Austin Fort and section of military road


Heritage Category:
Scheduled Monument
List Entry Number:
Date first listed:


Ordnance survey map of Austin Fort and section of military road
© Crown Copyright and database right 2019. All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey Licence number 100024900.
© British Crown and SeaZone Solutions Limited 2019. All rights reserved. Licence number 102006.006.
Use of this data is subject to Terms and Conditions.

The above map is for quick reference purposes only and may not be to scale. For a copy of the full scale map, please see the attached PDF - 1021380 .pdf

The PDF will be generated from our live systems and may take a few minutes to download depending on how busy our servers are. We apologise for this delay.

This copy shows the entry on 14-Oct-2019 at 11:23:42.


The building or site itself may lie within the boundary of more than one authority.

City of Plymouth (Unitary Authority)
National Grid Reference:
SX 50485 57501

Reasons for Designation

The Royal Commission fortifications are a group of related sites established in response to the 1859 Royal Commission report on the defence of the United Kingdom. This had been set up following an invasion scare caused by the strengthening of the French Navy. These fortifications represented the largest maritime defence programme since the initiative of Henry VIII in 1539-40. The programme built upon the defensive works already begun at Plymouth and elsewhere and recommended the improvement of existing fortifications as well as the construction of new ones. There were eventually some 70 forts and batteries in England which were due wholly or in part to the Royal Commission. These constitute a well defined group with common design characteristics, armament and defensive provisions. Whether reused or not during the 20th century, they are the most visible core of Britain's coastal defence systems and are known colloquially as `Palmerston's follies'. All examples are considered of national importance.

Although it has been utilised as a depot leading to the erection of temporary buildings and structures within its interior, Austin Fort survives as a nearly complete example of a fort and gun battery of Royal Commission date which retains components such as a near complete guardhouse, casemated magazines, and rock-cut defences with counterscarp gun casemates and gallery, many of which are in an excellent state of preservation. The fort has a long section of purpose-built military road surviving in association with it. Austin Fort was a major site within the integrated, planned, and coherent defensive complex which included the associated and nearby sites of Eggbuckland Fort, Forder Battery, and Bowden Battery. This position in turn formed a key part of the wider defensive system for the naval dockyard at Plymouth, a system which, by virtue of its grand scale and sheer strength, indicated the extent to which Britain would go to protect its naval interests. The monument survives therefore as a little-changed visual reminder of Victorian military power and thinking.


The monument includes Austin Fort, a mid to late 19th century fort and battery which survives as a four-sided work located on a spur overlooking the Forder Valley, and part of the contemporary military road which served it. The fort was defended by rock-cut ditches which are now partly infilled whilst the military road was defended by an earthwork bank which concealed the movement of troops behind it. Austin Fort formed part of the north east land defences of Plymouth which encircled the Plymouth Harbourage and which were intended to protect it from land attack in the event of invasion. Austin Fort represented a major site within an arrow-shaped position comprising Bowden and Forder batteries and Eggbuckland Keep. Fears of a French invasion of Britain in the middle years of the 19th century led to the formation of a Royal Commission in 1859 to consider the defences of the United Kingdom. The Royal Commission's recommendations for Plymouth were acted upon by Major W F D Jervois and resulted in the completion, by 1872, of six new coastal batteries and a ring of eighteen land forts and batteries based on three principal forts at Staddon and Crownhill on the Devon side of the harbour, and Tregantle on the Cornish side. The land forts and batteries were linked by a system of military roads protected from the likely direction of attack by earth traverses and cuttings. Construction of Austin Fort began in about 1863 and it was completed shortly after 1868. It was designed for 15 guns and five mortars, with five earth traverses containing expense magazines. The fort is trapezoidal in shape with deep rock-cut ditches on the north, north east, and south east flanks, these ditches being enfiladed by two pairs of 32-pounder gun casemates (vaulted chambers) located in the counterscarp at the north east and east salients. Access to the gun casemates was via a tunnel from the parade ground to the site of a mortar battery and thence by another tunnel to the east salient. Running the length of the counterscarp on the north east ditch is a loop-holed gallery connecting the two gun casemates. The gorge (the ditch at the rear of the fort) was enfiladed by two pairs of 32-pounder guns in each flank of the guardhouse and by loop-holed galleries in the gorge wall and over the parapet above. The ditch on this side is infilled but all the other elements are visible including the guardhouse which provided the only entrance into the fort over a drawbridge which was subsequently removed. The entrance was protected by musketry loops in two projecting caponiers (casemated works projecting into the ditch). Spiral stairs give access to the rampart on either side of the guardhouse which was originally protected by an earth traverse that was later removed. At the rear of the guardhouse is the main magazine. All five of the expense magazines which served the guns mounted on the rampart survive whole or in part although they have lost their earth covering to some extent. The gun positions adjacent to the expense magazines vary in the degree of their visibility with the two at the south either demolished or hidden. Three mortar batteries survive overgrown in the north west, east and south salients. Much of the glacis (the slope around the fort which was usually cleared of obstructions) originally associated with the fort now lies under modern housing. The fort was approached from the south west by a purpose-built military road which was part of a road system that connected all the forts and batteries of the line. In common with other sections of the road it was defended by an earthwork bank 10m wide and up to 4m high which protected troop movements against incoming fire. A section, between 360m-370m long, of the military road and embankment is included in the scheduling, this section being the best preserved and largely intact portion of the road where it lies adjacent to Austin Fort. The site was used in World War II by the Devon and Cornwall Auxiliary Unit and in 1984 the guardhouse was converted to the Plymouth City Emergency Centre for Civil Defence. All modern prefabricated structures and offices, sheds, huts, stores and racking, signage, telegraph poles, stores of building materials, fencing, road surfaces, and modern surfaces and hard standings, are excluded from the scheduling although the ground beneath all of these features is included.

MAP EXTRACT The site of the monument is shown on the attached map extract.


The contents of this record have been generated from a legacy data system.

Legacy System number:
Legacy System:


Books and journals
Pye, A, Woodward, F, The Historic Defences of Plymouth, (1996), 185
Pye, A, Woodward, F, The Historic Defences of Plymouth, (1996), 183-85


This monument is scheduled under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 as amended as it appears to the Secretary of State to be of national importance. This entry is a copy, the original is held by the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport.

End of official listing

Your Contributions

Do you know more about this entry?

The following information has been contributed by users volunteering for our Enriching The List project. For small corrections to the List Entry please see our Minor Amendments procedure.

The information and images below are the opinion of the contributor, are not part of the official entry and do not represent the official position of Historic England. We have not checked that the contributions below are factually accurate. Please see our terms and conditions. If you wish to report an issue with a contribution or have a question please email [email protected].