Details of site on Pastscape
(SP 157288) Eubury Camp (NR) Eubury Camp, discredited as a hillfort, is derived from an apparent enclosure made by four different elements. "a" (from SP 1576 2893 to SP 1587 2885) is a bank with limestone core, 570ft long by 40ft across and 10ft high, with no apparent ditch. "b" (SP 1549 2898 to SP 1589 2880) is a sharp scarp about 3ft high. Large limestone blocks
revetting its western end, now destroyed, were visible in 1937. "c" (SP 1556 2868 to SP 1587 2875) is a terrace about 900ft long, hollowed as if a ditch with a counterscarp bank. Midway along its length the terrace is 22ft wide below a scarp 10ft high capped by a slight bank 12ft across by 1ft high. Revetment stones were visible here up to c1939. "a", "b" and "c" are artificial, but of uncertain origin. At "d" (SP 1555 2874) slight scarps and banks, suggesting an entrance, are continuous with natural slopes and may be supposed to be also largely natural. The the west of these are rings and circles also of geological origin. Romano-British pottery was discovered west of "d" in 1937. (2)
Though in plan these features appear to form a coherent structure on the ground they are not clearly associated, differing in type of construction and falling as they do on differing levels, part on the top of the spur, part on the sides and part in the bottom of the valley. Not an antiquity. See also SP 12 NE 59. (3)
The earthwork and cropmark remains of the alleged hillfort described by the previous authorities were seen on aerial photographs forming an elongated plygonal enclosure, narrowing towards its eastern end (c.330m x 226m). This part appears to have incorporated parts of the natural sharp slope and outcrops of limestone. The western part appeared to be marked an irregular broad ditch, the eastern part of a large sub-circular enclosure centred at SP 1542 2884. This was seen as a cropmark on photographs taken in July 1996 and gave the appearance of being an earlier enclosure onto which the eastern enclosure (defined by surviving fragmented earthwork banks) appears to have been added. The curvilinear cropmark defined enclosure was hard to define due to the presence of geological 'background noise' visible as swirling cropmarks. These features were mapped from aerial photographs as part of the English Heritage Gloucestershire NMP project. (4)
|
Posted by Chance
10th June 2014ce
|
|
Log in |
Register
Top of page