Historic archaeological find in Scottish loch go on display
It was discovered in 1979 when an Iron Age loch dwelling house, known as the Oakbank Crannog, was excavated.
(Image: Martin Shields) It is now on public display for the first time at the Scottish Crannog Centre's Iron Age village, visitor centre and museum, on the banks of Loch Tay.
The textile was previously thought to be too fragile to go on show but it has now gone through a painstaking stabilisation and conservation process, funded by Museums Galleries Scotland.
It is on display from Wednesday and is being housed safely in a climate-controlled cabinet.
READ MORE: Elon Musk to reduce role at Doge as Tesla struggles to sell cars
Mike Benson, director of the Scottish Crannog Centre, said: 'We are absolutely thrilled to be able to invite the public to come and see this amazing find.
'This piece would have been made by a whole community, from the shearing of the sheep, to the processing and dyeing of the wool, to the weaving of the textile.
'Our centre today is very much about community and the one thing that unites all of us is our common humanity through the ages.
'We're really looking forward to finding out what people make of this rare textile, which is part of our past but also a hugely important part of our present and future.
'We hope people will be drawn to see this exhibit, and the rest of our extensive collection, for years to come.'
Scottish Crannog Centre (Image: Martin Shields) The fabric, known as the Oakbank Textile, has been analysed by archaeologists at the University of Glasgow who have radiocarbon dated the material to between 480 and 390BC.
Dr Susanna Harris, senior lecturer in archaeology at the university, said: 'There are very few early textiles of this date and we think this is the first one of this type, of 2/1 twill, in Scotland.
'Wool was such an important material in Scotland, it's been exciting to analyse this piece.
'It's great that the Scottish Crannog Centre has taken this step. It's really important finds like this go on display. It may be a small piece of textile but it tells us a lot about the heritage of Scottish textiles.'
READ MORE: Reform UK attack 'Scottish political class' over exclusion from anti-far-right summit
Crannogs were dwelling houses built on stilts or stone over water and usually had a bridge connecting them to the shore.
The first crannogs in Scotland were built on lochs from Neolithic times and very few are said to exist outside of Scotland and Ireland.
The centre's reconstructed crannog was destroyed in a fire in 2021.
Last year the Scottish Crannog Centre reopened to visitors on a new and enlarged site near Kenmore and the team are well on the way to completing a new crannog using sustainable and historical construction methods.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scotsman
2 days ago
- Scotsman
How these changes to Sitka spruce plantations could help improve biodiversity in Scotland
'Blocky mixes' are being put forward as an option according to a new report. Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... A new report has found how the most common conifer plantation can be managed in a more biodiversity-friendly way long-term. Sitka spruce dominates the forestry sector, with the non-native tree making up about half of Scottish woodlands. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad There have been concerns the plantations are less resilient to disease, severe weather and longer-term climatic shifts. The visual impact of the 'serried ranks' on the landscape and the lack of species diversity under its dense canopy have also been noted as issues. Sitka spruce is the most common conifer in Scotland | JHI Diversification of woodlands is fairly common now, with the Scottish Government only allowing up to 65 per cent of one tree variety in a woodland to avoid climate and disease related problems. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad There can be issues, however, with some native broadleaves being unable to grow long-term with Sitka. It is why some researchers have suggested planting natives in 'blocky mixes' among the plantations. A new paper from the DiversiTree project, a collaborative project aimed at increasing woodland resilience through greater tree species diversity, began the study identifying 564 species (12 birds, 147 bryophytes, 28 non-lichen-forming fungi, 123 invertebrates, 243 lichens and 11 mammals) which use the Sitka spruce for feeding or as a living space. However, many of these are non-specialists and can survive on a wide range of trees. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The authors then assessed 34 tree species which could be planted with Sitka spruce for their impacts on both biodiversity and ecosystem function. This included checking their leaf litter decomposition traits, influence on the soil and leaf litter chemistry, as well as their ability to grow alongside Sitka spruce, support Sitka spruce-associated species and nurture additional biodiversity. Authors said mixing Sitka forests with oak, sycamore, Scots pine, birch, beech and Norway spruce would provide the greatest biodiversity benefits, supporting both the species found on Sitka spruce and additional biodiversity not currently found in these forests. However, the study explained all these tree species, except sycamore, are unable to grow in the long-term when planted in mixtures with Sitka spruce. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad This is when authors suggested 'blocky mixes' - small blocks of single tree species which connect the forest like a patchwork quilt. They claimed this would help diversify Sitka spruce plantations without major impact to timber production. The paper said more research is needed to decide the optimal size and arrangement of these 'blocks.' Dr Ruth Mitchell of JHI | JHI Dr Ruth Mitchell, a plant soil ecologist at the James Hutton Institute and the paper's lead author, said: 'As our forestry adapts to a changing climate and new tree pests and pathogens, it is crucial that we understand how this may impact forest associated biodiversity. 'This work shows how diversification of our Sitka spruce plantations with other tree species can bring many biodiversity benefits." Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Forestry leaders insist Scotland needs to increase its timber production, often citing the UK being the second largest importer of timber products in the world.
The Independent
2 days ago
- The Independent
SpaceX goes back to drawing board over its ambitious rocket for Mars
SpaceX has unveiled a radical redesign of its Starship rocket following several failed flight attempts. The Super Heavy booster will now feature three larger and stronger grid fins, replacing one key landing fin, to improve vehicle control and enable new catch mechanisms. This redesign follows the most recent test flight in May, where the booster crashed into the Gulf of Mexico and the main Starship exploded over the Indian Ocean. Elon Musk endorsed the simplification, stating, "Best part is no part," in reference to the design changes. The next critical test flight, Flight 10, is anticipated as early as this weekend, with maritime warnings issued for 16 August, as SpaceX continues its ambitious plans for Mars missions.
The Guardian
2 days ago
- The Guardian
Trump's space order risks environmental disaster while rewarding Musk and Bezos, experts say
A draft executive order from Donald Trump that aims to largely exempt space launches from environmental review is viewed as a gift to commercial space industry players such as Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos and others who have long targeted the regulations. But its central components may be illegal and the US president 'is trying to do an end run around' the law, said Jared Margolis, an attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity, which has litigated environmental issues around launches. If successfully implemented, the launches could create an environmental disaster, advocates say. Rocket launches create a huge amount of pollution that can contaminate local waterways and air with high levels of mercury, Pfas, particulate matter and other highly toxic substances. The vibration, sound waves, heat and explosions damage habitat and kill wildlife, some of which are protected by the Endangered Species Act. The executive order directs the US transportation department to 'use all available authorities to eliminate or expedite' environmental reviews. Among the few protections during space launches is the National Environmental Policy Act (Nepa) review that considers a wide range of impacts on the environment and human health, and the Coastal Zone Management Act, a federal law that allows states to decide how coastlines are used. The order targets both, and suggests the agency could attempt to circumvent the Endangered Species Act. 'The order is directing the transportation department to do whatever they can to avoid Nepa, but it doesn't mean that's possible, or that they have the authority to do so,' Margolis said. The executive order comes at a time when commercial space activity is spiking. Musk's SpaceX, the largest space company, did 96 launches in 2023, and is targeting 180 this year. That number is expected to continue growing, while other players, like Bezos's Blue Horizon, are quickly increasing launch rates. The US federal government's environmental oversight of the launches has always been weak, public health advocates say. The Trump administration quickly hobbled several of the few regulatory mechanisms that existed, and recently gutted funding for research into stratospheric pollution largely caused by Musk's SpaceX. 'We're accelerating the number of launches and blinding ourselves to the follow-up effects that they have on the environment – that spells disaster,' said a space industry employee who does work around Nepa issues, but requested anonymity to talk about the order without retribution. Space companies must obtain a launch permit from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), which does a Nepa review as part of the process. The reviews are the framework by which federal agencies should assess a project's environmental or human health risks. The best public interest journalism relies on first-hand accounts from people in the know. If you have something to share on this subject you can contact us confidentially using the following methods. Secure Messaging in the Guardian app The Guardian app has a tool to send tips about stories. Messages are end to end encrypted and concealed within the routine activity that every Guardian mobile app performs. This prevents an observer from knowing that you are communicating with us at all, let alone what is being said. If you don't already have the Guardian app, download it (iOS/Android) and go to the menu. Select 'Secure Messaging'. SecureDrop, instant messengers, email, telephone and post If you can safely use the tor network without being observed or monitored you can send messages and documents to the Guardian via our SecureDrop platform. Finally, our guide at lists several ways to contact us securely, and discusses the pros and cons of each. They take into consideration air pollution, endangered species harms, water pollution, wildfire risk, noise pollution and potential human health risks, among other issues. The FAA has faced criticism from space companies for taking too long to review launch permits – about five months – while environmental groups have lambasted the agency for not using Nepa reviews to require more protections at launch sites. The executive order in part directs the department to classify the launches as 'categorical exclusions', which is the legal term for minor changes to a site that do not require a Nepa environmental review. Among other categorical exclusions are landscaping or lighting alterations. Legal experts who reviewed the order questioned the legality of the claim that a rocket launch has similar environmental impacts to landscaping changes. The plan 'fits with their overall desire to eliminate environmental considerations and reviews', said Dan Farber, an environmental law attorney with the University of California, Berkeley. 'Clearly what Trump wants to do is bulldoze through all this procedural stuff,' Farber added. However, there is a more legally plausible route. The Commercial Space Launch Act does include a provision that allows the transportation secretary to attempt to exempt requirements of environmental law if it is determined that the law is not necessary to protect the 'public health and the safety of property', Margolis said. That would be accomplished through a legal rulemaking process. But the provision is in conflict with Nepa, which applies to any federal action that has significant environmental impact, Margolis said. 'We would argue that review is necessary to protect public health and safety, and Nepa applies,' he added. The Nepa reviews provide a valuable legal avenue for challenges to the worst abuses, and Margolis said the order seems to be a response to arguments he made in which the Center for Biological Diversity sued several federal agencies and SpaceX over launches from the Boca Chica, Texas launch site on the Gulf of Mexico. The site sits next to a sensitive habitat for protected species, like the Kemp's ridley sea turtle, which is on the brink of extinction. SpaceX has launched the largest rockets ever made from the site, and several of those exploded, raining down particulate matter, metal and concrete across the region. The debris caused brush fires and covered homes six miles away in dust. Sound waves from launches have been known to kill birds and other animals, and SpaceX has been cited by state environmental regulators in Texas for spitting wastewater highly contaminated with mercury into adjacent waters. Still, the FAA has done little to mitigate the damage to the environment, and claimed the issues did not warrant an in-depth review. Margolis said SpaceX, with the FAA's blessing, had turned the ecologically sensitive area into a 'sacrifice zone', and the litigation is ongoing. The order also seems designed to aid Musk in his fight with California state regulators who have so far stopped SpaceX from expanding the number of launches along the coastline, in part using their authority under the Coastal Zone Management Act. Trump's order would give federal authorities more power to intervene, and restrict state agencies' decision-making powers. Margolis said this part of the order was also illegal because Trump was again attempting to change the law by decree. 'It's a talking point to show he's supporting industry, but at the end of the day it's not something that can happen the way he says it can happen,' Margolis said.
