Iron Age defended settlement on Beanley Moor (Hedgeley)
On the slope of the hill 1/4 mile northward (of the camp on Beanley Hill - NU 01 NE 8) and near to the Beanley road are remains of a camp with two ramparts; it is circular with diameter of 62 yards and with entrances on the east and west. Within the near to this camp are circular foundations. (1)
Three native sites. ((Sited to NU 09211842, NU 09471843) and NU 09641843 from approx Lat and Long given in article. The former is probably the camp referred to by Tate). (2)
A: NU 09161827. A double ramparted enclosure situated on the western slope of a hill. The ramparts are very slight, the inner one being 4m wide, the outer one 3m wide both of average height of 0.4m. The internal area has been scooped out and the material from the scooping probably used to form the inner rampart. The entrance is on the lower (western) side and is 4m wide. There are no definite traces of internal dwellings although some outcrops of rocks may be mistaken for remains of hut circles. The earthwork is of a simple pastoral enclosure variety and is probably of native origin. (The nearest water supply is approximately 750m to the north-east).
B: Four circular pits of modern construction. Possibly the circular foundations referred to by Tate.
C: NU 09211842, D: NU 09471843 and E: NU 09641843. There are no traces of any of Hogg's sites at these points and nothing visible on available aerial photographs (RAF 1946). (3)
The work is so reduced that it is barely discernible. Broadly speaking, however, its proportions, form and method of construction are those of the local type of native homestead enclosure, although the double bank is an unusual feature. Surveyed at 1/2500. (4)
Description of the enclosure as 'double-ramparted' by F1 after Tate is misleading; the indications are that it was formed by a single rubble wall with probably some orthostatic revetment, but persistent robbing has virtually destroyed it except for two slight residual banks and an accompanying stone spread, most apparent on the downhill side. As previously noted, there is a single entrance, Tate's eastern break being modern. Internally five possible hut sites can be envisaged, although there are no definite remains. Surveyed at 1:2500. The homestead is approached from the south by a terrace, which near the entrance merges with a stony lynchet. This, with other occasional wall fragments, may be contemporary with the enclosure, but it is more likely associated with adjacent rig and furrow. (5)
NU 0915 1826. Defended settlement on Beanley Moor 780m E of Beanley South Side Farm. Scheduled RSM No 21026. The roughly circular enclosure is 50m E-W by 45m N-S within a single stoney rampart 9m wide and standing to a maximum height of 0.5m. The broad rampart has been much robbed of stone on the N and E sides, giving the impression of there having been a double rampart. There is an entrance 4m wide through the rampart in the SW side of the enclosure. Within the enclosure there are the well-preserved foundations of a prehistoric house abutting the S wall, immediately to the right of the entrance. The foundations are 7.5m in diameter and the walls stand to a height of 0.3m. Several other circular hollows may be the sites of further round houses. (6)
The site is in good condition but is covered in bracken. (7)
A possible Iron Age/Roman enclosed settlement and prehistoric enclosure, centred at NU 0915 1826, are visible as earthworks on air photographs. The former feature is situated on a gentle west-facing slope and consists of a single bank (earthwork). It is circular in plan and encloses an area 1875m square. There are breaks in the circuit to the east and west which might be interpreted as entrances (however there is more modern disturbance to be accounted for). On OS vertical photographs from 1971 it is possible to make out an earlier rectilinear enclosure (overlain by the later settlement), consisting of an external bank and internal ditch, situated in the north-west quadrant. This feature measures 23m wide. The east side is not visible on the air photographs available and so its length cannot be ascertained. Bank and ditch are both approximately 1m wide. (8)(9a)
Three native sites. ((Sited to NU 09211842, NU 09471843) and NU 09641843 from approx Lat and Long given in article. The former is probably the camp referred to by Tate). (2)
A: NU 09161827. A double ramparted enclosure situated on the western slope of a hill. The ramparts are very slight, the inner one being 4m wide, the outer one 3m wide both of average height of 0.4m. The internal area has been scooped out and the material from the scooping probably used to form the inner rampart. The entrance is on the lower (western) side and is 4m wide. There are no definite traces of internal dwellings although some outcrops of rocks may be mistaken for remains of hut circles. The earthwork is of a simple pastoral enclosure variety and is probably of native origin. (The nearest water supply is approximately 750m to the north-east).
B: Four circular pits of modern construction. Possibly the circular foundations referred to by Tate.
C: NU 09211842, D: NU 09471843 and E: NU 09641843. There are no traces of any of Hogg's sites at these points and nothing visible on available aerial photographs (RAF 1946). (3)
The work is so reduced that it is barely discernible. Broadly speaking, however, its proportions, form and method of construction are those of the local type of native homestead enclosure, although the double bank is an unusual feature. Surveyed at 1/2500. (4)
Description of the enclosure as 'double-ramparted' by F1 after Tate is misleading; the indications are that it was formed by a single rubble wall with probably some orthostatic revetment, but persistent robbing has virtually destroyed it except for two slight residual banks and an accompanying stone spread, most apparent on the downhill side. As previously noted, there is a single entrance, Tate's eastern break being modern. Internally five possible hut sites can be envisaged, although there are no definite remains. Surveyed at 1:2500. The homestead is approached from the south by a terrace, which near the entrance merges with a stony lynchet. This, with other occasional wall fragments, may be contemporary with the enclosure, but it is more likely associated with adjacent rig and furrow. (5)
NU 0915 1826. Defended settlement on Beanley Moor 780m E of Beanley South Side Farm. Scheduled RSM No 21026. The roughly circular enclosure is 50m E-W by 45m N-S within a single stoney rampart 9m wide and standing to a maximum height of 0.5m. The broad rampart has been much robbed of stone on the N and E sides, giving the impression of there having been a double rampart. There is an entrance 4m wide through the rampart in the SW side of the enclosure. Within the enclosure there are the well-preserved foundations of a prehistoric house abutting the S wall, immediately to the right of the entrance. The foundations are 7.5m in diameter and the walls stand to a height of 0.3m. Several other circular hollows may be the sites of further round houses. (6)
The site is in good condition but is covered in bracken. (7)
A possible Iron Age/Roman enclosed settlement and prehistoric enclosure, centred at NU 0915 1826, are visible as earthworks on air photographs. The former feature is situated on a gentle west-facing slope and consists of a single bank (earthwork). It is circular in plan and encloses an area 1875m square. There are breaks in the circuit to the east and west which might be interpreted as entrances (however there is more modern disturbance to be accounted for). On OS vertical photographs from 1971 it is possible to make out an earlier rectilinear enclosure (overlain by the later settlement), consisting of an external bank and internal ditch, situated in the north-west quadrant. This feature measures 23m wide. The east side is not visible on the air photographs available and so its length cannot be ascertained. Bank and ditch are both approximately 1m wide. (8)(9a)
N3148
FIELD OBSERVATION, Ordnance Survey Archaeology Division Field Investigation 1955; J H Ostridge
FIELD OBSERVATION, Ordnance Survey Archaeology Division Field Investigation 1970; B H Pritchard
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH INTERPRETATION, English Heritage: Till Tweed NMP 2003; English Heritage
FIELD OBSERVATION, Ordnance Survey Archaeology Division Field Investigation 1970; B H Pritchard
AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH INTERPRETATION, English Heritage: Till Tweed NMP 2003; English Heritage
Disclaimer -
Please note that this information has been compiled from a number of different sources. Durham County Council and Northumberland County Council can accept no responsibility for any inaccuracy contained therein. If you wish to use/copy any of the images, please ensure that you read the Copyright information provided.