladius at Fordoun and Laurence at Laurencekirk in the Mearns reflect connections with Irish establishments dedicated to St Patrick, whose cult was dominated by Armagh (Clancy 2009). Moreover, Iona’s power was also limited in the early 8th century by King Nechtan when he changed monastic tonsure and the method for calculating Easter away from Iona’s practice to that maintained in Rome and most of the western Church, expelling the Columban community in the process. While the expulsion was probably temporary, this enhanced royal control, weakened Iona’s influence and also involved Northumbrian English clergy. In the 8th and 9th centuries, the Pictish Church had its own practices, such as the distinct form and iconography of its sculpture, which utilised panels beside crosses not only for interlace but also figures and fantastic beasts, as well as, at least initially, Pictish symbols. However, it also had strong links with the wider Church, as shown by the St Andrew’s shrine, being part of wider European developments, even if the Gaelic dimension increasingly came to the fore, part of the broader process by which Pictland became Alba (see Chapter 7).

Pictish kingship and the rise of an over-kingship

It is in the 6th century that clear evidence for Pictish kingship commences – the item in c.580 for Cennalath in the Irish chronicles being the first of many – with some given the title rex Pictorum, ‘king of the Picts’. The Pictish king-lists, an early version of which was in existence by the reign of King Gartnait son of Donuel (c.656–663), included many kings before this, some with plausible names and reign lengths, stretching back into the ancient past for many centuries. However, some of the early kings – occasionally with reigns of fifty or a hundred years! – were clearly later additions, possibly included from other regnal lists, so we cannot rely on that as evidence for such a continuous, ancient line of kings.

The first contemporary item involving a Pict in the Irish chronicles, ‘the flight before the son of Maelchon’ recorded in AU 558 and AU 560 seems to refer to an obscure event involving Bridei son of Maelchon, a king based in northern Pictland, whose death is recorded in AU 583. He was a key figure in later sources, including Adomnán of Iona’s Life of Columba, written c.700, and the Northumbrian Bede’s Ecclesiastical History of the English People, finished in 731, but for slightly different reasons.

In Adomnán’s Life of Columba, Bridei was a powerful king residing in a fort by the River Ness in the Great Glen, in prouincia Pictorum, ‘the territory of the Picts’, whose magi, ‘wizards’, sought to defeat the saint (I.37, II.32–34; Anderson and Anderson 1991, 70–71, 138–47). Columba prevailed, winning the assistance and respect of the king, as well as some converts, but the conversion of Bridei himself is not mentioned. Bede also described Bridei as a very powerful king but stated that Bridei was converted by Columba, along with the broader northern Pictish territories (HE III.4, Colgrave and Mynors 1969, 220–23). In return, Columba is said to have been given the island of Iona, which was to become the most important early-Christian centre in northern Britain. The contradictions in these two texts may not just be due to the saint’s Life having a different emphasis from a text that sought briefly to explain Christianity in northern Britain as part of a wider scheme of salvation history, but may also result from Adomnán being conscious of the (probably correct) view that Iona was a Gaelic donation, whereas Bede repeated a Pictish claim to overlordship of northern Britain.

Such views of supremacy, perhaps resting on the idea that the Picts preceded the Gaels in the west, in the area that was, by 700, called Dál Riata, were a product of the power of the Pictish realm in Bede’s time. Before the late 7th century, it is difficult to define the status of kings in Pictland, since the Irish chronicles either did not give titles to Pictish rulers or simply called them rex Pictorum. The Latin is inherently ambiguous – rex Pictorum could mean ‘the king of the Picts’, representing a Pictish over-kingship, but, alternatively, it may have simply denoted ‘a king of the Picts’, that is, one of many. The latter meaning is more likely since, elsewhere in our early sources, we have the titles rex Britonum, ‘king of the Britons’, and rex Saxonum, ‘king of the English’, when we know that there were multiple kings of these ethnic groups. However, there remains the question of why these particular kings were recorded, so it is plausible that they were particularly powerful rulers in Pictland, who had gained the notice of Iona’s chroniclers.

In the mid 7th century, the expansionist Anglo-Saxon kingdom of the Northumbrians achieved a dominance over much of northern Britain, including at least parts of Pictland, though it is uncertain how this hegemony operated in practice. In the later 7th century, that overlordship was shattered by Bridei son of Beli, a ruler of Fortriu, a territory now recognised as located around the Moray Firth, perhaps extending from Ross to Moray (Woolf 2006). The rise of Fortriu, which became the pre-eminent Pictish province, was one of the most notable developments of early medieval Scotland (Figures 1.3 and 1.4).

The formation of the entity known as Fortriu can be traced back to the Roman Iron Age. Our first reference to this region is when Ammianus Marcellinus named the Verturiones (hence the adjective ‘Verturian’ used in some recent scholarship) as one of the two Pictish peoples, along with the Dicalydones, involved in the ‘Barbarian Conspiracy’ of 367–368. After this, our next reference is in 664 in the Irish chronicles, which gives the related territorial name, Fortriu in a Gaelicised form. Bridei’s stronghold was located, according to Adomnán, by the River Ness, perhaps at Craig Phadrig, Torvean or nearby Inverness, in or close to the power base of Fortriu. If Bede and Adomnán were not simply projecting back Fortriu’s later power here, then Bede’s description of Bridei as ‘rex potentissimus’, a ‘very powerful king’ (HE III.4, Colgrave and Mynors 1969, 222), and Adomnán’s portrayal of Bridei as the overlord of a regulus or ‘underking’ of Orkney (VSC II.42, Anderson and Anderson 1991, 166–67) indicate that Fortriu’s wider power had a precursor in the late 6th century (Figure 1.3).

While their earlier history may be somewhat obscure, it is clear that the power of the kings of Fortriu in northern Britain was secured in the late 7th century with the famous victory at the Battle of Nechtanesmere. Early in his reign, Ecgfrith, king of the Northumbrians (671–685), crushed what Stephen of Ripon regarded as a Pictish rebellion, after ‘swarms of them gathered from every cranny of the north’ (Stephen, Life of Wilfrid, ch. 19, Webb 2004, 128). However, from 679 onwards, the Irish chronicles start to record conflicts in northern Britain that appear to have been preludes to the Pictish victory at Nechtanesmere. Sieges are noted in 679 at Dún Baitte (AU 680.5, see Chapter 3) and, in 680, there was a siege of Dunnottar near Stonehaven (AU 681.5). Then, in 681 (AU 682.4), Orkney was ‘destroyed’ by Bridei (presumably the son of Beli). In the following year, in 682, there were sieges of Dunadd in Mid Argyll and Dundurn in Strathearn (AU 683.3). While these campaigns cannot with certainty be associated directly with Bridei, they can plausibly be linked with Bridei growing his power base and taking the fight to the Northumbrians.

1.3 Map showing Picts and their neighbours in the early 7th century.

Bridei’s activities in Pictland certainly caught the attention of the Northumbrian ruler Ecgfrith who launched his own campaign in Pictland. This resulted in the Battle of Nechtanesmere (Dún Nechtain in the Irish chronicles), in which Ecgfrith was killed and his army defeated (see also Chapter 3). After his victory, Bridei ended Northumbrian rule north of the Forth, extending Fortriu’s control southwards. On his death in 692 (AU 693.1), the Iona chronicler called Bridei ‘king of Fortriu’ and it is from his reign that we can see clearly that there was a powerful over-kingdom of the Picts.

The extent and power of the expanded (or partially restored to its former extent) 7th-century kingdom of the Picts is indicated in a number of written sources (Figure 1.4). One of Bridei’s immediate successors, Bridei son of Derilei (696–707), was a signatory to Adomnán’s ‘Law of the Innocents’, also ratified c.697 by kings in Ireland and Dál Riata. King Bridei was the only Pictish participant, apart from Curetán, a cleric of Rosemarkie on the Black Isle (Márkus 2008, 17–18; see also Chapter 4). This law prevented minors, women and clerics from participating in warfare while also protecting them during conflict. The clerics of the Columban community were to collect the fines designated for infringements, but ultimately rulers were expected to ensure adherence, indicating that kings such as Bridei son of Derilei felt able to assert their rule throughout their realm, in aspiration at least. Similarly, in the 710s, King Nechtan son of Derilei (707– 724, 729–732) decided not only the Church practice in his realm, relating to the tonsure and the date of Easter, but Bede states that he then ordered copies of the new Easter tables to be distributed ‘throughout all the provinces of the Picts’ (HE V 21, Colgrave and Mynors 1969, 532–53). Clearly the over-kings of Pictland, in the later 7th and 8th centuries ad, were able to decide law and policy throughout their hegemony.

In the 730s, the Pictish kingdom expanded further, to include Gaelic Dál Riata in the west. King Onuist son of Uurguist (732–761) invaded and conquered the Gaels of Dál Riata in Argyll after a number of campaigns from 731–741. This conquest was not permanent – kings of Dál Riata appear again in the 770s until 792, in a period when Pictland was itself divided, but, by the 9th century, Dál Riata again seems to have come under Pictish rule (Broun 1998; Clancy 2004). This period, therefore, can be regarded as the height of Pictish royal power, but Pictish control might not have been very stable, perhaps being maintained largely through local leaders, even before the Scandinavians presented an existential threat to the kingdom from the mid 9th century onwards (see Chapter 7).

Indeed, throughout the 8th century, there were periods of conflict, such as a major civil war with a three-way leadership battle from 728 to 729. Later, in the 770s and 780s, Pictland seems to have been divided, as indicated by a reference in the Annals of Ulster, AU 782.1, to ‘Dubthalorc, king of the Picts this side of the Mounth’, demonstrating that the Highlands could be a political dividing line. That potential division may also be reflected in Bede’s Ecclesiastical History, in which he stated that the northern Picts had been evangelised by St Columba, whereas the southern Picts were converted by St Ninian (HE III.4, Colgrave and Mynors 1969, 220– 23; see also Chapter 4). Similarly, a Gaelic text, Senchas Síl hÍr, which might have elements from before the mid 10th century, stated that the Cruithni (the Picts) in the ancient period settled in Mag Fortrenn and Mag Circin (Dobbs 1923, 64–66), the plain of Fortriu in the north, and of Circin, including the Mearns, Strathmore, Gowrie and perhaps Strathearn south of the Mounth. This reflected a similar division to Bede’s, with the Highlands again being the dividing line (Evans 2013).

1.4 Map showing Picts and their neighbours c.ad 700, when Pictish over-kingship was consolidated.