supposed to imply." By quoting other longitudinal calculations, Mr. Cole winds up his argument thus: "1st, actual examination of the locality shews the former existence of a harbour here, a fact in agreement with both tradition and history. 2nd, the encampment and vestiges of ironworks prove the harbour to have been known to the Romans. 3rd, a Roman harbour called Portus Novus was situated at this very part of the Coast. These three considerations put together seem to lead inevitably to the conclusion that Hastings was a Roman Port, and that Portus Novus was the name of Roman Hastings."
Mr. Dawson, in his "Hastings Castle," has the following reference to Roman Hastings: "At what time iron-ore was first worked in Sussex for smelting, is a question which we cannot answer at present for want of evidence ; but it is almost certain that the passage in Caesar's Commentaries of the Gallic War, which states that iron is found in the maritime districts, related to the iron found near the Sussex Shores. If so, this would go to prove that the art of smelting iron was practised in Sussex before the first Roman Invasion, although earlier remains have not been positively identified in the cinder-heaps which abound in the vicinity of Hastings. The magnificent gold hoard discovered in 1863 at Mountfield, testified that Hastings was, at all events, near some important centre of the Celtic tribes. It is quite certain that iron-ore was extensively worked in Sussex during the time of the Roman occupation of Britain. Roman and Romano-British remains are common in the cinder-heaps of Beauport, near Hastings." So far as the Author is able to ascertain there is not sufficient evidence to shew that any considerable settlement existed at Hastings itself during Roman times. The reported discoveries of remains dating from this period are so extremely rare and doubtful, taking into account the large amount of excavation which has been carried out at Hastings for building purposes during recent years, that it is impossible to conceive that anything like a fair-sized settlement could have existed without leaving some more definite mark of its presence.
It is, of course, possible to suppose, as some have done, that for a Roman oppidum (city or town) flourished south of the supposed shore, on land now submerged; but even had this been the case, one would have surely found more evidences of its existence on the immediately adjoining land. On the other hand, it is quite within the bounds of possibility, owing to the "Eastward drift," that there may have been no port on the site of Hastings during the Roman occupation. The supposed traces of Roman entrenchments (found by Ross) upon the East Hill must be considered, for the present at all events, very much open to question. Traces of Roman occupation have never been known to occur in or about the Castle or West Hill.
Much importance must be attached to the testimony of the author of "The History of Hastings Castle."[a]
Cite error: <ref> tags exist for a group named "Notes", but no corresponding <references group="Notes"/> tag was found
