Is this how a Pictish fort looked 1,000 years ago?

[Imperial Dave]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-59121017

interesting...

[Duncan Head]

Very nice indeed.

[aligern]

Indeed, though the problem with promontory forts would be that they are relatively easy to besiege , there being only one way out. ( if the cliff is enough to deter an opponent landing its probably not that easy fir tge defenders to cross.
Roy

[Erpingham]

Though a well-prepared, well stocked promentary fort might be better equipped to endure than army of the period with somewhat ad hoc logistics.  Just sit and wait till they get hungry, disease breaks out or they fall out and go home.  Or your relief force from elsewhere in the kingdom appears in the bay, turning the besiegers' flank.

[aligern]

Having only one exit considerably reduces the stress on the besieger.  As to sitting there for a long time, it didn't daunt the Vikings at Alt Cluidh.
Roy

[RichT]

I have always assumed that the purpose of these sorts of forts is to prevent raids and assaults rather than to withstand a formal siege - for this, sea and cliffs are ideal. As a place to live, it must have been pretty miserable.

Though I also wonder to what extent the location of a fort (or other fortified structure) is chosen because it looks defensible, rather than because (on careful analysis of the pros and cons) it is defensible. The visuals of fortified positions are I think somewhat underrated.

(Edit - as the article says, it 'was built to be "dramatic and imposing".)

[Erpingham]

Having only one exit considerably reduces the stress on the besieger.  As to sitting there for a long time, it didn't daunt the Vikings at Alt Cluidh.
Roy

While not familiar with the siege of Alt Cluidh, I'm not sure that the Viking approach was always so patient, nor that Early Medieval raiding forces were usually able (or even inclined) to sit down in one place and starve the inhabitants out.  As Richard said, the impressive, impenetrable appearance may discourage any attempt (I know, lets look for a softer target like that monastery down the coast) unless treachery or surprise was in play.

[Imperial Dave]

the gate is the weakest point on a fort

[Nick Harbud]

Except, perhaps, for Caernarfon Castle with no less than 6 portcullisses?

[Imperial Dave]

flashy....

[Erpingham]

The gate of the reconstruction is rather vague but looks quite weak - no towers or walkways, just what a presumably wooden gates in wide spaces.  I can't see anything that would allow flanking shooting or overhead missiles, except by people balanced on the exposed wall ends.  This may be the archaeologists being unclear what was happening in the area and placing it in a hazy distant view, of course

[Imperial Dave]

needs a good military historian to add chrome.....

[Anton]

That one's worth seeing, thanks Dave.   

On supply for the defenders, no doubt resources were concentrated there and supply by sea possible.  There is also the effect of tides for attackers to mull. The amount of labour required to build such fortifications  should also be considered.