Projectiles,Ballistae,and Burnswark

Абрамков А.О.

Burnswark Hill

Burnswark Hill in Dumfriesshire overlooks the Solway plain. Its hillfort, covering about 17 acres, lies between two Roman camps. The northern camp is elongated; the southern camp has three broad exits facing the summit, protected by earthworks known as the Three Brethren. This unusual arrangement underlies the debate over whether the camps served military training or an actual attack.

Roman camp - training or siege?

The camps were long interpreted as siege works. In the twentieth century Kenneth Steer proposed that the slope had instead been used for military training and target practice. This interpretation influenced later scholarship but remained contested. An unusual camp plan alone cannot reliably distinguish an exercise from a combat operation.

Previous studies

Excavations in 1898 for the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland recovered lead sling bullets, stone artillery projectiles and metal equipment. George Jobey investigated the site in the 1960s and published his results in 1978. He concluded that bombardment followed the collapse of the main stone rampart and favoured a training interpretation. Concentrations of sling bullets near the gates were linked to targets, although the distribution also reflected the limited areas excavated.

Trimontium Trust organised a new investigation combining battlefield archaeology, systematic metal detection and experimental testing. The work described in John Reid’s 2016 account began in 2015 following Heritage Lottery Fund support. Rather than removing every detected object, the team first recorded signals and coordinates, then tested selected areas in small trenches. This approach mapped projectile distribution while preserving most archaeological deposits.

Detector responses were compared with known bullets from the older museum collection. The aim was to relate finds to camps, gates, slopes and rampart remains. A detector signal is not itself an identified ancient object; excavation was needed to test the interpretation.

Morphology of the Roman camp

Under the assault interpretation, the southern camp formed an attack base while the northern camp blocked escape. The southern camp stood roughly 130–150 m from two hillfort entrances, and its three broad uphill exits could facilitate troop movement. The narrower northern camp faced the more protected northern slope. Larger ditches on the hill-facing sides also admit a military explanation. These are interpretations of the layout, not direct evidence for a particular order or sequence of attack.

Roman shells

Before the new project, approximately 130 lead sling bullets, nine iron arrowheads and eleven worked stone artillery projectiles were known. The lead finds included lemon-shaped and acorn-shaped forms, many weighing around 50 g. Earlier concentrations near gates must be considered alongside the extent of the old excavations.

Red sandstone projectiles averaged around 600 g and often had a flattened side. Alan Wilkins connected this feature with seating a projectile on the slider of a torsion engine. Their relatively low weight is consistent with use against people, but the precise engine and its deployment remain matters of interpretation.

Three-bladed iron arrowheads were found on the southern rampart. Such forms occur in Roman weaponry of the first and second centuries, but an arrowhead alone does not establish the origin of its archer.

Researchers also distinguished small lead bullets, often below 20 g, with small round holes, designated Type III. The function of the holes was tested experimentally rather than inferred from appearance alone.

Experiments with a sling

Experiments used replicas of ancient projectiles and slings made from different materials. Larger bullets could reach approximately 200 m, depending on throwing technique and the slinger’s skill. Projectiles buried in turf were difficult to recover even when painted. During rapid shooting some ammunition was dropped while loading; such losses may explain concentrations but cannot alone locate an ancient firing position.

Several small bullets could be released together, producing a spread of impacts. Replicas with holes made a buzzing sound in flight. Psychological intimidation offers a possible explanation for this feature, but the makers’ intentions and the defenders’ reactions cannot be established directly. Modern experiments demonstrate capabilities rather than reproduce every ancient shot.

Projectile distribution

The report on the 2015 work records more than 2,000 metal signals during seven days of survey; around 700 resembled lead projectile responses. Coordinates were mapped, and two 10 × 2 m trenches tested the survey: one inside the hillfort and one on its southern rampart. Lead and stone projectiles and an iron artillery bolt head were recovered.

The team reported a 94% correspondence between predicted and recovered finds in the tested areas. This measures that survey’s performance, not universal detector accuracy. Projectile positions supported the conclusion that bombardment followed the collapse of the stone rampart.

Storming of Burnswark Hill

The camp layout, variety of ammunition and distribution of projectiles support an actual assault interpretation. Bombardment was not confined to the gates; finds extended along a substantial stretch of the hillfort’s southern edge. A possible reconstruction combines suppressive sling, arrow and artillery fire with an infantry advance from the southern camp. Archaeology does not establish exact troop numbers, casualties or every stage of the operation.

Dating and open questions

The 2016 account considered alternative dates: the period after Hadrian’s Wall was built and the beginning of the advance under Antoninus Pius. Limited dating evidence did not allow a choice on ammunition alone. Proposals for further investigation in that report belong to their original historical context, not to a newly announced project. The ancient event’s date must be distinguished from excavation dates and modern reconstructions.

Archaeological context

Projectile distribution needs to be considered with camp topography and excavation history. Useful comparisons include Trimontium / Newstead, other archaeological sites and Roman missile weapon finds.

Related topics

The Slinger,Throwing Machines

Literature and sources

• Reid, John. Bullets, Ballistas, and Burnswark: A Roman Assault on a Hillfort in Scotland. Current Archaeology, 316, June 2016.
• Trimontium Museum catalogue: author and publication details