| Summary : The site of a Roman vexillation fortress with defensive outworks at Newton on Trent. It was discovered in 1962, and probably dates from the Claudian period. The fort was discovered in the course of reconnaissance of the Trent valley in 1962 when the ditch-system on part of the north and east sides was visible. The site lies 9 1/2 miles west of Lincoln, at the north end of a ridge that rises to a height of some 70 ft on the east bank of the Trent. This is the highest ground close to the river for several miles and commands extensive views. Outside the fort to the east a number crop marks probably represents two temporary camps. Three sides of the double-ditched vexillation fortress are known; the fourth west side, if such existed, has been lost to river erosion. The area enclosed is likely to have been at least 12 ha (30 acres). There was a defensive outwork comprising a polygonal envelope of ditches on the three sides, with perhaps a simple gate on the north and south sides; on the east a more complex system, with staggered entrances, is discernible. |
More information : SK 824737. A Roman fort and temporary camp at Newton on Trent was discovered in 1962, and probably dates from the Claudian period. The fort was discovered in the course of reconnaissance of the Trent valley in 1962 when the ditch-system on part of the N and E sides was visible. Subsequent observation has added more to the plan; only the line of the W side which is under permanent pasture remains unknown. The site lies 9 1/2 miles W of Lincoln, at the N end of a ridge that rises to a height of some 70 ft on the E bank of the Trent. This is the highest ground close to the river for a good many miles, and thus commands very extensive views. The plan shows the line of the two ditches of the fort on the N, E and S sides, each with a gate. The proven area of the fort thus measures 1,000 ft from N to S, by at least 840 ft., within the ditches. If the N and S gates may be assumed to be centrally placed in their sides, then a strip of ground 200 ft wide should be added to the W side of the fort as shown on the plan, giving an E to W dimension of about 1,040 ft and area of 25 1/2 acres. This would mean that the fort was well placed on the crest of the ridge: a little of the area has now been lost by river-erosion at the SW angle.
Outside the fort to the E a number of lengths of ditch have been recorded in terms of crop marks (see photo). Though the system is manifestly incomplete, the plan leaves little doubt that the remains are those of a temporary camp, having gates where adjacent lengths of ditch overlap. If this camp lies symetrically across the ridge its area may be half as large again as that of the fort.
The area is so large as to place these far outside the range of forts garrisoned by auxiliary troops. The impression gained is that they are work of the same unit. Though not large enough to hold an entire legion, they would accommodate a considerable proportion of one. (1)
A denarius of "Cnaius Foulvius" c. 106 BC, was found by Mr B Minnit at c SK 824737, on the cliff overlooking the Trent. (2)
There are no surface indications of this site which falls partly on arable land at present under crop, and partly on pasture. Mr B Minnit of Church Laneham has seen building debris in the plough but no pottery. He said the coin was found by his son, and indicated the exact spot, within the fort, at SK 82297375. It is still in his possession. (3)
SK 824737. Further reconnaissance of the Roman fort at Newton on Trent, has established the N to S axis as 1125 ft in length within the ditches, and the E to W dimension is 1025 ft or a little more, if the north gate is not at the mid-point of its side. Only the line of the W defences remains unknown. The area will have been not less than 26 1/2 acres. (4)
Fortresses of this size are not sufficiently large for a whole legion, but would be adequate for a half-legion possibly brigaded with some auxiliary cavalry. Classified as a vexillation fortress. (5)
The consensus of opinion expresses by Frere, Riley and Jones regarding overlapping ditch systems is that they form outworks or outer ditches to early Roman military sites rather than evidence for earlier temporary camps. (6)
Scheduled as Roman fort and camp. Identified from air-photographs. (7)
This camp has been re-assessed in connection with RCHME's survey and publication of Roman Camps in England. The following descriptive account is taken from the published text.
Aerial recconnaisance has located fragments of two possible camps (see SK 87 SW 27 and 38) and a vexillation fortress with out works (St Joseph 1965, 74-5 (see auth 1); 1973, 214 (see auth 4); Bishop and Freeman 1993, 187-9 (8a)) on Newton Cliff, on the E bank of the River Trent. The fortress occupies an elevated position at the W end of a ridge, at 24 m above OD. The whole complex is sited on the highest ground close to the river in this region; it commands the present river-crossing at Dunham on Trent, and provides views south-wards along the Trent valley.
Three sides of the double-ditched vexillation fortress (SK 82367372) are known; the fourth, W, side, if such existed, has been lost to river erosion. The area enclosed is likely to have been at least 12 ha (30 acres). There was a defensive outwork comprising a polygonal envelope of ditches on the three sides, with perhaps a simple gate on the N and S sides; on the E a more complex system, with staggered entrances, is discernible. Nothing remains on the ground, except for a very slight rise on the line of the NW part of the inner defence close to a Second World War observation post. Wilson (1984, 58, 60, group 3 (8b)) has suggested that outworks of the kind seen around this fortress may plausibly be interpreted as a temporary defence for the construction party.
To the S of the fortress, two linear cropmarks seem to represent portions of the perimeters of two. They lie at 25 m above OD, on the S side of the slight hollow surrounding the high ground occupied by the fortress. Their position commands good views to the N, and particularly to the E, but to the S the line of sight is obscured by a rise.
The detailed topography here is not sufficiently striking to provide clues as to the approximate area enclosed by either camp. The overall position of the camps is markedly inferior to that of the fortress, suggesting that the construction of the fortress had had priority. Full information is included in the NMR Archive. (8)
Scheduled (9) |