Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T07:43:06.213Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Roman Fort at Brancaster

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 January 2012

Extract

The present paper is an account of excavations undertaken in October 1935 at the site of the Roman fort at Brancaster in North-west Norfolk. Thanks are due to the Committee of Section H of the British Association for the award of a grant which largely defrayed the cost of the excavation. The writer has also to thank Mr. F. Wordingham the owner of the site, and Mr. J. Bunkle the tenant, for permission to excavate, and Messrs. May, Gurney & Co., contractors, Trowse, for the loan of implements. Mr. R. R. Clarke and Col. A. C. A. Thackwell assisted throughout the period of the digging.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Society of Antiquaries of London 1936

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 444 note 1 These include a gold ring with the inscription Vivas in Deo, found in 1829 (Archaeologia, xxiii, 361; C.I.L. vii, 1307), and now in the Castle Museum, Norwich; where are also some of the earlier finds of pottery. Cf. too J.R.S. xxii, 67–8.

page 444 note 2 Spelman, Icenia, written about 1600 and published posthumously in 1698, pp. 147–8.

page 444 note 3 Blomefield's Norfolk, 1775, v, 1254, after referring to the fort, mentions the foundation of the malthouse ‘some years past’. Reprinted in 2nd ed. (Parkin), 1805–10, x, 298–9. The malthouse is also mentioned by Spencer, N., The Complete English Traveller, 1773, 214–17Google Scholar ; while, Wilkins, Archaeologia, xii, 134Google Scholar , footnote, quotes Camden (ed. Gibson) and adds ‘when I was there in 1788 the walls were all erased’.

page 445 note 1 This malthouse was remarkable for being the largest in the country. It was destroyed early in the nineteenth century, and building material that came from the fort walls can still be recognized in the neighbouring farm buildings.

page 445 note 2 Warner, Lee in Proc. Arch. Inst. (Norwich volume), 1851, 916Google Scholar.

page 445 note 3 V.C.H. Norfolk, i (1901), 304–5Google Scholar.

page 445 note 4 O.S. Maps, 25 in. sheets, Norfolk, ii, 13, and vii, 1.

page 446 note 1 Full black indicates that masonry was actually found in place; cross-hatching, that all masonry had been robbed away.

page 446 note 2 Ordnance Survey, site 432, no. 7532, taken May 1932.

page 447 note 1 Cf. Castle, Burgh, Richborough, and Pevensey, ; J.R.S. xxii, 60–4Google Scholar.

page 448 note 1 Warner, Lee, op. cit., p. 14Google Scholar.

page 451 note 1 Cf. J.R.S. xxii, 69-70.

page 451 note 2 Collingwood, , Arch. Roman Britain (1930), p. 54Google Scholar ; cf. F.C.H., Kent, iii (1932), 1924Google Scholar.

page 453 note 1 V.C.H., , Norfolk, i, 1901, 304Google Scholar ; this list includes two coins (Republic and Claudius I) recorded in Blomefield's Norfolk, 1775, and seven coins of Carausius in the Wisbech Museum.

page 453 note 2 W. Hall, Burnham Market (9); S. J. Jacobs, Postmaster, Brancaster (5); P. Skipper, Brancaster (3); and J. Bunkle, Marsh Farm, Brancaster (10). These coins have been examined by the writer.

page 453 note 3 List on p. 452.