The bridge of Kinloss: A 10th century mystery
The bridge of Kinloss: A 10th century mystery
In which I examine whether Sueno’s Stone depicts a bridge mentioned in the medieval Scottish king-lists
For new followers: I’m writing this blog while I’m doing preparatory research for a Medieval Studies MA that I’m starting later this year.
My research topic is – or rather, is anchored to – Sueno’s Stone in Forres, a massive early medieval carved cross-slab that has a series of graphic battle scenes on its reverse face, and a heavily-weathered (or defaced) scene on the cross face that’s been interpreted as a royal inauguration.
Nobody knows for sure when Sueno’s Stone was carved, what the battle scenes are supposed to represent, or why it’s located in Forres, which isn’t obviously an early medieval royal centre.
My dissertation will be my contribution to this mystery, which has been ongoing at least since 1727, when antiquary Alexander Gordon, passing through Forres on a journey through the north of Scotland, wrote:
“It is all one single and entire Stone; Great Variety of Figures, in low Relievo, are carved thereon, some of them still distinct and visible, but the Injury of the Weather has obscur’d those towards the upper Part. What the Import, or Signification, of those Figures is, I am at a Loss to determine.”
Sueno’s Stone and the bridge at Kinloss
As I wrote in my last blog, one theory that’s gained a certain amount of currency is the one put forward by Archie Duncan, Professor of Scottish History and Literature at the University of Glasgow, in 1984.
He suggested that the battle scenes narrate and commemorate the death of king Dubh of Alba, who died in suspicious circumstances in Forres in 966 AD. He also suggested that the stone was raised by Dubh’s brother Cináed, who was king from 971 until his death in 995.
As evidence, Duncan uses a note about Dubh that appears in some versions of the Scottish king-lists. These are later medieval copies of one or more original manuscripts, which recorded the names, reign lengths and sometimes a few scraps of information about the kings of Alba.
Some of these king-lists record the death of Dubh in 966 as follows:
“Dub, Malcolm’s son, reigned for four years and six months; and he was killed in Forres, and hidden away under the bridge of Kinloss. But the sun did not appear so long as he was concealed there; and he was found, and buried in the island of Iona.”
Archie Duncan saw a link between this description and Sueno’s Stone, writing:
“On one side, carvings depict a great army on horseback. Below, a central figure with a helmet and quilted coat (Dubh, I suggest) watches with his armed retinue while the armies begin to fight on foot […] The battle continues with three fighting couples on each side of an arc which is the bridge of Kinloss. Beneath the bridge lie more bodies and severed heads; one of the heads, that of Dubh, is framed to stress its importance.” [see image below]
Was there an arched bridge at Kinloss in the 10th century?
However, if you boil Duncan’s theory down, only two things really link the scenes on Sueno’s Stone with the medieval records of Dubh’s death.
One is that the stone is located near Forres, where Dubh is said to have been killed. The other is that the bodies and heads of the battle-dead are shown arranged underneath an arch-shaped object, which Duncan interprets as “the bridge of Kinloss”.
If this object really is “the bridge of Kinloss”, it suggests there was an arched (stone) bridge at Kinloss in the late 10th century, when Duncan suggests the stone was raised.
How credible is it that Kinloss might have had an arched stone bridge in the late 10th century? My initial research suggests “not very”. In his book The Bridges of Medieval England: Transport and Society 400-1800, David Harrison describes the development of bridges in the medieval period thus:
“Before the twelfth century most bridges were timber or had timber roadways and stone piers. […] Between 1100 and 1500 the bridge network was rebuilt so that by the sixteenth century most major bridges were constructed with stone vaults.”
Of the bridges that were built in the early medieval period (in England), their construction seems to have been connected with the development of the burhs – fortified towns to defend against attackers.
In 920, for example, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle notes that Edward the Elder ordered the repair of a bridge at Nottingham that connected the burhs on either bank of the Trent:
“This year, before midsummer, went King Edward with an army to Nottingham; and ordered the town to be repaired on the south side of the river, opposite the other, and the bridge over the Trent betwixt the two towns.”
Kinloss was certainly not a town in the 10th century, as towns didn’t develop in the north of Scotland until the establishment of the burghs in the 12th century.
In fact, apart from this single chronicle mention, I’ve found no evidence of any kind of settlement at Kinloss before David I founded Kinloss Abbey in 1150. (A 2017 find of an early medieval cross-slab fragment is probably a red herring.)
A flat wooden bridge – but depicted as an arch?
One possibility is that the bridge at Kinloss was made of wood, and of flat construction. This would be more typical of the period: the Ravning Bridge in Denmark, for example, was built in the late 10th century on the orders of Harold Bluetooth.
My thanks to Helen McKay of the Pictish Symbols: Art and Context group on Facebook, who suggested that the “bridge” could in fact have been a jetty for maritime trade, much like this viking-age example from Bork in Denmark:
If the bridge at Kinloss was a flat wooden bridge or jetty, and if Sueno’s Stone does depict it, it would mean the sculptor deliberately chose to portray it as arch-shaped.
That would imply a knowledge of Roman architecture, and indeed art historians George and Isabel Henderson suggest that Sueno’s Stone could have been commissioned as “a conscious cultural gesture” by a patron who had been to Rome and “wanted the equivalent of the columns of Trajan and Marcus Aurelius on his doorstep”.
However, it’s debatable whether it would have been understood as the Kinloss Bridge to a local audience, who would be familiar with the bridge in question but not with Roman architecture. (My thanks to Lorna on Twitter for this observation.)
Was there even a bridge at Kinloss at all?
A more vexed question, for me, is whether there was a bridge at Kinloss at all in the 10th century. If there wasn’t, it casts the chronicle account of Dubh’s death into serious doubt.
The Moray Firth coastline and its hinterland have changed dramatically in the past 1,100 years, and it’s very hard to know what watercourses might have run through Kinloss around 990 AD.
But it’s worth noting that the earliest detailed map of the area, drawn up by Timothy Pont in 1590, shows no bridge at Kinloss, nor even over the River Findhorn on the other side of Forres. The only bridge in the area is the one that crosses the Mosset Burn at the western entrance to Forres.
(UPDATE: Thanks very much to Dr John R. Barrett, who has identified the bridge on Pont’s map below as the Lee Bridge over the Mosset Burn, and not - as I had thought - Castle Bridge.)
If there was no bridge – and indeed no settlement – at Kinloss in 966 AD, why do the king-lists say there was? As the manuscripts we have are only copies of original records, which were added to over time, is it possible that the bridge and the place-name were added later?
Establishing exactly when information was added to the various versions of the Scottish king-lists is extremely challenging, and scholars still haven’t reached consensus (and perhaps never will). But for my MA I’m going to attempt to pin down when the mention of Kinloss – and its bridge as the hiding place for Dubh’s body – first entered the record.
I’m not ready to do that yet! But my hunch is that the place-name was added later – perhaps in the 12th century after the foundation of Kinloss Abbey in 1150, since there seems to be no archaeological evidence of anything existing at Kinloss before that date.
In summary…
To sum up: Archie Duncan interpreted Sueno’s Stone as a 10th century monument commemorating the recent death of Dubh, king of Alba.
That theory rests largely on the notion that an arched object on the stone depicts the bridge at Kinloss, under which the medieval king-lists say Dubh’s body was hidden. But bridges of that time were not arched, it’s unlikely there was a bridge at Kinloss in the 10th century in any case, and the place-name of Kinloss may only have been added to (some of) the king-lists in the 12th century.
I’ll no doubt come back to all of this quite frequently as my research continues. Stay tuned (if you like lengthy meditations on medieval bridges and place-names)! And if you have any insights or corrections, please do let me know in the comments or on Twitter at @fcampbellhowes.
References
A. O. Anderson, Early Sources of Scottish History A.D. 500 to A.D. 1286 (1922)
M. O. Anderson, Kings and Kingship in Early Scotland (1973)
A. A. M. Duncan, The Kingdom of the Scots, in The Making of Britain: The Dark Ages (1984)
A. A. M. Duncan, The Kingship of the Scots, Succession and Independence 842-1292 (2002)
A. Gordon, Itinerarium Septentrionale (1731)
D. Harrison, The Bridges of Medieval England: Transport and Society 400-1800 (2004)
I. Henderson and G. Henderson, The Art of the Picts (2004)
L. Izzi, “Trajan’s Column on his doorstep”: investigating the Romanitas of Sueno’s Stone (2013)
A. Woolf, From Pictland to Alba 789-1070 (2007)
A. Woolf, Reporting Scotland in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (2010)
Hi Fiona. Late comment on this but I only just discovered that Brora is derived from a Norse name meaning “river with a bridge”. Given that Norse was being superseded by Gaelic by the 10th/11th century and names need some time to stick, this probably gives more support for bridges existing in the north of Scotland at the time of Sueno’s Stone’s creation.