Satellite Imagery
Satellite Imagery
HER: Scottish Borders 58777 (None)
NMR: NT 76 SE 6 (58777)
SM: 90134
NGR: NT 7724 6031
X: 377240 Y: 660310 (OSGB36)
This fort, which is situated on the sloping NE flank of Cockburn Law immediately above a steep escarpment dropping into the gorge of the Whiteadder Water, is better known for the broch occupying the NW end of the interior. This has attracted numerous antiquaries and archaeologists, who have variously excavated in the broch and the houses of the late Iron Age or Roman Iron Age settlement that sprawls across the SE half of the fort and overlie the defences at that end. The clearest circuit comprises double ramparts and ditches, which enclose an area measuring about 135m from ESE to WNW by 75m transversely, an area of some 0.87ha. A section partially excavated across these defences on the S in 1996 (Dunwell 1999) showed that the inner rampart was possibly faced externally but had been reduced to a bank 8.45m thick by 1.45m high, fronted by a ditch some 6m broad and possibly as much as 3m deep; the outer rampart was composed of five stratigraphic elements, which suggested a sequence of construction in which a primary counterscarp bank on the lip of the inner ditch had been enlarged with material dug from the outer ditch, though the elapse of time between these events was uncertain and this may have reflected no more than a convenient constructional sequence. A third bank some 5.5m in thickness by 1.1m in height lying within the interior in this sector, apparently forming part of a subrectangular enclosure around the broch was also sectioned, uncovering a faced wall 3.7m in thickness by 1.25m in height, with an external ditch on the S 3.5m in breadth; these were interpreted by the excavator as a secondary construction within the fort, probably associated with the broch. While this bank almost certainly incorporates elements of an enclosure around the broch, the foundations of which can be traced elsewhere, it is far more substantial here than elsewhere, and a detailed examination of the rest of the defences in this sector suggests that the explanation may be rather more complex. The defences of the fort in this sector are not only markedly more substantial than further E, but the inner rampart appears to change direction just to the W of a possible entrance in the middle of the S side, turning slightly westwards from a line that would otherwise project onto the SW corner of the supposed broch enclosure; far more likely, the broch enclosure has adapted a fragment of the rampart of a primary univallate fort, in front of which on the W a ditch at least 5m in breadth can still be seen. Unlike the inner rampart, the line of neither the outer nor its accompanying ditch deviate along the S side, indicating that these were probably an addition to the extended scheme embracing the whole circuit; if the possible entrance here is a feature of the original fort, the outer ditch appears to carry across the gap unbroken. Another gap on the W has clearly been broken through the defences, but the character of a gap on the WSW is less certain, and any entrance in the eastern end is obscured by the later settlement. The western end of the earlier fort was probably partly demolished and extended long before the erection of the broch, which measures 16.8m in diameter within a wall between 5.2m and 6.4m in thickness, and has three mural chambers, one with a stair, and an entrance flanked by guard cells opening to the E. The whole of the eastern half of the fort is subdivided into courts and yards by low walls, which also flank a long passage entering the settlement from the ESE. At least ten stone founded round-houses are associated with this settlement, one of them an unusually large structure some 14m in diameter. The only dateable finds from the excavations - a fragment of glass armlet and a bronze stud - are associated with the broch or the later settlement, indicating that the defences were probably derelict by the late Iron Age, and certainly did not remain in use into the Roman Iron Age.
Citizen Science: ✗
Reliability of Data: Confirmed
Reliability of Interpretation: Confirmed
X: -263265 Y: 7525741 (EPSG: 3857)
Longitude: -2.3649491982396516 Latitude: 55.83551720095325 (EPSG:4326)
Country: Scotland
Current County or Unitary Authority: Scottish Borders
Historic County: Berwickshire
Current Parish/Community/Council/Townland: Duns
None
| Extant | ✓ |
| Cropmark | ✗ |
| Likely Destroyed | ✗ |
None
| Woodland | ✗ |
| Commercial Forestry Plantation | ✗ |
| Parkland | ✗ |
| Pasture (Grazing) | ✓ |
| Arable | ✗ |
| Scrub/Bracken | ✗ |
| Bare Outcrop | ✗ |
| Heather/Moorland | ✓ |
| Heath | ✗ |
| Built-up | ✗ |
| Coastal Grassland | ✗ |
| Other | ✗ |
None
| Contour Fort | ✗ |
| Partial Contour Fort | ✗ |
| Promontory Fort | ✗ |
| Hillslope Fort | ✓ |
| Level Terrain Fort | ✗ |
| Marsh Fort | ✗ |
| Multiple Enclosure Fort | ✗ |
| Hilltop | ✗ |
| Coastal Promontory | ✗ |
| Inland Promontory | ✗ |
| Valley Bottom | ✗ |
| Knoll/Hillock/Outcrop | ✗ |
| Ridge | ✗ |
| Cliff/Plateau-edge/Scarp | ✓ |
| Hillslope | ✓ |
| Lowland | ✗ |
| Spur | ✗ |
Dominant Topographic Feature: None
| North | ✗ |
| Northeast | ✗ |
| East | ✗ |
| Southeast | ✗ |
| South | ✗ |
| Southwest | ✗ |
| West | ✗ |
| Northwest | ✗ |
| Level | ✓ |
Altitude: 205.0m
N/A
The datable artefacts - a glass armlet fragment and a bronze stud - are probably associated with the occupation of the late Iron Age settlement or the broch rather than the occupation of the fort.
Reliability: D - None
| Pre 1200BC | ✗ |
| 1200BC - 800BC | ✗ |
| 800BC - 400BC | ✗ |
| 400BC - AD50 | ✗ |
| AD50 - AD400 | ✗ |
| AD400 - AD 800 | ✗ |
| Post AD800 | ✗ |
| Unknown | ✓ |
| Pre Hillfort: | None |
| Post Hillfort: | The fort is not only overlain by the large broch at one end of the interior, but also by a series of late Iron Age stone founded round-houses and their attendant courts and yards |
| Artefactual: | Mainly relating to the broch |
RCAHMS holds an extensive collection of ground and aerial photographs taken under a wide range of conditions. Photographed by CUCAP in 1945, 1953 and 1975, by John Dewar in 1971, and by RCAHMS Aerial Survey Programme in 1980, 1983, 1986, 1989, 1992, 2008, 2010 and 2012, and drone photography by George Geddes in 2015
| 1st Identified Written Reference (1764): | Scots Magazine 26 (1764), 431 |
| 1st Identified Map Depiction (1771): | Square symbol on Andrew and Mostyn Armstrong's Map of the County of Berwick (1771) |
| Other (1792): | Description of the broch (Stat Acct iv, 1792, 389-90) |
| Other (1834): | Description of broch (NSA, ii, Berwickshire, 252-4) |
| Earthwork Survey (1850): | Description of broch by George Turnbull includes a section on the other fortifications and a plan by David Milne Home (1856, 14-15, pl II) |
| Other (1857): | Named in Gothic type on the 1st edition OS 25-inch map (Berwick 1862, sheet 10.6) |
| Earthwork Survey (1869): | Plan adapted from David Milne Home and description by John Stuart (1870, pl I) |
| Excavation (1869): | Report of the 'excavations by General G Lefroy (1870; Michie 1869) |
| Excavation (1879): | Report of the 'excavations which have been made from time to time' since 1869 by John Turnbull (1881, pl II-IV) |
| Other (1882): | Scheduled Ministry of Works archives may contain unpublished records (SRO MW. 1.656) |
| Earthwork Survey (1894): | Sketch-plan of part of the fort by David Christison and description (1895, 160-4, fig 25) |
| Other (1908): | Description (RCAHMS 1909, 21-2, no.114-15) |
| Earthwork Survey (1914): | Plan and description (RCAHMS 1915, 60-4, no.115; fig 58; RCAHMS BWD 14/8 & DP148105) |
| Earthwork Survey (1950): | Incomplete plan and full description (dated 1954) drawn up during RCAHMS Survey of Marginal Lands (RCAHMS BWD 14/2-7 & DP148102-4; Feachem 1963, 111-12) |
| Other (1966): | Resurveyed at 1:2500 by the OS |
| Other (1979): | Description by RCAHMS |
| Earthwork Survey (1996): | As part of the excavations directed by Andrew Dunwell (1999, 310, fig 5) |
| Excavation (1996): | Directed by Andrew Dunwell (1996; 1999) |
| Other (1999): | Re-Scheduled |
No original structures belonging to the fort are visible within the interior, one end of which is occupied by a broch standing within an enclosure, and the rest by a late Iron Age settlement of at least ten stone-founded round-houses associated with yards and courts that sprawls across the defences at the opposite end.
None
| None | ✓ |
| Spring | ✗ |
| Stream | ✗ |
| Pool | ✗ |
| Flush | ✗ |
| Well | ✗ |
| Other | ✗ |
And a broch
| No Known Features | ✗ |
| Round Stone Structures | ✓ |
| Rectangular Stone Structures | ✗ |
| Curvilinear Platforms | ✗ |
| Other Roundhouse Evidence | ✗ |
| Pits | ✗ |
| Quarry Hollows | ✗ |
| Other | ✓ |
Stone-founded round-houses, many of which were emptied out in the 19th century excavations and some of which were sampled in 1996
| No Known Excavation | ✗ |
| Pits | ✗ |
| Postholes | ✗ |
| Roundhouses | ✓ |
| Rectangular Structures | ✗ |
| Roads/Tracks | ✗ |
| Quarry Hollows | ✗ |
| Other | ✗ |
| Nothing Found | ✗ |
None
| No Known Geophysics | ✓ |
| Pits | ✗ |
| Roundhouses | ✗ |
| Rectangular Structures | ✗ |
| Roads/Tracks | ✗ |
| Quarry Hollows | ✗ |
| Other | ✗ |
| Nothing Found | ✗ |
From the 19th century excavations these are listed as: a stone whorl; hones; shale bracelet; amber bead; bones and teeth; fragment of a glass bracelet; fragments of quernstones; and a late medieval bronze stud and buckle (Turnbull 1881, 96-7). A catalogue by Fraser Hunter of all the finds is included in the report on the excavations in 1996 (Dunwell 1999): roughout for a stone pendant or bead; perforated stone disc, probably an unfinished pendant or bead; a cannel coal ring; glass armlet fragment; amber bead; late medieval brooch; a bronze stud; two whetstones; stone rubber; hammerstone; two sherds of coarse pottery; and a stray find of a plano-convex copper ingot found nearby.
| No Known Finds | ✗ |
| Pottery | ✓ |
| Metal | ✓ |
| Metalworking | ✗ |
| Human Bones | ✗ |
| Animal Bones | ✓ |
| Lithics | ✗ |
| Environmental | ✗ |
| Other | ✓ |
And the broch
| APs Not Checked | ✗ |
| None | ✗ |
| Roundhouses | ✓ |
| Rectangular Structures | ✗ |
| Pits | ✗ |
| Postholes | ✗ |
| Roads/Tracks | ✗ |
| Other | ✓ |
See main summary
| 4: | None |
| 2: | It is difficult to discern any original entrances to the fort |
Guard Chambers: ✗
Chevaux de Frise: ✗
In its final form the fort defences comprised two ramparts with ditches, but this almost certainly represents an extension of an earlier scheme
| Area 1: | 0.87ha. |
| Area 2: | 0.73haf. |
| Total: | 0.87ha. |
Total Footprint Area: 1.7ha.
None
| ✓ | None |
| ✓ | None |
| NE Quadrant: | 2 |
| SE Quadrant: | 2 |
| SW Quadrant: | 3 |
| NW Quadrant: | 2 |
| Total: | 3 |
| Partial Univallate | ✗ |
| Univallate | ✗ |
| Partial Bivallate | ✓ |
| Bivallate | ✗ |
| Partial Multivallate | ✓ |
| Multivallate | ✗ |
| Unknown | ✗ |
| Partial Univallate | ✓ |
| Univallate | ✗ |
| Partial Bivallate | ✗ |
| Bivallate | ✗ |
| Partial Multivallate | ✗ |
| Multivallate | ✗ |
None
| None | ✗ |
| Earthen Bank | ✓ |
| Stone Wall | ✓ |
| Rubble | ✗ |
| Wall-walk | ✗ |
| Evidence of Timber | ✗ |
| Vitrification | ✗ |
| Other Burning | ✗ |
| Palisade | ✗ |
| Counter Scarp Bank | ✗ |
| Berm | ✗ |
| Unfinished | ✗ |
| Other | ✗ |
Ditches
| None | ✗ |
| Earthen Bank | ✓ |
| Stone Wall | ✓ |
| Murus Duplex | ✗ |
| Timber-framed | ✗ |
| Timber-laced | ✗ |
| Vitrification | ✗ |
| Other Burning | ✗ |
| Palisade | ✗ |
| Counter Scarp Bank | ✗ |
| Berm | ✗ |
| Unfinished | ✗ |
| No Known Excavation | ✗ |
| Other | ✓ |
| ✗ | None |
| ✓ | This relates to the most obvious defensive phase |
Number of Ditches: 2
| ✗ | None |
Christison, D (1895) 'The forts of Selkirk, the Gala Water, the Southern slopes of the Lammermoors, and the north of Roxburgh'. Proc Soc Antiq Scot 29 (1894-50), 108-79
Dunwell, A (1996) 'Edin's Hall (Duns parish), fort, broch and settlement'. Disc Exc Scot (1996), 88
Dunwell, A (1999) 'Edin's Hall fort, broch and settlement, Berwickshire (Scottish Borders): recent fieldwork and new perceptions'. Proc Soc Antiq Scot 129 (1999), 303-57
Feachem, R W (1963) A guide to prehistoric Scotland. Batsford: London
Lefroy, G (1870) Contained in 'Proceedings at meetings of the Royal Archaeological Institute'. Archaeol J 27 (1870), 61-2
Michie, A (1869) 'A visit to Etin's Hald'. Trans Hawick Archaeol Soc (1869), 43-6
RCAHMS (1909) The Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments and Constructions of Scotland. First report and Inventory of Monuments and Constructions in the County of Berwick. HMSO: Edinburgh.
RCAHMS (1915) The Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments and Constructions of Scotland. Sixth report and Inventory of Monuments and Constructions in the County of Berwick (Revised Issue). HMSO: Edinburgh
Stuart, J (1868-70) 'Notice of a Circular Structure known as 'Edin's Hall,' on Cockburnlaw, one of the Lammermoor Hills'. Proc Soc Antiq Scot 8 (1868-70), 41-6
Turnbull, G (1856) 'An account of Edin's Hall, in the parish of Dunse, and County of Berwick'. Hist Berwickshire Natur Club 3 (1850-6), 9-20
Turnbull, J (1881) 'On Edin's Hall'. Hist Berwickshire Natur Club 9 (1879-81), 81-99
Atlas of Hillforts:
Wikidata:
This work is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0
and should be cited as:
Lock, Gary and Ralston, Ian. 2024. Atlas of Hillforts of Britain and Ireland. Available at: https://hillforts.arch.ox.ac.uk
Document Version 1.1