Conclusion and Discussion

The excavation of the Geodha Smoo Caves resulted in the identification of complex archaeological deposits and the recovery of valuable artefactual and environmental evidence. Optimum preservation levels were encountered, with animal bones and organic artifacts plentiful in a number of deposits. The presence of archaeological deposits in the three caves described here and in SmooCave itself clearly indicate the importance of this coastal location in the past. Prehistoric activity is evidenced by the deposits in the Wetweather Cave but the majority of the evidence, from all of the other caves, indicates their use during the Norse period.

Despite its confirmed occurrence in only one of the, caves (but see Pollard 1992), the discovery of prehistoric activity in the Wetweather Cave is of some considerable importance. Our present understanding of the extent and character of prehistoric, and indeed later, settlement in this extreme northwest corner of Scotland is limited, with very little fieldwork so far carried out in the area; a rare exception being Reld's survey of prehistoric monuments in the Dumess area (1967). The prehistoric utilisation of coastal caves and marine resources in the northern fringes of mainland Scotland should perhaps come as no surprise and the patterns of activity evidenced may bare some similarity to those envisaged for the west coast of Scotland (Pollard 1994).

The evidence from the other caves clearly indicates that marine resources continued to play an important role in the historic period. The deposits within the Glassknapper's Cave strongly suggest that the Norse, in an area characterised by an exposed coastline regularly battered by heavy seas, regarded the Geodha Smoo as an important natural harbour. There is also place name evidence (Fraser 1995, 94) to suggest a Norse presence, with the name Smoo perhaps having its origins in the Norse Smúga (rift, cleft, cave).

In common with other northern Scottish sites, the presence of quantities of large fish bones in the Glassknapper's Cave suggests that deep sea fishing played an important role in the Norse economy. The importance of boats is further emphasis by the presence of rivets and metal slag, both of which indicate the repair of boats. It is difficult to say whether this activity merely represents onecomponent of a more complex Norse archaeological landscape, with settlements situated in reasonably close proximity to the caves. If this were the case then the caves may relate to the daily practice of marine exploitation, representing the place at which fish were landed and processed before being transported to the settlement, balt (shellfísh?) prepared and boats maintained. However, as yet, no Norse settlements have been identified in this area, although the recovery of a Norse burial from the sand dunes at Balnakeil some 4 km to the northwest (Dorothy Low pers comm) does suggest that activity was not confined to the caves and their immediate environs. As with the case of prehistoric settlement, our under-standing of Norse actively along this part of the northern coast of mainland Scotland requires a more intensive programme of research. Excavations at Freswick Links and Robert's Haven have provided physical evidence for the Norse presence in Caithness suggested by a proliferation of Norse place names. More recently small scale excavation at Dunnet Bay, some 75km to the east of Smoo, has revealed the presence of a Norse settlement on the northern coast of Caithness (Pollard 1996). It remains to be seen whether this settlement pattern extends as far west as Smoo or whether the deposits in the caves were merely the results of temporary stop-over by Norse mariners on their voyages from Scandinavia and the Northern Isles to the Western Isles and more southerly destinations such as Ireland and the Isle of Man.

In the absence of further evidence this latter hypothesis is an attractive one, with the sheltered Geodha and the caves providing the ideal location in which to carry out repairs on boats, which may have suffered damage in heavy seas, the beach allowing boats to be hauled ashore if necessary. This 'port in a storm' would also provide the opportunity to process fish caught on the voyage and toprocure other foodstuffs, both wild and domestic, from the immediate environs of the caves. Although the deposits in both the GKC and AC were of considerable depth they may have resulted from regular visits, perhaps several times a year, and thus may have built up quite rapidly, perhaps over a period no longer than one or two hundred years. Despite the fact that much of the activity does appear to relate to Norse activity the potential for earlier (perhaps Iron Age) and later (Medieval and post Medieval) phases of use should not be overlooked. It is hoped that radiocarbon dating will help to clarify these chronological issues. Only with the completion of a full post-excavation programmed will we begin to more fully understand the archaeological implications of the deposits reported here. However, in the meantime, it is hoped that this report has served to demonstrate the rich potential of these sites.