78 Antiquities of Girthon. 



at least for the latter, but I do uot kuow what it is, and in the 

 absence of any authoritative statement I am disposed to accept 

 the suggestion made by Sir Herbert Maxwell in his recently 

 published " Histoiy of Dumfries and Galloway." " From Kirk- 

 cudbright," he says, '• the King " {i.e., Edward I. in the year 1300) 

 " advanced as far as Cally, where his sojourn is perhaps commemo- 

 rated in the name of a field on Enrick, called Palace Yard." 



The present state of the ground is, I think, what we might 

 expect on the site of a royal camp, for Edward resided in the parish 

 for some days, fined the miller, and made an offering at the altar 

 of the church. But in that case it is, of course, difficult to account 

 for the " ruined edifice," the " arched gate," &c. (if they ever 

 existed), for these all point to a structure of a more permanent 

 character. 



There are several remains of what have been apparently 

 ancient fortifications, but of what periods I am not able to say. 

 On Enrick, for instance, and within sight of Palace Yard, there 

 are traces of what is reported to have been a clearly defined 

 Roman camp. It has been very nearly obliterated by agricultural 

 operations. 



Within Cally grounds there is a square fortification of no 

 great extent, surrounded by a ditch, which I take to have been 

 British. 



Opposite Barlae Mill there is a place on some rising ground, 

 which appears to have been " improved " at some distant date for 

 purposes of defence, and the miller reports that small balls of 

 some hard substance have once or twice been discovered on the 

 slope, a little under the surface. 



Castramont, two miles further up the same road, is a tempting- 

 subject, but I really do not feel competent to say much about 

 it. The name, of course, points at once to a Roman camp, but 

 the etymology is just too easy. I am inclined to think that in 

 its present form it is a fancy name of comparatively modern 

 origin. It may be, of course, a revival of the true ancient name, 

 but in the Session Records, under date December 3rd, 1701 (the 

 earliest I can find), it is written " Carstramin." I cannot find 

 " Castramont " until the present century, and I am inclined to 

 think that form has been invented or resuscitated (1) for the sake 

 of euphony, and (2) from an idea that it gives better sense than 

 the old " Carstramin." Sir Herbert Maxwell does uot accept the 



