ANCIENT EARTHWORKS 



INTRODUCTION 



Notwithstanding that much attention has in recent years been devoted 

 to the study of ancient earthworks and defensive enclosures in Britain, it is 

 impossible to classify them in perfect chronological order ; nor is there any 

 hope of accomplishing this desirable end until careful and scientific exploration 

 is made and properly recorded. 



Certain works can, however, be assigned to more or less definite periods ; 

 for example, fortresses which have yielded evidence of construction by men 

 of the stone age when the use of metal implements was unknown; enclosures 

 proved to be of the age when bronze had largely supplanted stone as the 

 material for making weapons of war and implements for everyday use; camps 

 in the ramparts of which have been found proofs that men had learned some- 

 thing of the use of the great civilising agent iron; and passing to the historic 

 period, Roman stations and mediaeval strongholds ; but the gaps are wide, the 

 story overlaps, and in the majority of cases we must wait the result of adequate 

 examination with pick and shovel. 



Recognizing our limitations, it is preferable to adopt the Scheme 1 pub- 

 lished by the Congress of Archaeological Societies, and classify the defensive 

 enclosures of a district by form rather than to attempt a strict chronological 

 order, bearing in mind the recognized exceptions to which reference has just 

 been made. 



A. At many points on the coast line of Britain are found promontory 

 fortresses constructed either by landing parties of enemies as bases for offensive 

 warfare, or by the inhabitants as defensive shelters to check invaders and 

 protect themselves. Whence arises the fact that Durham yields no such 

 coast examples ? Owing to the nature of the rocks forming the coast, erosion 

 is not likely to have been sufficient to destroy any defensive works on the 

 cliff summits, and we must look for a different reason for their absence. Two 

 large rivers pour their waters into the sea the Tyne on the north, the Tees 

 on the south, while the Wear has a lesser but still considerable debouchment. 



' The following classification u recommended in the Scheme and its Appendix : 



A. Fortresses partly inaccessible, by reason of precipices, cliffs, or water, additionally defended by 



artificial works, usually known as promontory fortresses. 



B. Fortresses on hill-tops with artificial defences, following the natural line of the hill ; or, though 



usually on high ground, less dependent on natural slopes for protection. 



C. Rectangular or other simple enclosures, including forts and towns of the Romano-British period. 



D. Forts consisting only of a mount with encircling ditch or fosse. 



E. Fortified mounts, either artificial or partly natural, with traces of an attached court or bailey, or of 



two or more such courts. 



F. Homestead moats, such as abound in some lowland districts, consisting of simple enclosures formed 



into artificial islands by water moats. 



G. Enclosures, mostly rectangular, partaking of the form of F, but protected by stronger defensive works, 



ramparted and fosscd, and in some instances provided with outworb. 

 H. Ancient village sites protected by walls, ramparts, or fosses. 

 X. Defensive works which fall under none of these headings. 



343 



