Priority 1: There is a need to better understand the diverse range of settlement types, in particular roundhouse forms in Perth and Kinross. New research methodologies and clearly reported consideration of domestic architecture are key to addressing this. Reassessing how roundhouse forms relate across geographical zones and to other contemporary monuments, both within and outwith the region, will contribute to understanding the Scottish Iron Age as a whole.
Priority 2: There is a need to refine chronology and mechanism behind the transition from roundhouses to longhouses (Pitcarmick-type buildings) at the end of the long Iron Age and into the early medieval period.
Priority 3: There is a need to explore and refine the chronology of the origin and development of monumental enclosure forms, including brochs, monumental roundhouses, duns and forts, and to compare with neighbouring regions.
Priority 4: There is a need to better understand the context of monumental enclosed forms, such as forts, crannogs and monumental roundhouses, and to improve our knowledge of contemporary environment and settlement in the wider landscape.
Priority 5: There is a need to better understand lowland enclosed settlement, known through the cropmark record, ideally through comprehensive mapping of the cropmark record and a programme of targeted excavation of multiple examples/sites. This could be considered a high priority given the ongoing destruction of cropmark sites.
Priority 6: Further consideration of the origins, nature and reuse of monumental roundhouses is required. While previously labelled ‘circular fort’, ‘ring-fort’ and ‘homestead’, they have more recently been proposed as one form of ‘monumental roundhouse’ (Hingley 1992, 14–5; Strachan 2013, 8–10). The detail of their architectural form remains unclear however, and a range of options have been suggested, from massive roofed buildings to partially roofed structures (Strachan 2013, 94–100). While their artefactual signature appears to be domestic, a better understanding of their form is required to fully appreciate their relationship to roundhouses and other forms, such as duns. Several show evidence of reoccupation or reuse in the early medieval period and the nature of this activity requires further research.
Research Questions
PKARF Qu 5.68: What are the key differences between the region’s roundhouse forms and what can they tell us? How do these regional patterns relate to patterning beyond the PKARF boundary?
More information on this question
PKARF Qu 5.69: To what extent can the underlying reasoning behind construction of different roundhouse types be determined through archaeological investigation?
More information on this question
PKARF Qu 5.70: How influential are material, taphonomy and later land use to the variety of regional roundhouse forms?
More information on this question
PKARF Qu 5.71: What can Iron Age inter-regional patterns of settlement (eg east and west of the Tay) reveal about societal structure during this period?
More information on this question
PKARF Qu 5.72: To what extent can patterns or sequences of elaborate/monumental roundhouse architectural development be identified and what can they reveal about the region’s Iron Age communities?
More information on this question
PKARF Qu 5.73: What is the relationship between duns and other monument forms in upland north-west Perth and Kinross such as the smaller monumental roundhouses and larger forts?
More information on this question
PKARF Qu 5.74: How do patterns or sequences of architectural development compare across different Iron Age domestic monument types?
More information on this question
PKARF Qu 5.75: How extensively are chronology patterns for large hilltop and other enclosures identifiable in the region and how do they compare with elsewhere in Britain?
More information on this question
PKARF Qu 5.76: What is the chronology for the origins of forts, and related monumental forms such as brochs, monumental roundhouses and duns – can this be refined and is it reflected in morphology?
More information on this question
PKARF Qu 5.77: What is the chronology for the use of palisaded enclosures – can existing botanical archives contribute through radiocarbon AMS dating?
More information on this question
PKARF Qu 5.78: Is there potential for the use of LiDAR data, especially in uplands and in improved pasture, where the results of air photography and ground survey are limited, to revolutionise our knowledge of settlement when it becomes available?
More information on this question
PKARF Qu 5.79: What more can be learnt about the use of artificial ponds on forts in the region?
More information on this question
https://scarf.scot/researchframework/v1/question/question-6308c380eec9dSome forts such as Barry Hill, Alyth and Abernethy include large artificial ponds, at Abernethy this is in addition to a recognised cistern. Might these examples suggest a regional tradition similar to the examples known in Ireland? Were these water bodies artificial? Do they date to hillfort construction? Why were they made? What practices went on around them? Comprehensive lake-based environmental construction is needed at these and other hilltop forts.Active01/06/202201/06/2025The Scottish Archaeological Research Framework PKARF Qu 5.80: Can a review of material assemblages and radiocarbon dating material from previously excavated sites, such as Litigan and Queen’s View, assist with understanding early medieval activity at the monumental roundhouses (Strachan 2013, 115)?
More information on this question