Richborough, near Sandwich, the Roman Rutupiae: p. 24.
(7) Dover, the Roman Dubra or Dubrae: p. 42.
(8) Lympne, the Roman Portus Lemanae: p. 55.
(9) Pevensey, in the
marshes between Eastbourne and St. Leonards, once probably
approached closely by the sea. The fort is oval in shape, and
more than nine acres in extent. Its walls still stand 12 ft.
thick and more than 25 ft. high. They consist of a
concrete and rubble core, a facing of small courses of sandstone
masonry, bonding tiles which never run right through from face
to face, and two kinds of mortar, white in the interior and pink
on the surface. Externally they are strengthened by fifteen or
more circular bastions. The coins found here belong entirely to
the period after A.D. 250. Saxon names, Andredsweald and the
like, to say nothing of the Roman tiles stamped HON AVG ANDRIA
from the site, support the idea that this plainly fourth-century
fort is the Anderidos of the Saxon Shore.12
(10) Porchester, planted at the water’s edge near
the head of Portsmouth harbour. It is a nearly square fort, in
area nine acres; its ramparts are of concrete-and-rubble core
with flint facing and bonding courses of stone and tile, and are
strengthened by some thirteen round projecting bastions. Few
Roman remains have been found in it; but the four or five
recorded coins belong to the fourth century. No clue exists as
to its ancient name.13
(11) Carisbrooke Castle, in the Isle of Wight,
seems to cover the remains of yet another fort of this series.
In 1927 it was found that the ramparts of the rectangular
medieval bailey cover the walls and bastions of a fortification
which cannot differ far in time from the Roman defences of the
neighbouring coastline. Little is as yet known about it in
detail, but there was a rather curious in-turned entrance in the
middle of the eastern side. It would seem that the
Romano-British population of the island, now represented by
half-a-dozen villas and numerous slighter evidences, was
sufficiently wealthy to claim a closer protection in the fourth
century than the fort at Porchester was able to afford.14
(12) Plainly to the same general phase belongs the
late Roman fortress at Cardiff, of which considerable remains
survive in a restored condition. This fortress, eight acres in
extent, has walls 10 ft. thick, armed with polygonal bastions.
It was, however, presumably a countermeasure to Irish rather
than to Saxon attacks.15
On the whole, this series agrees plainly enough
with the list of the ‘Notitia.’ We cannot, indeed, trace by
inscriptions any of the garrisons mentioned in that list. But
the actual remains suffice. Of the nine ‘Notitia’ forts,
eight can be identified, and the ninth, Portus Adurni, may be
placed either at Porchester, or, if Felixstowe was a fort, at
Felixstowe.15a We can
12 C. R. Smith, Report
on Pevensey (London, 1858). For the stamped tiles see Epham.
13 V.C.H. Hants, 1, 328.
Horsley suggests that it was the Portus Adurni; cf. Sussex
Arch. Coll. xxxviii, 217; ii, 99; lii, 83.
14 Antiquity, i, 476.
15 J. Ward, Arch. lvii,
335; R. E. M. Wheeler, Ant.Journ.. ii, 361.
15a The river name Adur,
near Shoreham in Sussex, is of modern origin, and gives no
reason to place Portus Adurni there. See Haverfield, Proc.
Soc.Antiq. xiv, 112I iz; Sussex Archaeoi. Collections, xxxviii,