Explore Forts.im
Shore.forts.im
Sources

Where the facts come from

Every factual claim on this site links to its source. This is the full list.

How we checked

Each fact was written alongside its source. Our build script stores the source text and, for every fact, checks that the key words and figures really appear in it. 191 of 191 checks passed when this site was last built (checked 3 Nov 2026). Where we couldn’t read a source, we left the claim out. We quote short phrases only, and never reproduce anyone’s photographs or plans.

Figures that change

Opening times, entry and access change, so we don’t give them. This site gives no travel advice.

What we leave out

This is a site about the history of the Saxon Shore forts and about how to read them. It isn’t a visitor guide with live opening times, prices or access advice. Where a source gives an interpretation or says the answer is unknown, we say so rather than choose for it. Where two sources give different numbers or dates, we show both rather than pick one.

English Heritage: Roman Coastal Defences and the Saxon Shore (story of England) (1)

English Heritage: visitor and history pages (13)

UK government (Department for Education) (1)

When sources disagree

Where sources give different dates or numbers, or tell a story differently, we show all of it, with links, and say how we handle it.

Why were the forts built?

How we handle it: The name “Saxon Shore” led to a long-standing assumption that the forts were built against Saxon pirates, and English Heritage’s Portchester history still says so. English Heritage’s Saxon Shore article says there is no written evidence for raiding in Britain when the early forts were built, and that the later forts may have been built to defend Britain against Rome. Its Burgh Castle page says they are thought to have been a defence against seaborne raiders, naval bases and defended trading centres.

Were they one system?

How we handle it: English Heritage’s Pevensey history says it is not clear whether the forts were set up as one defensive system. The Saxon Shore article says they were built at different times, that some seem to have worked as pairs, and that some had been abandoned by the time the Notitia list was compiled.

When was Caister built?

How we handle it: English Heritage’s Caister page says about AD 200. Its Saxon Shore article says the AD 230s. The pages do not say why they differ.

Best preserved, and where?

How we handle it: English Heritage’s Portchester overview calls it the best-preserved Roman fort in northern Europe. Its Portchester history says the best preserved Roman fort north of the Alps. Its Saxon Shore article says Portchester has the best-preserved Roman fort walls north of the Alps.

How tall was the arch, and when was it built?

How we handle it: English Heritage’s Richborough history says 25 metres tall, probably built between AD 85 and 150. Its page on the arch says 26 metres high and around AD 90, then explains that 1920s and 1930s digs suggested the reign of Domitian (AD 81 to 96), that recent analysis allows any time between AD 90 and 150, and that we may never know who ordered it.

When was Richborough’s stone fort built?

How we handle it: English Heritage’s Richborough history says AD 275 to 290. Its Saxon Shore article says about AD 275 to 285.

When was Portchester built?

How we handle it: English Heritage’s Portchester history says there is no clear evidence for the date, that coins date it to after about 268, and shows a reconstruction drawing of it being built probably between AD 285 and 290. Its Saxon Shore article says around AD 286.

When was the Notitia compiled?

How we handle it: English Heritage’s Saxon Shore article says probably between AD 390 and 420. Its Portchester history says the date is disputed, but commonly placed between AD 380 and 420. Its Pevensey history says the western part is usually regarded as late 4th or early 5th century. Some of its information may be much older.

Which Roman name goes with which fort?

How we handle it: Portchester is the favoured candidate for Portus Adurni, but the other candidate is the lost Walton Castle. One or both of Burgh Castle and Caister were called Gariannonum. The Anglo-Saxon Cnobheresburh may have been Burgh Castle, but Caister is also a likely candidate.

How wide was the Wantsum Channel?

How we handle it: English Heritage’s Richborough history says up to 2 miles wide. Its Reculver history says up to 3 miles wide. The pages do not say where or when each width was measured.