Details |
Hillfort with earth rampart and ditch. A survey of published documentary and cartographic evidence 2016 concluded that a large enclosure was probably visible on the summit of Cluny Hill at the beginning of the 19th century. An almost circular hillfort with rampart and ditch 12 feet wide, enclosing more than 6 acres, is shown on a survey and plan made in 1798. This also shows a small 'post' on the south side of the hill is a small 'post' circa 3m square with bank and ditch. Said to be vitrified, but no trace of vitrification. OS site visit 1963 recorded that the only possible indication of the fort visible was the fragmentary remains of a possible rampart at NJ04475894, although the landscaping of the hill as a public park and the tree cover made identification of any remaining features difficult. Assessment in 2016 of documentary sources reinforced the claim that although a significant earthwork was visible at the end of the 18th century, it was subsequently extensively modified through construction of paths, and memorialised by the planting of yew trees around its perimeter in 1846. Extensive ditch-like depressions visible on LiDAR photography and siting yew trees correspond closely with the extent as indicated by historical evidence. Geophysical survey was carried out over part of the site in 2016, and confirmed the presence of a significant ditch and bank north and south of the summit. In Area A this clearly showed the southwest ditch and south rampart although the ditches in the southeast were less clear. It also located three previously excavated holes. No clear features were identified in Area B, east of Nelson’s Tower (NJ05NW0053). Area C, north of the tower, included part of the northern ditch. Small scale community excavation was carried out in 2017 and 2018. In 2017, trenches on the south (Trenches A-C) and north (Trench D) side of the hill recorded evidence of a defensive ditch and an earth and stone bank or rampart. There may also have been a timber palisade or fence. A single radiocarbon sample from the first year of excavation suggested that there was a hillfort or defended settlement dating to circa 800 BC, the Late Bronze Age. However this was the only sample dated to this period, and an Early Iron Age date for the hillfort may be more likely. Trench E near the top of the hill revealed stone paving and slag, the residue of iron smelting around a hearth, dating from some time in the first four centuries BC. The results indicate that Cluny Hill may have been occupied over several centuries, and the enclosed area may have included a settlement. Metal detecting survey as part of the community project recorded lead shot, a number of post-medieval buttons and coins, iron slag (likely scattered from the metalworking area) and fragments of iron. Excavation in 2018 further explored the area of metalworking. This recorded a paved iron-smithing hearth surrounded by hammer scale, other areas of paving, and numerous pits and postholes. Vitrified clay and several crucible fragments were found in proximity to the metalworking area. Charcoal from two adjacent pits returned Early Iron Age dates. The 2018 excavations also expanded Trenches C and D whilst other trenches explored geophysical anomalies in the enclosed area. Trench 4, on the north side of the hill, revealed a stony track or area of metalling with a bank to one side, running west from the recorded area of metalworking. Charcoal from among stones at the base of the track gave a radiocarbon date of 390-202 BC, and charcoal from the base of the bank gave a date of 751-408 BC, indicating that the track is contemporary with the metalworking. Only one posthole was recorded in the other areas of magnetic anomaly investigated. Other finds from the investigations include charred grains and possible quern fragments supporting the likelihood of domestic occupation on the hill. A watching brief was carried out by S. Farrell in February and March 2020 during works to upgrade section of footpaths on the south slope of the hill. A total of seven areas were monitored but no archaeological features or artefacts were recorded.
|