Kindrochit Castle
This photo was taken looking northward along Balnellen Road and the east side of the remains of Kindrochit Castle.
Not only did the waters of the Clunie, hurrying through its gorge to the west, enhance the castle's defences, they also provided an excellent opportunity for a mill. A mill lade was cut from a point some 500ft upstream of the castle, from where it passed around the east side of the castle, through the area of land that now lies between Balnellen Road and the A93 (away to the right of this shot). The mill stood a little to the north of the present bridge over the river (just beyond the distant cottage with the 2 dormer windows). The mill lade of course, also helped enhance the eastern defences of the castle.
There is evidence that the original bridge across the Water of Clunie, was a little to the south of the present bridge, and appears to have entered directly into the castle precinct.
Signs beside the castle ruins state that there are two quite different periods of construction evident at Kindrochit - a later castle built within an earlier one if you like. The source quoted for much of the sign-writer's information, is a report on his 1925 excavations, by Dr W. Douglas Simpson. While archaeological opinions may have changed in the intervening years, it is notable that this report (which I have) does not agree with what the sign-writers wrote, despite being quoted by them! Two sections of Douglas Simpson's report read as follows:
"The masonry of the castle is exceedingly stout. A heartening of stones of all sizes, grouted in run lime, is cased by large undressed "heathens" or surface boulders, some of which are 2 feet or more in diameter. In some places the fallen masonry lies in great masses, in which stone and lime cohere as firmly as ever. The style of the work is typical of the fourteenth and fifteenth century castles in Aberdeenshire, marked by the very free use of mortar in filling the interstices between the large irregular stones. Small flat pinnings inserted horizontally, which are so characteristic a feature in sixteenth-century work, are here totally absent."
"The uniform thickness and construction of the walls suggest strongly that the whole of the remains now existing belong to one period and straightforward effort of building." He goes on later to say "The plan rather suggests the type of castle erected after the War of Independence, when square tower-houses with appended courtyards came into vogue. At the same time, the simplicity of the structure, the great thickness of its walls, and above all the style of masonry, indicate a date comparatively early within this period. Generally, the castle recalls the greater-strongholds of the fourteenth-century, such as Threave, Dundonald, or Torthorwald. With such conclusions the ascertained history of the castle fully agrees."
Kindrochit Castle
This photo was taken looking northward along Balnellen Road and the east side of the remains of Kindrochit Castle.
Not only did the waters of the Clunie, hurrying through its gorge to the west, enhance the castle's defences, they also provided an excellent opportunity for a mill. A mill lade was cut from a point some 500ft upstream of the castle, from where it passed around the east side of the castle, through the area of land that now lies between Balnellen Road and the A93 (away to the right of this shot). The mill stood a little to the north of the present bridge over the river (just beyond the distant cottage with the 2 dormer windows). The mill lade of course, also helped enhance the eastern defences of the castle.
There is evidence that the original bridge across the Water of Clunie, was a little to the south of the present bridge, and appears to have entered directly into the castle precinct.
Signs beside the castle ruins state that there are two quite different periods of construction evident at Kindrochit - a later castle built within an earlier one if you like. The source quoted for much of the sign-writer's information, is a report on his 1925 excavations, by Dr W. Douglas Simpson. While archaeological opinions may have changed in the intervening years, it is notable that this report (which I have) does not agree with what the sign-writers wrote, despite being quoted by them! Two sections of Douglas Simpson's report read as follows:
"The masonry of the castle is exceedingly stout. A heartening of stones of all sizes, grouted in run lime, is cased by large undressed "heathens" or surface boulders, some of which are 2 feet or more in diameter. In some places the fallen masonry lies in great masses, in which stone and lime cohere as firmly as ever. The style of the work is typical of the fourteenth and fifteenth century castles in Aberdeenshire, marked by the very free use of mortar in filling the interstices between the large irregular stones. Small flat pinnings inserted horizontally, which are so characteristic a feature in sixteenth-century work, are here totally absent."
"The uniform thickness and construction of the walls suggest strongly that the whole of the remains now existing belong to one period and straightforward effort of building." He goes on later to say "The plan rather suggests the type of castle erected after the War of Independence, when square tower-houses with appended courtyards came into vogue. At the same time, the simplicity of the structure, the great thickness of its walls, and above all the style of masonry, indicate a date comparatively early within this period. Generally, the castle recalls the greater-strongholds of the fourteenth-century, such as Threave, Dundonald, or Torthorwald. With such conclusions the ascertained history of the castle fully agrees."