Monument record 1641/4 - Irchester Romano-British Town Defences

The town covers an area of just over 8ha; between AD 150 and 200 it was enclosed by a bank and then a wall.

{1} In 1963 a section 6ft wide and 85ft in length was cut through the defences 25yds east of the south-west angle. Occupation began in Claudian times, perhaps as the extra-mural settlement of an auxilliary fort. An earthen rampart was constructed probably in the period AD 150-200 sealing earlier occupation levels. The rampart was some 40ft wide and survived to a height of 4ft and when completed consisted of earth with a stone core, the front part comprising alternate layers of topsoil and freshly dug material, the rear of uniform, heavy sterile ironstone clay. The front of the rampart had subsequently been cut away for the insertion of a well-built and solidly-mortared wall of dressed limestone rubble with pitched footings. The wall survived to a width of 6ft compared to an 8ft width recorded by Morton in the 18th century. The wall was fronted by a berm 17ft wide and a ditch 6ft deep and about 47ft wide. Beneath a mound of undifferentiated material (marked as a temple on a map of the 18th century), was found the rear of a solid, trapeze-shaped structure with a well-mortared core of limestone rubble and faced with coursed limestone blocks similar to those used on the town wall, the structure occupying the internal angle of the walls.

Early in the 5th century a crudely built wooden structure was built to the rear of the town bank.

{2} Earthwork fortifications were erected in the later second century. A masonry curtain-wall was added sometime afterwards but its date of insertion, like that of a possible corner-tower at the south-west agle is uncertain.

{6} The town covers an area of just over 8ha and was formerly surrounded by large earthen ramparts; the north side survives as a massive scarp 6m high, falling directly to the edge of the flood plain. It is damaged at its east and west ends. The east side is bounded by a large scarp 3m high, the north end of which is still preserved in pasture. A shallow trench was cut into its summit. A series of shallow depressions may indicate stone robbing. A gap at the centre of the east side was made in the late 1920s for an ironstone tramway. It is thought that the east gate was located just to the south of this but was later blocked. On the west side the southern half has been destroyed by modern cultivation and is marked only by a small scarp 1m high. The northern half survives as a bank 2.5m high with a flat top and broken only by a narrow cut made for the ironstone tramway. The south side of the town defences was removed by the re-alignment of the modern road. Slight re-alignments of the town's defences may indicate they are not of the same period.

Morton in the early 18th century described the walls as still standing. Excavation in 1878-9 of the eastern gate of the town. Some foundations were not explored but noted in the centre of the east side near the assumed original entrance. Excavation by Baker. The 1926 excavations cut across both the east and west ramparts on the line of the tramway. 'Well built stone walls displaying two periods of construction' were discovered.

{7} Wall stood 9ft thick around town.

{8} Walls were still standing in the early C18th, 8ft thick. The outcourses as usual were set flatways while the inner part of the wall consisted of stones pitched on end and inclining southwards. The angles were apparently rounded and no indications of turrets or bastions were noted. [Mentions a circular foundation at the south-west corner, but now thought to be an C18th garden temple.] According to VCH Morton records finds of brick and tile pavements, along with column fragments.

{9} Overall the defences seem to fit the broader plan of settlement and its roads rather poorly and suggests that the defences were imposed upon an extant plan. At Irchester the intention seems to have been to best use the available topography, and to enclose the densely occupied core of strip buildings and religious foci. The north side of the defences occupies a natural low scarp overlooking the river whilst the core settlement to the south sits on a low ridge flanked by shallow slades.
The recent geophysical survey west of the walled area, clearly indicates that the multivallate defences are offset to north and south of the change in alignment and indicate a break where the circuit alters direction. This conceivably indicates that the northern and southern half of the defences are of different date, but equally appears to coincide with the location of the western gateway into the town.

{11} The immediate west and south of Chester Farm were surveyed. Here the elements of the defensive ditch system flanking the eastern walls of the town, an adjacent minor route and at least two extramural ditched enclosures were identified.
The town defences are visible in the simplest terms as a bank enclosing the town. This circuit has, however, been only intermittently, and generally not very effectively, examined by excavation, which means there are references to the existence of gates but little or no recorded evidence for them. This survey gave an opportunity to explore issues such as the presence and disposition of gateways, and also the possible occurrence of either internal or external defensive embellishments such as towers or buttresses. Unfortunately, at no point was a complete survey of any of the corners possible, so comparisons cannot be made with the results of the excavated evidence from the south-west corner of the town.
The eastern defensive line comprised a triple ditch within which lay a wall probably fronting an earthen rampart. In the present survey no convincing evidence for any portals was identified on this side and at the two points where minor roads could be seen heading to the wall there was no break in the detected line of either the wall or the enclosing defensive ditch circuit.
The southern length of the defences comprised a wall that presumably fronted an internal earthen rampart. Towards its eastern end, the wall appears to cut across a building that had a different alignment to the defences. The building fronted onto a minor road running south-eastwards which does not seem to continue through the wall line.
At the point where the main street reaches the wall there may be a narrow opening along with a quantity of masonry, which might denote the presence of a southern gate partly blocked and obscured by collapsed masonry.
The short length of the western side that was available for survey also comprised a triple ditch sequence beyond the wall and rampart. The ditches did not have any breaks in their line suggestive of the location of a point of access. The wall line again appeared to be fairly continuous, although an irregularity to the south of the Iron Age enclosure might denote the presence of an internal feature perhaps related to a gateway (Fig 4, G1). To the north of the Iron Age enclosure the wall appears to change course slightly for 30m before its line is lost. The reason for this change in the wall alignment is unknown, but it may relate to topographic changes.
The northern defences could not be surveyed owing to both topographic issues and recent land use resulting in the effective masking of the remains from this type of survey by the construction of a metalled track.
Overall, the absence of breaks in the enclosing ditch sequence was surprising and must suggest that they were crossed at certain points by timber bridging which has left no detectable traces. The apparent continuous nature of the wall circuit may reflect the nature of its construction, with continuous foundation courses serving both as the base for the wall and as thresholds at gateways. In recent excavation, it was seen that the wall in the south-west corner had been robbed down to little more than the foundation courses, and therefore any gaps or irregularities in the surveyed line might denote nothing more than this.

{12} Sections of the defences were surveyed in 1876. The survey was copied by Dryden. It includes plans and sections.

{13} 1:2500 plan and profiles were made on 22/2/1905.

{14} Fig.10 may be a reproduction of the 1876 earthwork survey.

{17} The east gate of the town was observed by Dr Robb. [This may be confused with C19th excavations as Robb's trenches were on the alignment of the 1920s tramway and probably slightly to the north of the gate.]

{22} In 2004-5 a section of the twon defences was exposed at the south-western corner of the town during the improvement scheme for the access road to the business par to the west. A narrow strip, 3.5m wide and 50m long, was uncovered. The town wall comprised the substantial pitched-stone foundations, robbed in places, curving around the south-western corner with an internal stone turret set in the angle, aspreviously uncovered by Knight. Outside the town wall there were three defensive ditches.

{23} The northern half of the Roman town's western defences have good earthwork survival ie. A bank with a prominent slope to the ditch to its west. A gully across the defences may represent the line of the ironstone quarry tramway.

{26} Rescue excavations in connection with the widening of the A45 Road at Irchester Roman town were carried out 1981-2. Three ditches were found and excavated but no stratigraphic links between them were established. The regularity of the spacing and similarities of their respective backfills would suggest that all ditches were contemporary. No direct relationship between the ditches and the wall or rampart could be demonstrated. Finds included small curved fragment of bronze wire from unknown object.

{30} Three ditches were found, running round the south west corner of Burrow Field, parallel to each other. Since the axes of all three ditches are equidistant and parallel, and since D18 and D19 are practically identical in size, it is very probable that all the ditches were dug at the same time. Ditch 19 contained Belgic pottery, large pieces of limestone and pebbles. Above this the main mass of fillings contained miexed Belgic and 1st century pottery. The top layers had 1st-2nd century pottery. The finds from ditch 20 were similar, with pottery ranging from Belgic to 3rd century.
The ditches of the Roman town run 18-30ft behind the inner lip of ditch 20. The ditches could be Belgic from the finds, but the lack of any rampart material is clearly an obstacle in accepting the ditch system as Belgic. Could it be that the Roman defences were inserted into the rear of an earlier rampart, the remains of which are not preserved in the area excavated?

<1> Knight J.K., 1967, Excavations at The Roman Town of Irchester, 1962-63, p.65-128 (Report). SNN48299.

<2> Dix B.N., 1990, Irchester Roman Town, (unchecked) (Report). SNN39884.

<3> Ordnance Survey, 1950s/1960s, Ordnance Survey Record Cards, SP96NW2 (unchecked) (Index). SNN443.

<4> GOUGH, Camden Britannia, 282 (Uncertain). SNN58271.

<5> IRCHESTER CROPMARKS, (unchecked) (Drawing). SNN57937.

<6> Royal Commission on The Historical Monuments of England, 1979, An Inventory of The Historical Monuments in The County of Northampton, p.92 (unchecked) (Series). SNN77380.

<6> Butler A.; Meadows I.; Fisher I., 2010, Archaeological Geophysical Survey at Chester Farm, Irchester, Northamptonshire, p.7+Fig.4 (checked) (Report). SNN107215.

<7> Bridges J., 1791, The History and Antiquities of Northamptonshire, p.181 (unchecked) (Book). SNN100366.

<8> Morton J., 1712, The Natural History of Northamptonshire, p.517 (unchecked) (Book). SNN10113.

<9> Taylor J., 2000, Northamptonshire Extensive Urban Survey: Irchester (Roman), Section 3.2 Defences (Digital archive). SNN100749.

<10> Yates A.; Butler A., 2006, Archaeological Survey (Module 5) at Chester Farm, Irchester, Northamptonshire, (unchecked) (Report). SNN105697.

<11> Butler A.; Meadows I.; Fisher I., 2010, Archaeological Geophysical Survey at Chester Farm, Irchester, Northamptonshire, p.2-3+14-15 (checked) (Report). SNN107215.

<12> DRYDEN H., 1876, DRYDEN MSS, (unchecked) (Plan). SNN44062.

<13> DOWNMAN E.A., 1908, Ancient earthworks in Northamptonshire, p.29 (unchecked) (Manuscript). SNN60129.

<14> Doubleday H A (ed), 1902, The Victoria History of the Counties of England: Northamptonshire, p.179 (checked) (Series). SNN100368.

<15> Ordnance Survey, 1950s/1960s, Ordnance Survey Record Cards, SP96NW2 (unchecked) (Index). SNN443.

<16> 1926, The Journal of Roman Studies (16), p.223 (unchecked) (Journal). SNN59497.

<17> Unknown, ORAL REPORT TO SMR, (unchecked) (Oral Report). SNN50486.

<18> Cadman G., 1993, Irchester, Chester Farm: Conservation Survey Archive Report, (checked) (Report). SNN105154.

<19> 1875, Associated Architectural Societies Reports, p.116 (checked) (Series). SNN44074.

<20> Dix B.N., 1991, Archaeological Evaluation at Irchester, Northants, 1990-91, p.22 (checked) (Report). SNN1694.

<21> MORRIS S., 2007, Iron Age and Roman Landscape at Victoria Park, Irchester, Northamptonshire: Updated Project Design, Assessment Report (Report). SNN106041.

<22> Morris S.; Meadows I., 2012, Iron Age and Roman Landscapes at Victoria Park, Irchester, Northamptonshire: Excavations September 2004 to May 2005 (Report). SNN108056.

<23> Cadman G., 1993, Irchester, Chester Farm: Conservation Survey Archive Report, (checked) (Report). SNN105154.

<24> Treespace, 2006, Preliminary Tree Report: Land Near Chester Farm, (unchecked) (Report). SNN107137.

<25> Meadows I., 2012, Targeted Archaeological Excavations at Chester Farm, Irchester, Northamptonshire September 2011 (Report). SNN108094.

<26> Windell D., 1984, Irchester Roman Town: Excavations of 1981-82, p.36-41 (checked) (Article). SNN44248.

<27> Windell D., 1982, A45: Irchester Archaeological Excavations 1981-1982, (unchecked) (Report). SNN59538.

<28> Brown A.E.(ed), 1982, Archaeology in Northamptonshire 1981, p.100 (checked) (Journal). SNN100413.

<29> Yates A.; Cherrington R.; Webster T., 2004, An Archaeological Evaluation at Irchester Roman Town, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, Scheduled Ancient Monument (County No. 83), February 2004, p.3 (checked) (Report). SNN104670.

<30> Hall D.N.; Nickerson N., 1967, Excavations at Irchester, 1962-3, pp.75-8 (checked) (Article). SNN76281.

<31> Brown A.E.(ed), 1982, Archaeology in Northamptonshire 1981, p.100 (unchecked) (Journal). SNN100413.

Record last edited

Nov 28 2018 12:41PM