Defending Cambridgeshire: The Military Landscape from Prehistory to Present

by Mike Osborne

Overview

Throughout history, Cambridgeshire (including Huntingdon and Peterborough) has figured in many of the conflicts which have shaped our nation. Doomed Roman legionaries marched from Longthorpe to defeat by Boudicca's Iceni; Saxons and Danes fought over the edges of the Danelaw; the Normans came this way to crush Hereward's Fenland resistance; in the Civil War it provided the defended frontier between Parliamentarian and Royalist; in Napoleonic times French prisoners of war were incarcerated here; and in the twentieth century its flat expanses were home to numerous airfields and missile bases. This book describes the function and purpose of these defensive structures and reveals the evidence which many of these major events left on the ground: the earthworks of hill forts, medieval castles and moats; the masonry of later forts and strong-houses; drill halls and militia barracks; and the lines of anti-invasion defences from 1940.

Product Details

ISBN-13:	9780752497525
Publisher:	The History Press
Publication date:	10/01/2013
Sold by:	Barnes & Noble
Format:	eBook
Pages:	224
File size:	10 MB
Age Range:	12 Years

About the Author

Mike Osborne has been recording these structures for 30 years and, for the duration of the Defence of Britain Project, was its volunteer co-ordinator in the eastern counties.

Read an Excerpt

Defending Cambridgeshire

The Military Landscape from Prehistory to the Present

---

By Mike Osborne

The History Press

Copyright © 2013 Mike Osborne
All rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-0-7524-9752-5

---

CHAPTER 1

Prehistoric, Roman and Saxon Cambridgeshire

Prehistoric Fortifications

One of the earliest forms of defence work is the causewayed enclosure. That at Haddenham is the largest in England, covering a little over 20 acres (8.5ha) surrounded by a single ditch and palisade. Other examples have been found at Great Wilbraham and Maxey/Etton. At Rectory Farm, Godmanchester, is an enclosure of 16 acres (6.3ha) with an entrance to the north-east and twenty-four massive timber posts spaced around the inside of the perimeter. The Early Iron Age was largely characterised by loose unenclosed villages which had developed from farms set in field systems. Throughout the Iron Age, right up until the Roman invasion and beyond, isolated settlements consisted of round huts within an enclosure. A typical example was found at Werrington, where a single hut lies in a roughly square enclosure of bank and ditch, with sides of around 50 yards.

In the period between the third and the first centuries BC, the so-called Iron Age 'hillforts' made their appearance. There is still disagreement amongst historians as to the purpose of these monuments which would have required an enormous investment of materials and labour. It is quite possible that individual examples fulfilled different functions, but it is clear that many were never permanent residential sites. Assuming at least an element of military intention, it is possible to draw distinctions between those in our area. Some, such as Belsars Hill, were of only local importance, whilst others suggest themselves as being of more strategic significance, guarding frontiers. A line of forts, which includes Wandlebury, Arbury and War Ditches, stretched from the Thames to the Fens using the valleys of the Lea, Stort and Cam to separate the Trinovantes to the east from the Catuvellauni, controlling Huntingdonshire and West Cambridgeshire, in the west. Further to the north, the Corieltauvi marked their boundary with the Iceni with the fort at Borough Fen and a series of smaller defended enclosures which extended into Lincolnshire. Borough Fen (1), 4.5 miles (7km) north-north-east of Peterborough, on Peakirk Moor, had been built with a rampart 24 feet (7.5m) wide and reinforced with a revetment and a surrounding ditch, 32 feet (10m) wide and nearly eight feet (2.5m) deep, but these clear defensive features apparently enclosed empty space which was soon put to pasture. Recent Lidar mapping has shown an outer bank and ditch on the west, and emphasised that the fort stands 'a dizzying 4m' (13 feet) above sea level. Arbury, too, appears to lack interior structures and it has been suggested that it was an enclosure for migrating stock, but its substantial timber gateway, ramparts and ditches nevertheless suggest a defensive function. There is continuing uncertainty regarding the purpose of many Iron Age forts, and explanations of their use as emergency refuges are perfectly plausible. Arbury's low-lying position is contrasted by that of Wandlebury, a bi-vallate fort on the Gog Magog hills south of Cambridge. Here there is evidence of settlement, but not necessarily contemporaneous with the defences. A smaller fort at Cherry Hinton, War Ditches is, again, roughly circular, whilst Borough Hill at Sawston, much more extensive than all those mentioned above, appears to anchor its double ditches on natural marshy obstacles. Along with these forts, tribal boundaries were often marked by linear dykes, many of which are traceable through their re-use in Anglo-Saxon times.

It has been suggested that the major Fenland fortress of Stonea Camp, covering nearly 24 acres (9.5ha) and the most extensive such structure in East Anglia, was an important focus for Iceni gatherings. It enjoys the status of oppidum, or tribal centre, putting it on a level with Colchester, St Albans and Leicester. Stonea lies a little to the south-east of March on a ridge that dominates the southern Fens, close to the old courses of the Ouse and the Nene, and at a point where fresh-water met sea-water. The Iron Age fort occupies a site which in Neolithic times accommodated a settlement, a cursus, and burial mounds. The camp dates from the third or second centuries BC, from which time an inner defensive rampart and ditch have been found, entered through staggered entrances, an arrangement commonly found in such forts across the country. There are three distinct lines of banks and ditches, the two inner of them forming D-shapes with outer ones to the north and east (2). The ditches are cut through different ground conditions and this may account for variations in their dimensions and profiles. The excavators have postulated a four-phase construction for the camp, which began with the outer enclosure, and finished with the outer of the two D-shaped enclosures, suggesting a re-modelling towards the end of the Iron Age occupation. Ditches were generally around 16 feet (5m) across and up to 7 feet (2m) deep which, added to the height of the rampart, would have produced an impressive fortification in this low-lying landscape. To the surprise, and apparent disappointment of the excavators, no evidence was discovered for timber gate-defences. This may be explained by the lack of settlement evidence, as it seems likely that Stonea Camp was a site for gatherings and rituals, its defences being more of an insurance policy for emergencies rather than of permanent and continuous usage. The weakness of the defences on the south facing the watery approaches has been cited as a case for dismissing the structure's defensive integrity but, as at Borough Hill, the marshy nature of the land on that side may have been deemed sufficient defence in itself.

Despite archaeologists' and historians' ambivalence over the purpose of these Iron Age forts, it would appear that at least one Cambridgeshire example, War Ditches at Cherry Hinton, may have met a sudden and violent end. Although much of the fort has been destroyed by quarrying, excavators found that the ditch had not filled by natural processes but had been back-filled with the rubble and stone blocks which had formed the rampart, apparently intentionally, rapidly and by human agency. Not only was there charcoal in the ditch indicating the burning of, at the very least, the timber palisade, but there were large numbers of skeletons, both articulated and disjointed, some bearing cut-marks, and constituting possible evidence of injuries received in conflict. All this was dated to the middle of the first century AD, and may relate to the northward progress of the Roman army, or may simply represent the product of an intertribal spat.

Roman Fortifications

Having reconnoitred Britain in the previous century, but penetrated no farther than Hertfordshire, the Romans invaded Britain in AD 43, this time showing every intention of staying. Although the native British tribes had made some collective effort to resist the earlier incursions of the Belgic tribes from France, they were generally not given to co-operation, which gave the Roman troops a clearer run than they might have expected. Having secured London, and especially the major tribal centre of Colchester, their major thrust was towards the Trent and Humber, with the line of the Fosse Way marking a temporary western frontier. The valley of the Great Ouse appears to have provided one approach for the Roman forces who established forts at Godmanchester to secure a ford on the road north from Sandy (Bedfordshire), and at Longthorpe, on the Nene a little to the west of Peterborough, to act as a base for further operations. By AD 48 the Romans felt sufficiently well-established to demand that the British disarm, but powerful tribes such as the Iceni unsurprisingly resisted this demand, and military action, possibly taking place near Stonea Camp, was necessary for the policy to be enforced. Amongst human remains uncovered at Stonea was the skeleton of a child which appeared to carry sword-cuts. Following their subjugation, the Iceni were allowed to retain their own leader, a source of later misunderstandings, but became a subject people under Rome.

At Godmanchester (Durovigutum) the earliest fort, of the usual playing-card shape and oriented east-west, was large enough to hold half a legion. It had a double ditch and a timber rampart revetted in turf. It appears to have had timber interval turrets, the four corner-posts of one having been found on the south side of the fort. At Cambridge, the early settlement on the promontory overlooking the river was surrounded by a ditch outside a bank topped by a palisade. The original fortress at Longthorpe was squarer in plan with double ditches and an earthen rampart, 20 feet (6m) wide, surmounted by a timber palisade with a wall-walk or fighting-platform. The fortress, again designed to accommodate half a legion, covered 27 acres (11ha). It was south-facing on a site on the north bank of the Nene and close to important roads. Its four gates were each defended by flanking timber turrets mounted on six posts, allowing them to project beyond the two gate-passages, which were each 12 feet (3.6m) wide. The interior of the fort held barracks, a headquarters building, stores and granaries. It was in occupation from some time in the mid-AD 40s, but whether or not it pre-dated the initial problem with the Iceni cannot be determined with any certainty. Given that only auxiliaries rather than legionaries were involved in that particular campaign, might suggest that it came after the rebellion had been put down. It had a number of functions which included providing a reserve force behind the Fosse Way and a blocking force to prevent military collusion between the Iceni and their neighbours, the Coritani and Catuvellauni. It was also the nearest garrison to the newly established coloniaat Colchester. As well as providing the base for a mobile strike-force, it offered winter quarters for troops on campaign, and a permanent storage facility for grain and equipment. The mobility required by a quick-reaction force would have been provided by the stationing of auxiliary cavalry in the fortress, and one of the buildings, excavated in the 1960s and '70s, has been interpreted as stabling. The nature, proportions and dimensions of the buildings and the spaces in which they are set, enabled the excavators to infer a garrison of around 1,700 legionaries and 1,000 auxiliaries, including cavalry. About 500 yards to the east, a military depot produced pottery and other wares for the army.

In AD 60 Boudicca led a full-scale revolt of the Iceni against Roman rule. Hearing of the sack of Colchester, Petillius Cerialis, legate of the IXth Legion, led his troops from Longthorpe but was surprised by a vastly greater force of Iceni and defeated. A draft of reinforcements to the legion the next year contained 2,000 legionaries and is likely to represent the scale of losses sustained in the battle. Cerialus escaped back to Longthorpe with his cavalry, and appears to have shrunk the area of the fortress to reflect his reduced defence capability. The new fort, nearer to the typical playing-card shape, covered 11 acres (4.4ha) within the perimeter of the old fortress. The new defences were on a smaller scale to the earlier ones although it is likely that the old timbers, particularly those of the gate-towers (Fig. 1), were re-used. Those buildings which fell within the new enclosure were used as they were, with no visible evidence either of adaptation or rebuilding. The old outer defences were allowed to erode and the now unused buildings were dismantled. After the inevitable defeat of the Iceni, the Roman army shifted its focus northwards once more, and around AD 60 the IXth Legion's base was established in a new legionary fortress in Lincoln, rendering Longthorpe redundant. Military occupation there appears to peter out after AD 61, although it is not impossible that the fort continued in use for some years after.

Following the shock of the Boudiccan revolt in which three major Roman towns had been razed and their inhabitants slaughtered, the urgent re-establishment of Roman control was essential. Cambridgeshire contained important hubs in the network of roads in the region. From Colchester, a road ran to Braintree and Great Dunmow (Essex) entering the county at Great Chesterford, and continuing on to Cambridge and Godmanchester, finishing up in Leicester. Another road led from Royston to Durobrivae via the river crossing at Godmanchester (Ermine Street) and linked to the Longthorpe fort. The Fen Causeway ran from Whittlesea to Denver (Norfolk), and King Street ran from Durobrivae north along the fen edge to Lincoln. To protect these routes, and the settlements which grew up associated with them, forts were newly built or up-dated. New forts were built along the Fen Causeway, at Grandford near March and at Eldernell. The Grandford fort replaced an earlier one which may have been built around AD 47 at the time of the brush with the Iceni. Its successor, of a size appropriate to the accommodation of 500 auxiliaries, most likely represents the installation of a garrison along the Fen Causeway charged with ensuring that the remnants of the Iceni army caused no further problems. The fort at Eldernell, also located on the Fen Causeway, appears to have been of a similar size. At Cambridge (Durolipons) the defensive site above the river-crossing and track-way junction was enlarged with renewed defences as a military supply base, located near New Hall on the road out of the North Gate to Godmanchester, and in use around the turn of the first century. It was later adapted for domestic use, and by AD 150 the fort had been redeveloped as a town laid out in insulae. The fort at Godmanchester, which had in the meantime become a civilian settlement apparently destroyed during the Boudiccan revolt, was re-built in its aftermath slightly further to the north of its original site. With the winding-down of the legionary base at Longthorpe, it was nevertheless necessary to maintain a military presence in the Nene Valley, and a double-ditched auxiliary fort covering 5 acres (2ha) was established at Water Newton, where Ermine Street crossed the Nene. An industrial settlement, probably supplying the needs of the army, developed outside the fort, and this was most likely the stimulus for the later town of Durobrivae. A further fort at Lynch Farm near Peterborough probably dates from this first century of Roman rule. At Tort Hill, Sawtry, it was once thought that a possible Roman signal station had been built, presumably one in a chain which must have followed the line of Ermine Street. However, subsequent excavation revealed the square earthwork as a Civil War fort. The former presence of a Roman watch-tower at Pilsgate, overlooking Ermine Street, has been recorded in a local history of neighbouring Barnack, along with a marching camp in Burghley Park to its west. To the south of the Coneygeare in St Neots are traces of what has been interpreted as a Roman marching camp, perhaps sited to protect a crossing of the Great Ouse, since signs of a Roman road, entering Eynesbury from the south and aligning with the old Stanestrete to Crosshall and Hail Weston, have been inferred.

The important centre of the Iceni at Stonea was chosen as the site of a Roman town around AD 125. Functioning as an administrative centre, possibly of an Imperial estate under the patronage of Hadrian, exploiting the fertility of the Fenland soil as well as a focus for trade, this town boasted several sophisticated and imposing structures. One of these was a substantial square building, constructed in stone and possibly rising to four storeys, interpreted as either a town hall or a temple. Most of the rest of the town, spread over at least a dozen insulae, were of timber and daub. The settlement flourished until well into the third century when it appears to have shed its official status, and become the nucleus of a farming community. Thus at the time that other similar-sized towns were renewing or acquiring fortifications, Stonea lacked the status, the motivation and the resources.

Durobrivae has been described as a ribbon development straggling along Ermine Street, in essence a definable centre and two suburbs, with plots fronting onto the main road, and lanes going off in all directions behind this frontage. In the late second or early third century, the central part of the town was walled. These walls, in the shape of an irregular hexagon enclosing 44 acres (15ha), consisted of clay banks supporting a stone wall. In common with other such towns, the unrest of the late fourth century led to bastions being added to the walls. Despite a thriving mosaic industry and evidence of wealth as exemplified by the early Christian Water Newton treasure, the town contracted, the suburbs dwindled and the town died with the exodus of the Romans. The nearby settlement of Castor was centred on a high-status villa often described in palatial terms. The owner has never been identified but it has been suggested, possibly somewhat fancifully, that he could have been someone as important as the Count of the Saxon Shore, the Roman commander of the Classis Britannica, responsible for the defence of Britain's coastline against Saxon raids during the second half of the fourth century.

(Continues...)

---

Excerpted from Defending Cambridgeshire by Mike Osborne. Copyright © 2013 Mike Osborne. Excerpted by permission of The History Press.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.

---

Table of Contents

Contents

Title,
Acknowledgements,
Abbreviations,
Introduction,
One Prehistoric, Roman and Saxon Cambridgeshire,
Two The Early Mediaeval Period in Cambridgeshire 1066–1300,
Three The Later Mediaeval and Tudor Periods 1300–1600,
Four Stuart and Georgian Cambridgeshire,
Five The Victorian Period 1815–1914,
Six Cambridgeshire in the First World War,
Seven The Interwar Years,
Eight The Second World War,
Nine The Cold War and Beyond 1946–2012,
Appendix 1Iron Age Forts,
Appendix 2 Mediaeval Castles and Other Fortified Sites,
Appendix 3 Civil War Sites,
Appendix 4 Drill Halls and Other Premises used by Volunteer Forces,
Appendix 5 Airfields and other RAF and USAAF Aviation-related Sites,
Appendix 6 Designation of Airfields under Taylor Report, 1940,
Appendix 7 Air Defence: Bombing Decoys,
Appendix 8 Locations used by Home Guard (HG) Units,
Appendix 9 Command and Control in the Second World War,
Appendix 10 Military Hospitals and Welfare,
Appendix 11 Second World War Prisoner-of-War Camps,
Bibliography,
Copyright,