“WATCH out for the cow pat,” a friendly chap called Peter Dunn says as he carries a large tool bag full of various trowels and shovels which clunk away as we walk over a lush green field just off a busy road in Stirlingshire.
At the other end of the field, there were about 25 to 30 people gathered around in a semi-circle, all volunteers and all here for the same reason – to see if an old map was correct and that there were, in fact, the remains of either a fort or harbour built by the Romans.
They were all facing a man in a waterproof jacket sporting a grey beanie hat standing in front of them, an archaeologist for Stirling Council, Dr Murray Cook.
He was addressing the volunteers on what they were aiming to discover, a sea of faces all captivated and brimming with excitement at the prospect of potentially finding evidence which supports a natural harbour in the River Forth used by the Romans.
READ MORE: Volunteer archaeologist finds 1000-year-old Pictish ring at Scottish dig
The briefing took around 10 minutes. Dr Cook ended it by thanking everyone for giving up their time and encouraging them to have fun, and with that each person made their way to their allocated dig site, most with a shovel in hand.
While the bulk of the volunteers, a mixture of retired history enthusiasts and some archaeology students, Dr Cook decided to show me the “dog’s leg” which forms the natural harbour in the river.
It’s a short distance to get to the main part of the river, but between hopping over metal gates used to keep cattle penned in and side-stepping nettles and giant hogweed, it took us slightly longer to reach the main part of the river.
While we were walking, Dr Cook explained he had reason to believe through documentation that small boats were used to transport goods and people up the River Forth and that they docked at the natural harbour in Manor Powis, on the outskirts of Stirling.
He said the location would be logistically perfect as the harbour, which is only a few metres in width, looped around in a triangle from the river and offers protection from stormy weather.
“It’s extremely likely that a great army was here,” said Dr Cook.
“I mean, this is incredible,” he explained as we discussed the likelihood of the area being used by not just the Romans, but also the Vikings, Celts and Picts.
READ MORE: Historic shipwreck exposed by storms on Scottish island to be preserved in tank
He added: “It's extremely likely that a Viking Great Army was here where we're standing, at least they will have walked across it.
“They will have been thinking about Dumyat, they will have been thinking about Abbey Craig.
“We know Abbey Craig is occupied around 900 and we know it was destroyed by fire.
“If it was the Viking Great Army that destroyed it, and if you've got a Viking army arriving by boat, you're not going to go around the meanders, this might be where they stop.
“That's speculation, but that's one of the thrills of archaeology.
“That's why we're looking for this Roman fort.”
The harbour would have offered people a quicker route to Stirling without having to wind through the full river and it would have allowed easy access to a hill fort on Dumyat and to the Abbey Craig – which the Wallace Monument sits on today – as it is located perfectly in between all three locations.
It is also why Dr Cook believes there was a Roman fort in the area too as the River Forth would have offered a strong footing in Scotland and a great strategic advantage for an army.
When we made our way back to the main field, the volunteers had already made significant progress in excavating two areas on the bank of the river.
Most of them had already taken their waterproof jackets off despite it being quite cool as the areas being dug were covered in shade by nearby trees. It looked like tiring work.
Both trenches were around five metres long, around a metre wide, and one metre deep.
People took it in turn to shovel out soil, with others taking buckets full of earth to larger bags used to store it, as it must all go back once the excavation is finished.
Others sifted through the soil to make sure nothing was missing, there were plenty of keen eyes looking out for any traces of the past.
Dunn explained they would keep digging until they removed the top layer of soil, and hit subsoil, which tends to be clay.
The subsoil is usually untouched by man or nature and is commonly regarded as a defining point between archaeology and geology.
“We’re not interested in geology,” Dunn joked.
They are all looking for some form of wall or wharf that would stop the natural erosion of the riverbank and allow boats to come right up next to the land to make it easier to dock.
The main indicator for some form of manmade structure would be “a cut in the soil” which is a marking in the earth.
Dunn kept a watchful eye out for markings of potentially old post holes in the soil as he believed if there was a harbour in use it could have a wooden structure like a wall or a palisade built along it.
“I like to prove historians wrong,” Dunn said with a small chuckle. “Was there a castle there, we're not sure, okay prove it”.
He got into archaeology because he likes to find evidence, he likes to find “proof”, and as an avid fan of Scottish heritage, it gave him an outlet to “sink his teeth” into Scotland’s history.
Dunn has been a stalwart of the volunteering community for archaeological digs ever since he retired, travelling across the central belt, and Dr Cook has been training him so he can look after trenches as he helps other people on the site.
“It's nice, you’ve got a responsibility, and you know what you've got to do and it's just nice to say, ‘that's my trench’,” Dunn said.
He added that most people might find it boring, especially when you reach the lower levels of the soil and you have to take it painstakingly slowly, but it is his favourite part.
“I just love to dig,” he said.
Another volunteer, 80-year-old Christine Calder, spoke about how despite her physically being unable to partake in the digging element of the excavation, she enjoys coming along and helping in any other ways she can.
“When you get to my age, you've got to be sensible,” she laughed, explaining she has an artificial left knee and usually helps by using her metal detector.
READ MORE: Archaeologist sheds light on where in Scotland Stonehenge's Altar Stone comes from
“I'm always interested in the history of the area, which I think probably has been neglected over centuries, and there's so much here, and we're finding more and more,” Calder said.
As the day progressed, there were some signs of past life - some blue glass was found and some pottery which Dr Murray speculated dated to around the 1600s or 1700s and could have come from either the Romans or medieval times.
He believed the two of the larger round pieces could be jug handles and a smaller curved piece could have come from a bowl.
There was a castle in Manor Powis which dated back to the 1500s and there was speculation that the ceramics and glass could have come from there.
With every little find, there was a flurry of excitement, that was infectious, and everyone gathered around and had a look at every new finding regardless of how small it may have been.
Each discovery will be logged and sent to a specialist; the glass will go to Dr Murray’s colleagues in the National Museum of Scotland and the pottery will go to a friend of his in Perth who is an expert in ceramics.
Despite neither of the trenches on the riverbanks showing any signs of human activity regarding a harbour, Dr Cook still has hope there is something to be discovered in the field as he planned to move the search further along the following day.
“We've barely started,” he said. “What have we dug, 10 metres worth of trenches, less than half of 1% of the area?
“The important thing here is to figure out the lay of the land, to know how to get to it, to know what we should be looking at, and that then builds the grounds for subsequent seasons where perhaps instead of coming for two days, we come for three days or four days and we get 23 times as much work done.”
He added: “There's only so much I can do, otherwise I'll get divorced.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here