Topic: Archaeology

Interpretations of Iron Age Architecture Brochs in Society/Social Identity

Archaeology is a historical field which has advanced over the years based on more discoveries still being experienced by the archaeologists who seek them. According to Kelly and Thomas (2010; p.5), the concession that life existed in more ancient times than stipulated by biblical scholars and human culture allowed the archaeologists to dig deeper into genealogical data. Iron Age architecture and social/society identity relate to one another. For instance, the population, based on their identity and perception will construct buildings that directly reflect their beliefs. This essay will discuss these archaeological concepts of Iron Age architecture and society/social identity. Need a paragraph on brochs and how many and where they are across Scotland with patcialur focus on the atlantc region, this is not relevant for masters essay. Must define broch from its architecture and how long it would take to build and note famous ones and note the ones that will be referred to in this essay – this could be Perhaps incorpated into the next paragraph.

Iron Age architecture has over the years been dominated by differing archaeological concepts and debates. It was defined by settlements and settlement structures such as duns, brochs, wheelhouses, hillforts, stone-built round houses and timber. The social and societal identity which is identified through material remains indicates aspects of differentiation, regional patterns and segregation. According to Kelly and Thomas (2010; p.28), people who existed in Iron Age Scotland were isolated. This is demonstrated by the presence of a burial followed by an assembled chariot at Newbridge. Northern and western Scotland have been the source of the well-structured developments that have provided cultural, architectural and social data over time. Maes Howe, which is the largest Orkney burial cairn, located between Stromness and Kirkwall, does not contain any human remains other than a few skull fragments that have been mixed with animal bones (Downes et al, 2003; n.p).Nonetheless, the Iron Age architecture alone provides a detailed perspective regarding social identity which reveals more about the populus of that period.

Furthermore, social identity is also analyzed based on the distribution of people within the equivalent area. The analysis of their various traditions and cultures highlights the population’s view on their identity. For instance, the presence of graves was instrumental in the progress of early archaeology since it provided secure examples in the study of communities via evidence left behind by the inhabitants. Williams (2006; p.5), notes that how the dead were portrayed was a direct reflection of the person’s world views and concepts rather than that of the living in the society. Hence, the concept of social identity evoked links that connected the past and present and future relationships. It highlights how various group identities are determined as they envision their XXXXXXX indicating that, social identity relates to Iron age architecture and how it was perceived by the people. This is not an essay on funerary architecture so this needs changing

The primary aim of this essay is to discuss the concepts of archaeology based on the various academic’s interpretations of brochs in Iron Age architecture and social/society identity. This paper considers elements of study on Iron Age architecture and then strives to define Iron Age architecture and social/society identity according to the interpretations of four academic scholars, concluding with a comparison of the archaeologist’s arguments based on the research of X and X and X and X.

Defining the Iron in the Iron age

Iron Age is defined as a period from 600 BC- 400 AD characterized by the extensive use of iron for weapons and tools. The use of Iron began in the Middle East and southeastern Europe, albeit the middle eastern use being limited as Iron was deemed a precious metal. Despite its slow integration into every day lives, the export of knowledge regarding iron and its use was rapid. Thus, large scale production of iron subsequently led to the implementation of new patterns of permanent settlements (Ballin and Banks 2002; n.p).

Archaeologicalicaly, Iron age sites assit in determining the settlements of the medieval people’s homesteads, village’s monasteries, towns and later parish churches. However, in contrast to this, the change in patterns of the fields, boundaries, territories and settlements occurred during the end of the Norman and Britain conquest (Sahlén 2011; p.5).thsi is an essay about Scotland not England or britain This period marked great changes in tenure and land-use. Additionally, the medieval landscape incorporated certain aspects of the past, inclusive of monuments such as ceremonial monuments and burial piles (Gowland and Knüsel 2006; p.50). As stipulated by Sharples, the Iron Age of Atlantic Scotland consists of the distribution of specific kinds of monumental drystone architecture. They include duns, brochs and Atlantic roundhouses which are well preserved and quite visible in the landscape. The history of Orkney dates to the 8th century during which the occupation by genus Homo was part of Scotland’s genealogy (Renfrew 1985; n.p) and in Shetland and Orkney, brochs and other Iron age buildings form part of a complex and large settlement mounds that represent the people’s beliefs.

The chronological scheme for the iron age which was adopted in early 1980 was based on the Scandinavian model.( reference) The model aimed to break down the barriers between the Iron age, late Bronze age and early historic period. As summarized by Sharples and Pearson, the Iron Age era represents the first millennia BC and AD. Nonetheless, Armit defines this period as the initial millennium AD before the Norse settlement. Armit based his arguments on the aspect that no specific dates were given for the division which utilized the arbitrary approach. In this case, as stated by Johnson (1999; p.14), the archaeologists could make assumptions according to the current available evidence rather than archaeological theories.

As a result, academics can define social/society identity based on the population's age. For instance, both Sharples and Pearson took into consideration that the first millennia BC and AD defined a unique group of people. These identities were determined by previous experiences; with BC and AD representing a more evolved group of individuals. Based on Armit, the initial millennium represents an era whereby the majority of the population identifies with both the social and society setting. Relate this to brochs

The survey and excavation programs in the Northern and Western Isles ( define actual area) began in 1980. The advancements in this field facilitated archaeology in the area resulting in debates and radical interpretations of the Iron Age period. In Atlantic Scotland (Harding 2012; p.144), the dominant architecture during the Iron Age period was the broch which was a representation of a complex roundhouse. Hale and Sands (2005; n.p) noted that the different interpretations ( of what XXXX) and controversy were vital during research. For instance, brochs and the subsequent complex drystone structures have since been a source of disagreements among scholars such as Ferguson, Parker Pearson, Gilmour, Armit and Sharples.

Different perspectives

Niall Sharples views Orkney, in the British Isles, as one of the most vital archaeological landscapes due to the nature of their record and quality of the Neolithic archaeology (Merion-Jones 2011; n.p). As a result, he affirms that the Iron Age was likely represented by the remaining presence of the Neolithic monuments ( examples and where )that would have been as popular as they currently are today. Furthermore, he acknowledges that the monuments would be visible and better preserved with clear architectural features. The Iron Age farmers would have a vast knowledge regarding the landscape features and would also have a story linked to each features form and social significance (Sharples 2006; p.302).

Despite that, the Iron Age period could have facilitated the development of prominent features, the opportunities and obstacles posed by the monuments would be different from those in the 21st-century landscapes. The presence of these monuments would also be likely divisive and highly debated as witnessed in modern day times. Hence, social/society identities have evolved since people are currently aware of their needs and their cultural orientation. The differences would be evident especially because individuals during the Iron age era had different perceptions than those by comparison in the 21st century.

According to Sharples, brochs manifested as a building style due to a series of decisions taken by the communities that occupied the Atlantic fringe. During the beginning of the Iron Age, they agreed to use roundhouse structure as a means for status competition (Sharples and Parker 1997; p.254). Hence, they were named brochs since they did not fully match the complex buildings until the end of the first millennium. The professor ( which one?) can link the broch and roundhouse together according to the movement of the sun. Additionally, regarding the Iron Age architecture and social identity, Sharples wanted to find out why there were few artefacts in the Middle Iron Age period and specifically why there were few personal ornaments such as brooches and pins. He also wanted clarity on why the houses during this Age were poorly built since they lacked a central communal space.

Need examples of brochs and where they are and differences

Based on the various excavations ( which ones) conducted, the results indicated an inverse relationship between the diversity of material culture and monumental architecture. Over time, the construction of impressive buildings reduced and was further replaced by restricted sociality. On the other hand, the importance of material culture increased with imported materials decoratively worn to indicate the significance of an individual. The beginning of the Iron Age marked the disappearance of material culture that was later replaced by hillforts which were monumental structures. ( reference and examples in an area of highlands and islands)

On the other hand, Armit affirms, brochs as the product of invasion from the South. This is contrary to Sharples’s view that the architectural design choices were a mark of pride. In the Atlantic Scottish Iron Age, the significance of the innovation was reviewed based on the current excavations and emerging extended chronologies (Armit 1990; p.435). These architectural innovations were anchored given the parallel developments in other domains of non-architectural settlements growth and material culture. Despite the differences in approach, both Sharples and Armit based their arguments on the available research. ( what research of what and where and by who) The argument was based on whether brochs represented just one form of settlement pattern or facilitated the only settlement pattern during the Iron Age period.

In comparison, Parker Pearson interpreted the Iron Age architecture in a similar manner to Sharples. They both acknowledged that Iron Age societies were identified by fundamental households and local communities in their building blocks. Pearson, just like Sharples noted that the presence of roundhouses with conical roofs was a characteristic of the local architectures in Britain (Webley 2016; n.p). The building materials used were stone, turf and timber except for unique stone houses in northern and western Scotland such as brochs. The broch architecture was a symbolic domestic architecture, influenced by ethnographic and structuralist concepts. For instance, the British roundhouses had their doorways facing the rising sun as a sign of diurnal and life cycles. Thus, their identity was influenced as well as dictating the style of architectural monuments within their belief systems..

Pearson and Armit agree that the development and origins of brochs have been the center of attention due to the new perspectives regarding settlements. However, Armit in contrast to Pearson, states that buildings during the Iron age period formed a regional exhibition of a unique tradition of roundhouses. ( reference??/)The unique manifestations were a representation of the differences and similarities in view, expressed through the architecture as well as the individual’s social/societal identity.

In contrast to Sharples and Parker Pearson view on Iron Age architecture, Armit expressed different views. Armit stated that current terms utilized to define round stoned wall buildings of Northern and Western of Scotland ( give examples) should be substituted with a new framework. Initially, the classification defines brochs and duns as two classes of monument. According to Armit, the system should be replaced by a framework within which monuments can be discussed without making any initial assumptions of function or origin. Armit believed that the human population in the ancient past was defined by landscapes, relict buildings and archaeological finds (Armit 1996; n.p).( give an example) Parker Pearson and Sharples were against this general form of definition since his descriptive framework also encompassed all other buildings that only existed in a later prehistoric era.( need a reference and an example)

Furthemore, they noted that Armit’s general classification should not be adopted due to the vague information provided regarding the differences between brochs, wheelhouses and other structures. They also acknowledged that diverse interpretations of old excavations and unexcavated monuments would always be a source of debate. However, Armit should not assume that excavations conducted in the Western Isles are a representation of all the existing structures. ( reference) Armit’s argument that Atlantic roundhouses did not directly represent the ruling community, was only considered valid if the category incorporated various structures that were initially classified as different and which could have been separated by a classification framework.

Sharples highlights society/social identity changed in the first millennium. This was when there was a shift from a society where power was invested in individuals to one where power lay within the community. ( reference) Further, the changes from the middle to the late Iron Age had major effects on the social relationships of Atlantic Scotland. Introduction of artefacts had a positive effect since it ensured the individuals were able to break free from their comfort zones and create new relationships based on the exchange of exotic crafts (Sharples 2003; p.162). This form of interaction aimed to achieve communal understanding and relationships whereby unity is fostered in acknowledging the diversity in identity. Example of crafts found in Scotland that would deomstarte this)

This section does not seem to be about borchs but seems to have stayed in from previous essay about funerary archetceture which this essay is not about??????Disimilary, Parker Pearson’s view on society/social identity examines the kind of relationships that might have existed historically. ( how does this impact on Borchs and their building, strcrure and adoption within society?) The social identity of a deceased person is communicated to the living so that they can adapt to the loss. ( what is this to do with brochs explain?????Nevertheless, Pearson highlights that funerary practices are inconclusive since it provides a distorted image regarding past relationships (Thomas 2000; p.200). Pearson’s interpretation contrasts with Sharples since the focus is moved away from the society as an object and towards “the social” aspect of friendship through which personal identities such as ‘individual’ can thrive and remain stable.( relevance to brochs and archaituecture???) On an analytical view, society exists objectively and has to be reproduced continually. Thus, society has to be “acted upon” since individuals are always struggling to define their own societal identity yet they do not dwell within it.

As outlined above, the presence of symbolic tools showed how the people identified with the dead and all the subsequent rituals. The monuments include Maes Howe, the Ring of Brodgar and the stones of Stenness and Skara Brae (Downes et al. 2005; n.p). Additionally, funerary links with social identity since it provides crucial data regarding the population’s origin and ancestral relations. In this case, Neolithic Orkney funerary monument was characterized by stone-built tombs and other ceremonial monuments mounted near water. According to Ritchie (2000; n.p), Orkney is a world heritage site with various monumental sites that give insight into the lives of the Neolithic people in Britain and beyond. Moreover, based on Pearson’s views, the links shows the relationships that exist among individuals from both the present and past. Hence, the population can determine their identity both social and society by relating to their past and present experiences.

Simon Gilmour interprets Iron Age architecture based on their structural features and overall appearance. The design of the roundhouses is vital, according to Gilmour because their architectural scheme consists of more than just the summation of their parts or the height extension of the plain roundhouse (Theodossopoulos et al. 2012; p.6). ( how do these relate to brochs???? As they are roundhouses) In comparison to Sharples and Pearson’s work, Gilmour also notes that the structural schemes used during construction directly represent the people’s views and opinions. For instance, as highlighted above, the houses could be built with the door facing the sun in acknowledgement of their various life cycles.( this is repeated from before ????

The life cycles are similar to Sharples and Pearson’s view. The views describe the temporal cycle in building construction where they are used and abandoned. This was a tradition that was passed down from one generation to the next which identifies the unique patterns. The organization of circular domestic homes was dictated by time which further enforced that temporary structures reflected the movement of the sun. ( broch examples?) Gilmour was also interested in the work of Dun Vulan during the excavations in South Uist that focused on the broch site ( why and how ). The similarities between Pearson, ( point out his involvement in Dun vulan – info on SCRAN and CANMORE) Sharples and Gilmour is quite evident since their interests were influenced by structural evidence of Iron Age architecture. Therefore, the scholars were able to form conclusions based on an evident pattern throughout the years.

Regarding, social/society identity both Armit and Gilmour interpreted it differently according to their views on community and social relationships. Gilmour states that identity in either social or societal settings is a balancing act that is not only concerned with diversity but also equality and justice. Community cohesion will encourage aspects of identity since it will inspire individual identity that is anchored on common grounds and principles. ( Reference) On the other hand, Armit states that social/societal identity is a personal initiative that fosters the growth of other sectors within the community. Identity should be discovered on an individual basis to ensure that external influences do not influence one’s overall development.( Reference)Give example in broch terms

NEED AN OPNION HERE AND WHY AND LINK IT TO DUN VULAN)In summary, all these interpretations are debatable because they are stated based on the professor’s experience and views. Furthermore, each of the professors conducted their research regarding Iron Age architecture and society/social identity. For instance, Armit conducted his conclusive research in the Western Isles, nonetheless, the professor’s( which prfessor) challenged his work since he based his study on only a single point on contact. Archaeology is considered conclusive when the archaeologists analyze information that has encompassed all the involved parties without any omissions. The conclusions provided can only be influenced by archaeological records and literary works of academics and other authors who have spent years conducting research and analysis of this era.

Conclusion

In conclusion,., the comparisons and different interpretations OF x AND X AND x AND x ARE vital in determining an debating architectural strategies ofa contemporary cultural aspets relating to brochs. It is acknowledged that the Iron Age architecture was significant in providing detailed information regarding the population as the presence of monumental buildings and structures signify societys beliefs as well as status. As a result, archaeology, via the Iron Age architecture and society/social identity plays a vital role in shaping the chronology of events from this period to the modern time. It demonstrates how archiutectire impacted on the population’s identity and way of living. Furthermore, the comparisons and contrasts between archaeological theoeys is indicative of how historical aspects can be viewed differently based on a population's view on relationships and identity within society.

Bibliography – this contains bibliography from old essay which included funerary elements

Armit, I., 1990. Broch building in northern Scotland: the context of innovation. World

Archaeology, 21(3), pp.435.

Armit, I., 1996. The archaeology of Skye and the Western Isles. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

Ballin Smith B & Banks I (eds), 2002, In the Shadow of the Brochs: The Iron Age in Scotland, Tempus

Downes, J., Ritchie, A. & Downes, J. 2003, Sea change: Orkney and Northern Europe in the later Iron Age AD 300-800, Pinkfoot, Balgavies, Forfar.

Downes, J, Foster S. M. and Wickham Jones C. R. 2005 (eds) The Heart of Neolithic Orkney World Heritage Site. Research Agenda. Edinburgh: Historic Scotland. Downloadable from www.historic -scotland.gov.uk/orkneyresearch

Gowland, R. and Knüsel, C. eds., 2006. Social archaeology of funerary remains. Oxford: Oxbow Books. Pp50

Hale, A and Sands, R. 2005 Controversy on the Clyde. Archaeologists, fakes and forgers: the excavation of Dumbuck crannog. RCAHMS: Edinburgh

Harding, D., 2012. Iron Age hillforts in Britain and beyond. OUP Oxford. Pp144

Johnson, M. 1999 Archaeological theory, an introduction. Oxford: Blackwell. Pp14

Kelly, R. L., & Thomas, D. H. (2010). Archaeology. Belmont, CA, Wadsworth. Pp5-28

Merion-Jones, A., Freedman, D., O’Connor, B., Lamdin-Whymark, H., Tipping,. R. and Watson, A. 2011. An Animate Landscape: Rock Art and the Prehistory of Kilmartin, Argyll, Scotland.

Noble, G., Verrill, L., Raven, J. & Poller, T. 2008, Scottish odysseys: the archaeology of islands, Tempus, Stroud

Parker Pearson, M., Sharples, N. and Symonds, J. 2004. South Uist: Archaeology and History of a Hebridean Island. Tempus.

Renfrew, C. 1985, The Prehistory of Orkney, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh

Richards, C. 2013. Building the Great Stone Circles of the North. Oxford: Oxbow Books. Pp7

Ritchie, A. 2000, Neolithic Orkney in its European context, McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, Cambridge, England.

Sahlén, D. 2011, "Introduction: Archaeological theory and Scottish archaeology in practice", Scottish Archaeological Journal, vol. 33, no. 1-2, pp. 5.