Yet that gentle irregularity is the ghost of a substantial enclosure, roughly rectangular with rounded corners, measuring around 28.5 metres north to south and 19 metres east to west. What makes it quietly arresting is the way it survives at all: levelled to the point where the ordnance surveyors of the early 1950s saw no reason to mark it on their revised maps, it had been clearly visible, and carefully recorded as a roughly circular or oval enclosure, on the first edition six-inch Ordnance Survey map of 1843. A century of agricultural pressure had reduced what was once a coherent earthwork to a low bank no more than about 30 centimetres above the interior, tapering to a simple scarp along the southern side, while the south-eastern portion has been lost entirely.

The remaining traces are subtle but legible to anyone who knows what to look for. The bank itself is around four metres wide in places, and in the south-western sector a probable fosse, the ditch that would originally have fronted the bank as part of the enclosure's boundary, can be inferred from a strip of lush, dark grass growth roughly 2.8 metres across. Rank or unusually green grass of this kind often signals a buried or infilled ditch, where soil disturbance and moisture retention produce markedly different vegetation from the surrounding pasture. The site sits on a break in a south-east-facing slope in rolling pastureland, and upslope to the north-north-east, a ringfort is visible on higher ground, a reminder that this kind of enclosed settlement was once a familiar feature of the landscape here. Enclosures of this type, distinct from the more clearly defined ringfort form, are not always easy to classify, and their function, whether as settlement, agricultural, or ceremonial spaces, is not always clear from surface evidence alone.