Record Details

NHER Number:45242
Type of record:Monument
Name:Site of possible Roman camp

Summary

A possible Roman camp is visible as a cropmarks on aerial photographs. The square enclosure is defined by a relatively substantial ditch and inner palisade; the principal entrance is on its east side. Its dimensions and regular shape, which includes rounded ‘playing card’ corners, is reminiscent of Roman camps, but it lacks the distinctive entrance defences typical of such sites. It could instead have been a settlement or farmstead, perhaps of Iron Age date, or even a medieval enclosure. To its east a possible second camp (perhaps a practice camp) is visible (NHER 35243). In the surrounding area, fragments of an earlier (possibly Bronze Age or Iron Age) field system is evident (NHER 45244), as well as less coherent cropmarks of varying dates, including post medieval field boundaries (NHER 30320). The site lies on an area of low-lying ground, just above the upper reaches of the River Ant, which surrounds it on its west side. Whether it was a military camp or a settlement, it seems probable that it was deliberately sited to take advantage of this topographic position.

Images - none

Location

Grid Reference:TG 3427 2889
Map Sheet:TG32NW
Parish:EAST RUSTON, NORTH NORFOLK, NORFOLK

Full description

March 2007. Norfolk NMP.
The cropmarks described below were previously recorded as part of NHER 30320.

A substantial, undated, square enclosure is visible as a cropmark on aerial photographs (S1), centred at TG 3425 2885. Its dimensions and its square plan with rounded corners suggest that it might represent a Roman military camp; it fits, for example, within the smaller end of the range demonstrated by Welfare and Swan’s 1995 inventory of such sites (S2). Crucially, however, it lacks the standard entrance defences typical of such sites, as illustrated in Wilson 2000 (S3); a ring-ditch-like feature at the principal entrance to the enclosure, centrally positioned along its east side (at TG 3429 2887), could be a defensive feature, similar to a double clavicula, or could merely be geological in origin. It is also not entirely regular in plan (the west side is concave, for example), which although not enough on its own to rule out a Roman military origin, does add weight to the suggestion that other interpretations might be more likely. Similarly, although internal palisades or revetments are known from other sites, such as Stanway, Essex (Wilson 1977 (S4)) its presence is an unusual feature. Alternatively, the enclosure might represent a settlement or farmstead, perhaps of Iron Age date (compare fig. 57d in (S3)) or even a site of medieval date.

Whatever its origin, the enclosure seems to have been deliberately sited on ground just above the upper reaches of the River Ant, which surrounds the whole of its western side. It is approximately square in shape, and measures 87m by 81m externally and 78m by 72m internally (within the palisade). As well as the entrance on the east side, there is a probable entrance on the west side, near the southwest corner (at TG 3422 2882), although a ditch is faintly visible within it, suggesting that it was not a permanent feature (the same may also be true of the eastern entrance). A kink halfway along the western side (at TG 3421 2884) may mark the site of a third, temporary entrance; its positioning almost opposite the eastern entrance would be typical of a Roman camp. The cropmark of a possible small, internal enclosure conjoined with the southeast corner is not entirely convincing as an archaeological feature.

The postulated camp is surrounded by a variety of other cropmarks. Some are probably contemporary features; these principally comprise conjoined linear ditches to the east, north and west which share the enclosure’s orientation. They may represent trackways and/or field boundaries, suggesting either that this was a relatively permanent establishment (ie. not a practice camp; the possible alterations to the entrances also suggest the site was relatively long-lived) or that it remained a significant feature in the landscape for a considerable period of time. A large pit-like cropmark to the west (at TG 3420 2886) may also be contemporary. Other cropmarks, visible to the east, include fragments of a possibly earlier field system (NHER 45244) and a possible second square enclosure or camp (NHER 45243). A curvilinear ditch which overlies the southwest corner of the ‘camp’ corresponds with a field boundary depicted on East Ruston Tithe Map (S5).

It should be noted that due to an inadequate number of control points, rectification of the aerial photographs was poor, and this may have had a detrimental effect on the accuracy of the mapping.
S. Tremlett (NMP), 27 March 2007.

Monument Types

  • ENCLOSURE (Unknown date)
  • FIELD BOUNDARY? (Unknown date)
  • PALISADE (Unknown date)
  • PIT (Unknown date)
  • SQUARE ENCLOSURE (Unknown date)
  • TRACKWAY? (Unknown date)
  • FARMSTEAD? (Iron Age - 800 BC to 42 AD)
  • FIELD BOUNDARY? (Iron Age - 800 BC to 42 AD)
  • PALISADE (Iron Age - 800 BC to 42 AD)
  • PIT (Iron Age - 800 BC to 42 AD)
  • SETTLEMENT? (Iron Age - 800 BC to 42 AD)
  • SQUARE ENCLOSURE (Iron Age - 800 BC to 42 AD)
  • TRACKWAY? (Iron Age - 800 BC to 42 AD)
  • FIELD BOUNDARY? (Roman - 43 AD to 409 AD)
  • FORTLET (Roman - 43 AD to 409 AD)
  • MILITARY CAMP (Roman - 43 AD to 409 AD)
  • PALISADE (Roman - 43 AD to 409 AD)
  • PIT (Roman - 43 AD to 409 AD)
  • SQUARE ENCLOSURE (Roman - 43 AD to 409 AD)
  • TEMPORARY CAMP? (Roman - 43 AD to 409 AD)
  • TRACKWAY? (Roman - 43 AD to 409 AD)
  • FIELD BOUNDARY? (Medieval - 1066 AD to 1539 AD)
  • PALISADE (Medieval - 1066 AD? to 1539 AD?)
  • PIT (Medieval - 1066 AD to 1539 AD)
  • SQUARE ENCLOSURE (Medieval - 1066 AD? to 1539 AD?)
  • TRACKWAY? (Medieval - 1066 AD to 1539 AD)

Associated Finds - none

Protected Status

  • SHINE

Sources and further reading

<S1>Oblique Aerial Photograph: Edwards, D.A. (NLA). 1995. NHER TG 3428D-H (NLA 355/JEC5-8, 14) 02-AUG-1995.
<S2>Monograph: Welfare, H. & Swan, V.. 1995. Roman Camps in England: The Field Archaeology.. Fig 6.
<S3>Monograph: Wilson, D.R.. 2000. Air Photo Interpretation for Archaeologists.. Fig 56.
<S4>Article in Serial: Wilson, D.R.. 1977. A first-century fort near Gosbecks, Essex.. Brittannia. Vol 8, pp 185-187. Pl xiii.
<S5>Map: James Wright. 1841. East Ruston Tithe Map.

Related records

45243Related to: Site of possible square enclosure or Roman practice camp (Monument)

Find out more...

Norfolk County Council logo Heritage Lottery Fund logo

Powered by HBSMR-web and the HBSMR Gateway from exeGesIS SDM Ltd, and mojoPortal CMS
© 2007 - 2024 Norfolk Historic Environment Service