| Summary : A well-preserved multivallate hillfort presumably of Iron Age date, slightly oval in plan and with an internal area of 0.4ha, on the summit of Castle Hill, Alnham. The interior contains traces of three circular building platforms which may be contemporary with the ramparts. As Jobey first suggested, there is slight evidence for a univallate enclosure predating the hillfort proper in the form of a discontinuous low earthen bank in the interior. The hillfort proper appears to have originated in a second phase as a bivallate enclosure with substantial ramparts on all sides but no ditch on the west where the natural scarp is steep. There was certainly one entrance on the east and a second possible one on the south east. In the third phase, a third circuit, not quite concentric, was added to the exterior, again with no ditch on the west. There were certain entrances on the east and south east and possibly one on the west adjacent to the edge of the natural scarp. In the fourth phase, the east gateway was narrowed, and stretches of the outer rampart on either side of the south east entrance were massively enlarged. A stretch on the north west of the circuit was similarly enlarged. Whether this represents an unfinished modification or was intended to give an appearance of great strength on the two most visible and vulnerable sides is unclear, but the modification appears to predate Romano-British activity.Secondary, probably Romano-British, occupation in the interior and adjoining the exterior on the eastern side is recorded separately as NT 91 SE 344 and 17 respectively. All the settlement remains in the interior were formerly described as part of the record for the hillfort. Scheduled. |
More information : (NT 98001094) Camp (OE) Castle Hill. (1)
On the Castle Hill near Alnham, there is a fine circular camp with double ramparts, also circular enclosures within and larger enclosures in the east side. (2)
Multiple ramparts enclosing approx 1-1/4 acres. (3)
Type B2 (Forts on high ground less dependent on natural slopes for protection). (4)
Situated on the summit of a spur in rough pasture land at 944 feet above sea level, the earthwork has steep natural slopes on its south west side (gradient about 1:2). Elsewhere the slopes are less steep and there is some dead ground in the immediate vicinity. The view generally is good in all directions however. The earthwork has strong multiple defences which vary in construction and number according to the nature of the ground. In the south-east
quadrant are three ditches the outer of which has a strong inner bank. The ramparts on the north and west sides have been formed mainly by scarping the natural slopes - the spoil being used to form a bank on the top of the scarp. To the south, for a very short distance the ramparts are reduced to two in number. There are traces of a slight inner bank to the earthwork on this side too. The main entrance to the earthwork on the east side is somewhat oblique. Another well defined gap to the SE penetrates only the outer ditch and bank. On the west side the gap between the two outer banks widens suggesting that this area may have been a stock enclosure. A gap in the outer bank here, where the modern field wall crosses may represent an entrance to the enclosure. Traces of habitation are confined to the eastern part of the work where three hut circles and two possible hut circles are visible. Here too are traces of banks forming internal division. Also on the east side are three external rectilinear enclosures attached to the earthwork. These appear to be of later date than the main work and contemporary with a ploughed-down field bank - a part of which forms their eastern edge. Although the defensive situation is not ideal the number and strength of the ramparts indicate that this is a Hill Fort. A convenient supply of water would be obtainable from streams to the north east. (5)
Listed under pre-Roman I.A. multivallate, (forts, settlements and enclosures) with an overlying settlement of round stone huts.
"Existing, though not necessarily primary multivallate defences, have received an additional rampart and ditch" (in the south east). Plan indicates the north most entrance was the earlier of the two on this side. (6)
The sharp profile and more substantial nature of the outer defences on the south east side in comparison to the rest of the defences would suggest they were a later addition and that the entrance breaching them was of a contemporary date. Surveyed at 1:2500 and 1:10 000. (7)
On the crest of Castle Hill at 290m OD stands a multivallate hill fort overlooking the steep drop to the Spartley Burn to the W and S. On the other sides the ground falls less steeply and there is some dead ground but the fort is in a commanding position nevertheless, controlling the slight saddle which gives access from the head of the Aln valley into the Spartley Burn valley.
The fort has three lines of defence except for a short stretch on the SW side where the outer and middle ramparts have been amalgamated due to the steepness of the natural slope. The inner rampart consists mainly of an outward-facing scarp up to 3.0m high. In the SW quadrant only is a slight backscarp visible. The middle rampart is an earth bank 0.4-1.8m high internally and 1.0-2.2m high externally. The outer rampart is the most substantial, its inner face being up to 2.6m high and the outer face up to 4.0m high. An outer ditch is apparent on the S and E sides, 1.5m deep, and on the W side, up to 2.0m deep. There are three entrances through the outer rampart. That on the W has been mutilated but appears to be an original feature. It leads into a relatively wide intramural area which extends around the W and N sides of the fort. The other entrances, on the E side, form a wide-spaced double portal reminiscent of that at Low Chubden (NU 01 SW 8). It is noteable that the outer rampart is much higher in the immediate vicinity of the entrances than elsewhere; in the SE quadrant the outer rampart is so high as to overlook the middle and inner ramparts, though this may be due to later modification. There is only one entrance through the middle rampart and this is obliquely opposite the northernmost of the double portals on the E side. A slight bank, up to 1.2m high, on the berm between the middle and outer ramparts partly screens this entrance; this bank may be the remnant of an
earlier phase of outer rampart, as Jobey seems to imply (Authority 6, 26). The sole surviving entrance in the inner rampart is directly opposite that in the middle rampart. There are several internal features including five hut circles [a to e] on the E side of the fort, varying in diameter from 5-8m and with earthworks up to 0.4m high. Two of these buildings flank the entrance through the inner rampart. Two scarps [f and g] suggest internal divisions of the interior,
though Jobey believed them to result from the robbing of the inner rampart (6, 24, fig 1, and 26). A slight stony bank [h] overlies scarp [g] and the inner rampart and is a later boundary. A pond [j] is probably a recent feature.
On the E side of the fort outside the defences and between the paired portals are three small rectilinear enclosures. The banks which form them are up to 1.0m high and are attached to a low field bank [NT 9810/2]. These enclosures appear to be a late addition to the fort but the relationship is not certain. Jobey's argument that the outer rampart is a later addition (6, 26)
is attractive but firm evidence is lacking as it is not certain that the outer rampart is overlying the middle rampart where they conjoin. Jobey's claim that the northmost of the E entrances is
original and the southern a later breach (6, fig 1) is rejected on the grounds that the two appear to form a pair and to be part of a single design, though for what purpose remains obscure.
There are further details in the project archive. (8)
NT 980 109. Castle Hill, Alnham. Listed in a gazetteer of British hillforts as a multivallate structure enclosing 0.32ha. (9)
NT 980 110. Castle Hill camp. Scheduled No ND/43. (10)
NT 9800 1094 (FCE). Between May and June 2000, English Heritage carried out a detailed field investigation of the Iron Age hillfort on Castle Hill (NT 91 SE 9), together with an area of 16.1ha around it, following a request from the Northumberland National Park (Event record 1300646) (11).
The earthworks are essentially as described by previous investigators: a well-preserved multivallate hillfort presumably of Iron Age date, slightly oval in plan and with an internal area of 0.4ha, on the summit of Castle Hill. The interior contains traces of three circular building platforms which may be contemporary with the ramparts. As Jobey first suggested, there is slight evidence for a univallate enclosure predating the hillfort proper in the form of a discontinuous low earthen bank in the interior. The hillfort proper appears to have originated in a second phase as a bivallate enclosure with substantial ramparts on all sides but no ditch on the W where the natural scarp is steep. There was certainly one entrance on the E and a second possible one on the SE. In the third phase, a third circuit, not quite concentric, was added to the exterior, again with no ditch on the W. There were certain entrances on the E and SE and possibly one on the W adjacent to the edge of the natural scarp. In the fourth phase, the E gateway was narrowed, and stretches of the outer rampart on either side of the SE entrance were massively enlarged. A stretch on the NW of the circuit was similarly enlarged. Whether this represents an unfinished modification or was intended to give an appearance of great strength on the two most visible and vulnerable sides is unclear, but the modification appears to predate Romano-British activity.
Secondary, probably Romano-British, occupation in the interior, which was formerly described as part of the record for the hillfort, was allocated a new NMR number (NT 91 SE 344) to improve the record. Similar remains adjoining the exterior on the eastern side are also recorded separately as NT 91 SE 17.
For further information, see the Level 3 report on the field investigation, available through the NMR, which includes a full textual description and interpretation of the remains, copies of plans surveyed at various scales, selected photographs and interpretative drawings. (11)
|