Exploring Kent's Past

It should not be assumed that this site is publicly accessible and it may be on private property. Do not trespass.

Monument details

Summary

Site of a medieval moated and fortified manor house, 13th-14th century in date. Finds recovered from excavations include Roman pottery and Mesolithic flint implements.

Monument Types

• FORTIFIED HOUSE (Medieval - 1200 AD to 1399 AD)
• MOAT (MOAT, Medieval - 1200 AD to 1399 AD)

Associated Finds

• FLAKE (Early Mesolithic to Early Neolithic - 10000 BC to 4000 BC)
• SCRAPER (TOOL) (Mesolithic - 10000 BC to 4001 BC)
• VESSEL (Roman - 43 AD to 409 AD)

Full description

If you do not understand anything on this page please contact us.

[TQ 9184 6597] Castle Rough [NR] (1) Possible Danish defensive work - uncertain (2). Castle Rough in Milton is usually said to be a Danish fortress site, constructed c. 893. It is not large enough to serve an army, but may have sheltered Danish marauders or conversely have been a defensive work against the Danes. The moat on the S.W. side is about 12ft. below the enclosed mount, and a little less on the other sides. (3) Castle Rough is of square form, surrounded by a high bank, thrown up, and a broad ditch. There is a raised causeway, very plain to be seen,leading from it towards the sea shore (4). Two Viking fleets set out from France in 893 under the leadership of Hastein. The second division advanced up the Thames and encamped at Milton-next-Sittingbourne. The small, rectangular earthwork near Milton Creek, known as Castle Rough, may mark the encampment but it was hardly of sufficient size to accommodate Hastein's army (5). Castle Rough. The earthwork lies at the foot of the E. slope of Kemsley Down, a few feet above present sea level. 70 metres square in plan, it comprises a broad ditch with a slight outer bank on all sides but the N.W.; the interior is nearly level. The ditch has a maximum depth of 2.5 metres on the N.W. side. It is everywhere dry, but doubtless was originally filled, by tidal means, from the E. corner. There is no trace of the original entrance nor of internal occupation. There is also a marked absence of an inner rampart. The earthwork is in fairly good condition; partially covered by trees and bushes. It has the appearance of a normal homestead moat (6). The place called Castle Rough on Kemsley Downs is wholly unsuited to be the stronghold of an army, it is too small even to have accommodated Hastein's men and there was no place for the ships. This small square-shaped enclosure appears to be the site of a fortified manor house. (7) [TQ 918 660] Castle Rough, scheduled (8). Examination of "Castle Rough" by the Sittingbourne and Swale Archaeological Research Group in c. 1972, provided evidence that it was in fact constructed in the 13th or 14th century. The site comprises a water-filled moat of average width 7 metres, surrounding amound 45 metres by 43 metres in area, and 3 metres high above water level. The ground is now pasture, with a dense clump of bushes on the mound. The banks of the moat are being eroded by cattle. A single trench, divided into three sections was opened on the south flank of the mound. On cutting through its make up it was found to consist of brickearth, sand, and blue clay, throughout which were scattered Mesolithic scrapers and flakes. In the lowest deposit just above the natural brickearth, several sherds of Romano-British pottery were found accompanied by some sherds of 13th or 14th century green- glazed pottery. All the artifacts seemed to have been brought in with the dumped earth. The presence of the medieval pottery in the mounds make up suggest that the "Castle" was constructed at least 500 years after the visit of the Danes. (See Illustration Card for plan.) (9). Mesolithic flints from the 1972 excavations (10). [TQ 918 660] Castle Rough, listed in the county checklist for moated sites in Kent - December 1979 (11). Castle Rough moat and island site are large. Water encircles all four sides with a stream running into Milton Creek as a secondary defence on the south-east side. In parts the water is shallow enough to allow wading on to the island. This is partly open grass, but there is much thorn shrub and there has been recent interference in the shape of the trenching (a). The monument is as described in (a); the moat is as wide as 6 metres in places. On the north side where the moat is shallow are tracks across the island made by a tractor. Much of the thorn shrub on top has been uprooted (b) (12). Additional references (13-16) and site photographs (17-32).

From the National Heritage List for England:
Details
Castle Rough, which local legend has as a Danish/Viking encampment dating from 893, is a fine example of a Medieval moated manor site. A waterlogged moat some 6-8m across defines an island 45m square on which the buildings of the manor stood, although traces of these are no longer visible on the surface. On the south-west side of the moat a D-shaped raised area probably represents the site of an external gatehouse, while at the eastern and southern corners leats which guided the flow of water into and away from the moat survive. Moated sites are generally seen as the prestigious residences of the Lords of the Manor. The moat marked the high status of the occupier but also served to deter casual raiders and wild animals. Most moats were built between 1250 and 1350, and small-scale excavation at the site has confirmed that Castle Rough originated at about that time.

Reasons for Designation
Around 6,000 moated sites are known in England. They consist of wide ditches, often or seasonally water-filled, partly or completely enclosing one or more islands of dry ground on which stood domestic or religious buildings. In some cases the islands were used for horticulture. The majority of moated sites served as prestigious aristocratic and seigneurial residences with the provision of a moat intended as a status symbol rather than a practical military defence. The peak period during which moated sites were built was between about 1250 and 1350 and by far the greatest concentration lies in central and eastern parts of England. However, moated sites were built throughout the medieval period, are widely scattered throughout England and exhibit a high level of diversity in their forms and sizes. They form a significant class of medieval monument and are important for the understanding of the distribution of wealth and status in the countryside. Many examples provide conditions favourable to the survival of organic remains.

The moated site at Castle Rough is of particular importance because it survives to a great extent intact. This has preserved a diverse range of features in addition to the moat itself, including a barbican gate which has not been identified at any other Kent moated site. The continued wetness of the moat indicates that the site has high archaeological potential for the recovery of normally perishable artefacts and other evidence, while the undisturbed and raised nature of the island suggests that the archaeological potential is high there too, both for the recovery of evidence of the buildings on the island and for the retrieval of evidence of the environment in which the monument was constructed from the buried ground surface.

<1> OS 6" 1938-47 (OS Card Reference). SKE48354.

<2> OS Ancient Britain Map Index 1951 (OS Card Reference). SKE48401.

<3> VCH Kent 1 1908 432-3 sketch plan 1 (Chalkley Gould FSA) (OS Card Reference). SKE50906.

<4> History of Kent 1782 2 616 631 (E Hasted) (OS Card Reference). SKE44099.

<5> Arch of Kent 1930 246-7 (R F Jessup) (OS Card Reference). SKE36902.

<6> F1 ASP 31-JUL-59 (OS Card Reference). SKE42362.

<7> Arch J 42 1885 294 (F C J Spurrell) (OS Card Reference). SKE36637.

<8> DOE (IAM) AMs England 2 1978 112 (OS Card Reference). SKE40697.

<9> Kent Arch Review 31 Spring 1973 15-19 plans (OS Card Reference). SKE45852.

<10> Kent Arch Review 32 Summer 1973 60-61 illust (OS Card Reference). SKE45853.

<11> Moated Sites Research Gp 6 1979 47 (OS Card Reference). SKE47290.

<12> AM 12 J Melhuish (OS Card Reference). SKE33002.

<13> AM 107 K Chant 1982 (OS Card Reference). SKE33000.

<14> HBMC Record Forms (OS Card Reference). SKE43751.

<15> Field report for monument TQ 96 NW 10 - July, 1959 (Bibliographic reference). SKE4869.

<16> Sittingbourne and Swale Archaeological Group, Site Files, C13 9(a) 94 (Index). SWX9396.

<17> 1946, Photograph (Photograph (Print)). SWX9534.

<18> 1946, Photograph (Photograph (Print)). SWX9542.

<19> 1946, Photograph (Photograph (Print)). SWX9543.

<20> 2000, Photograph (Photograph (Print)). SWX10449.

<21> 1953, Photograph (Photograph (Print)). SWX10701.

<22> 1956, Photograph (Photograph (Print)). SWX10718.

<23> 1953, Photograph (Photograph (Print)). SWX11287.

<24> 1953, Photograph (Photograph (Print)). SWX11288.

<25> 1953, Photograph (Photograph (Print)). SWX11289.

<26> 1998, Photograph (Photograph (Print)). SWX11290.

<27> 1998, Photograph (Photograph (Print)). SWX11291.

<28> 1998, Photograph (Photograph (Print)). SWX11292.

<29> 1986, Photograph (Photograph (Print)). SWX11293.

<30> 1986, Photograph (Photograph (Print)). SWX11294.

<31> 1986, Photograph (Photograph (Print)). SWX11295.

<32> 1986, Photograph (Photograph (Print)). SWX11298.

<33> English Heritage, Register of Scheduled Monuments (Scheduling record). SKE16191.

Sources and further reading