Publication Account

Date 17 December 2011

Event ID 923974

Category Descriptive Accounts

Type Publication Account

Permalink http://canmore.org.uk/event/923974

The Roman fort on Bar Hill was excavated between 1902 and 1905. During these excavations, what was interpreted as an ‘Early Fort’ was uncovered lying underneath the Antonine Fort (Macdonald and Park 1906: 11–15). The site of the fort itself lies on the top of Bar Hill, at the highest point for any fort on the Antonine Wall. Just to the east lies the presumed Iron Age fort on Castle Hill, but the site commands good views to the north as well as along the Antonine Wall to east and west.

The first excavations of that ‘Early Fort’ recorded its unusual plan, much of which can be traced on the ground today as a shallow depression: an inner rectangular enclosure measuring about 58m from north-east to southwest by 49m, enclosing some 0.28ha (0.7 acres); an annexe to the south-west; and outer ditches on the south-east, north-east and north-west sides, with part of the northwest side undetected. The inner enclosure has a single entrance gap in the centre of the north-east side, and there is a staggered entrance to the north of this in the outer ditch. The excavations on the line of the ditch confirmed that it was V-shaped, ranging in width from 2.4m to 3.3m and in depth from 1.1m to 1.4m. The excavators noted that the absence of finds suggested a brief occupation; and the presence of about 0.6m of silt in the ditches prior to the building of the fort suggested that the site had long been abandoned. This led to the interpretation of the siteas one of the Agricolan praesidia on the Forth and Clyde isthmus (Macdonald and Park 1906: 15, 129–30). (It was a further 70 years before the probable Flavian fortlet of Mollins was discovered by aerial survey, about 4km due south of Bar Hill (RCAHMS 1978a: 160).)

Excavations between 1978 and 1982 by Keppie agreed with the outline of the ‘fortlet’ but did not agree with its interpretation as a Flavian outpost. Steer had earlier noted that the site might relate to the construction of the Antonine Wall owing to its similarity to other Antonine sites, including the fortlet at Duntocher (1960: 90). Feachem suggested that the remains may represent Iron Age activity, although this has not generally garnered favour (Robertson et al 1975: 8; Keppie 1985: 52). Keppie’s excavations gave similar ditch dimensions to those noted earlier, of 2m in width and 1.2m in depth on the south side, although this was not consistent throughout and the ditch was recorded as U-shaped and unusual in places. A rampart of yellow clay was also recorded on the southeast side, some 2.2m in width and 0.2m in height. In addition, various activities were noted in the interior that were assumed to be contemporary with the ‘fortlet’, including areas of burning (with a hearth of at least two periods) and areas of cobbling. A depression and channel cut through its rampart to reach the ditch, and Roman pot lids of Antonine date, as well as fragments of Iron Age pottery and hobnails, were recovered from this feature. The ditches were deliberately filled with turf and hawthorn brushwood, probably when the Antonine fort was under construction.

The ‘fortlet’ is generally interpreted as a construction camp for the Wall (Robertson and Keppie 2001: 93) or a semi-permanent Antonine site housing perhaps the garrison for a nearby (as yet undiscovered) fortlet (also see Croy Hill) (Hanson and Maxwell 1986: 120). No Flavian finds have been found on the Hill.

One further possibility should be noted – that this enclosure, sited on the highest point of the Wall close to the midpoint, could have housed a garrison engaged in surveying the Wall, with perhaps another garrison housed at the nearby enclosure underneath the fort on Croy Hill, some 3km to the east.

R H Jones.