Excavations at Gloucester, 1968–1971: First Interim Report

Henry Hurst

doi:10.1017/S0003581500020138

Excavations at Gloucester, 1968–1971: First Interim Report

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 29 November 2011

Henry Hurst

Article contents

Summary
References

Get access

Rights & Permissions

Summary

The 1968–71 excavations have produced a large body of information bearing on Roman Gloucester's development from legionary fortress to chartered city. It has proved possible to correlate Roman building sequences in different parts of the city. A building period which may be associated with the foundation of the colonia has been extensively excavated. The Roman forum has been discovered in a position equivalent to that of the principia of a fortress. Knowledge of the city's defences in both Roman and later periods has been amplified by work on three sides of the Roman circuit. Late Saxon use of the Roman wall is suggested and late Saxon buildings fronting Southgate Street have been discovered. At 13–17 Berkeley Street the first extensive excavation of medieval levels in the city has revealed a length of street fronted by late eleventh–fourteenth-century buildings.

Type: Research Article
Information: The Antiquaries Journal , Volume 52 , Issue 1 , March 1972 , pp. 24 - 69

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003581500020138 [Opens in a new window]
Copyright: Copyright © The Society of Antiquaries of London 1972

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

^{page 24 note 1} Excluding the Field Archaeologist's salary.

^{page 28 note 1} Throughout this report the Roman alignment is referred to as if it lay north-south and east-west rather than north-east-south-west and south-east-north-west.

^{page 28 note 2} Their Roman origin had been investigated most recently by Mr.Hunter, A. G. in 1960, TBGJS lxxxvi (1967), 88 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 28 note 3} Fig. 3, after Hall and Pinnell's map of Gloucester (1780).

^{page 28 note 4} Part of the Roman wall in areas A and D had formerly been excavated by Bellows, John, CNFC vi (1877), 171 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 29 note 1} Kindly examined by Mrs. F. Wild as with all other samian from the excavation.

^{page 29 note 2} TBGAS lxxxi (1962), 10 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 29 note 3} Ibid, lxxxiv (1965), 15 ff.

^{page 29 note 4} Ibid. 16–17. The Claudian date they proposed has not, however, been upheld by recent discoveries.

^{page 31 note 1} Assuming its west wall to be the same width as the north and south walls.

^{page 31 note 2} TBGAS lxxxvi (1967), 92–3Google Scholar, fig. 1.

^{page 31 note 3} Ibid. 93.

^{page 31 note 4} Ibid. liii (1931), 267 ff.

^{page 31 note 5} Hunter argues that at 1–5 Kings Sq. (Ibid, lxxxvi, 93) stone tower and primary bank are contemporary, and cites the evidence of pottery from the south-east angle tower excavation in 1932 (Ibid, liii, 283) to date the towers to the colonia foundation. His excavation, however, showed that the turret north wall's foundation trench cut the rampart (op. cit. p. 93 and fig. 1, c). The 1932 pottery only gives a terminus post quern off. A.D. 80 and is in any case probably not a group since the construction trenches of the city wall and tower were not recognized in the excavation.

^{page 31 note 6} Neighbouring Cirencester being a good example (Antiq. Journ. xli, 63; xliv, 16; xlvii, 188 ff.). Gloucester may, however, have already been walled (below, p. 32).

^{page 31 note 7} Discussed below, p. 32. I am very grateful to Professors S. S. Frere and D. E. Strong for helping with the interpretation of this feature.

^{page 32 note 1} TBGAS lxxxvi (1967), 89 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 32 note 2} For a recent discussion of the date of town wall bastions see Frere, S. S., Britannia (1967), pp. 255–6Google Scholar.

^{page 32 note 3} TBGAS liii (1931), 275Google Scholar.

^{page 32 note 4} Above, p. 29.

^{page 32 note 5} J.R.S. xlvi (1956), 24Google Scholar; Arch. Journ. cxvii (1962), 50Google Scholar; Archaeologia, civ (forthcoming).

^{page 33 note 1} The original is in Gloucester City Library (65–54).

^{page 33 note 2} Calendar of the Records of the Corporation of Gloucester (1893), no. 59 (1487–8).

^{page 33 note 3} Map of Gloucestershire (1610).

^{page 33 note 4} MS. Cal. Close Rolls, 30, Henry III.

^{page 33 note 5} Cal. Pat. Rolls Henry VII, i, 46.

^{page 34 note 1} Corbet, J., An Historical Relation of the Military Government of the City of Gloucester in Bibliotheca Gloucestrensis (1825), p. 42Google Scholar.

^{page 34 note 2} Samuel Rudder, following the early eighteenth-century manuscript notes of Archdeacon Furney, says that the order was given by the Commissioners appointed for the regulation of corporations; History of Gloucestershire (1779), p. 87.

^{page 34 note 3} For example the south-east corner, described by Howitt (op. cit., below, p. 35, n. 1).

^{page 34 note 4} Antiq. Journ. xxix (1949), 200Google Scholar.

^{page 35 note 1} Howitt, G. Armstrong, Gloucester's Ancient Walls and Gatehouses (1890), p. 25Google Scholar.

^{page 35 note 2} I am grateful to Mr. P. A. Barker for his help in interpreting this section.

^{page 35 note 3} CNFC vi (1877), 171 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 35 note 4} TBGAS lvi (1934), 65 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 36 note 1} Possible metalling of this lane was found in Mrs. O'Neil's Friars’ Orchard excavation, TBGAS lxxxi (1962), 29Google Scholar.

^{page 37 note 1} Historia et Cartularium Monasterii Sancti Petri Gloucestriae (ed. Hart, 1863), i, 11Google Scholar.

^{page 37 note 2} Ibid. 81.

^{page 37 note 3} Mr. Christopher Brooke has shown (in Celt and Saxon, p. 263) that the account in the Abbey History (op. cit. 11) of the founding of the 1089 Abbey logically follows a passage which states that in 1088 Gloucester and the church of St. Peter were destroyed on account of the war between the magnates of England (op. cit. 80). Either this or the building of the Norman castle could have occasioned the abandonment of the old defensive line.

^{page 38 note 1} Dr. I. F. Smith kindly examined this material.

^{page 39 note 1} Described in detail by Sir Ian Richmond in Studies in Building History (ed. Jope, 1961), pp. 19 ff.

^{page 40 note 1} Cf. Period 2, 10 Eastgate Street, below, p. 50.

^{page 40 note 2} The title is from a tombstone found at Rome, C.I.L. vi, 3346Google Scholar.

^{page 41 note 1} Alternatively, these features could belong to a secondary phase of Period 2. The plans, figs. 8 and 9, show both interpretations.

^{page 42 note 1} Cf., for example, the House of the Nereids at Volubilis (Encyclopedia Classica, vol. x, pi. 169Google Scholar).

^{page 42 note 2} Trans. Essex. Arch. Soc. xvi, 7 ffGoogle Scholar. I am indebted to Mr. J. S. Wacher for pointing this out.

^{page 43 note 1} For example, at 33 Southgate Street, a coin of Valens was found beneath a mosaic pavement (information, Mr. J. F. Rhodes), at 63–71 North-gate Street, the monumental building continued in use well into the fourth-century or later (below, p. 65), and at 11–17 Southgate Street there is a considerable late Saxon building sequence (below, p. 58).

^{page 43 note 2} North defences, above, p. 3 5; east defences, below, p. 52.

^{page 44 note 1} i.e. south of Building M9 and north of Buildings M3 and M6.

^{page 44 note 2} e.g. Building J at Thetford (Med. Arch, xi (1967), 192Google Scholar and fig. 52).

^{page 44 note 3} Oxoniensia, xxiii (1958), 9 if.Google Scholar, where they are discussed with references to other sites.

^{page 48 note 1} Cole, Robert, Rental of all the Houses in Gloucester, 1455 (ed. Stevenson, W. H., 1890), p. 40Google Scholar.

^{page 49 note 1} An example is the white crushed oolite streak slightly over halfway up the section shown in pi. via.

^{page 49 note 2} Op. cit. 40.

^{page 49 note 3} Ibid. 20 ff.

^{page 53 note 1} Periods 1a, 1b, and 2 on this site are the same as Periods 1a, 1b, and 2 in the table on p. 38. Apart from these the period numbers used relate to this site only.

^{page 53 note 2} Dr. C. R. Oyler, M.R.C.P., F.R.C.S., kindly reported on this.

^{page 53 note 3} I am indebted to Mrs. F. Wild for her report.

^{page 55 note 1} Above, pp. 39–40.

^{page 55 note 2} I am indebted to Professors B. W. Cunliffe, S. S. Frere, and D. E. Strong and Mr. M. W. C. Hassall, who visited the site and made many helpful suggestions about the interpretation of this structure.

^{page 55 note 3} Gloucestershire Extracts, 1878, p. 477, quoted in L. E. W. O. Fullbrook-Leggatt, Roman Gloucester (1968), p. 36. The position of 24–6 Southgate Street is shown in fig. 6.

^{page 57 note 1} Four fragments were analysed by the Research Laboratory of the British Museum.

^{page 57 note 2} Antiquités Africaines, 3 (1969), 128Google Scholar.

^{page 57 note 3} The street on the south was established by excavations in 1966–7 (J.R.S. lvii, 194–5Google Scholar); that on the east by Mr. Rhodes's observations of service duct trenches and the present excavation; that on the north by fixing the likely position of the east and west gates (above, pp. 28, 35); and that on the west by excavation at the rear of 22 Southgate Street in 1969 (below, p. 62).

^{page 57 note 4} Quoted by Fullbrook-Leggatt, op. cit. 33.

^{page 57 note 5} He was, however, describing what he had seen over thirty years previously.

^{page 58 note 1} Quoted by Fullbrook-Leggatt, op. cit. 36.

^{page 58 note 2} TBGAS lxxx (1962), 59 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 58 note 3} Ibid, lxxii (1953), 153.

^{page 58 note 4} Archaeologia, lxi (1909), 569 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 58 note 5} It is hoped that the specialist analysis of this deposit may allow a more precise description.

^{page 61 note 1} Mr. J. G. Hurst kindly examined this material.

^{page 61 note 2} I am indebted to Mr. I. H. Goodall for this information. The stirrup, which was unstratified, is similar to two found in the late ninth-early tenth-century boat-burial at Balladoole (G. Bersu and D. M. Wilson, Three Viking Graves in the Isle of Man (1966), 29 ff., fig. 19). The spur terminal has Viking parallels but is of a type which lasted into the twelfth-century (Archaeologia, xcvii (1959), 76, fig. 8, 5–7Google Scholar; Oxoniensia, xxi (1956), 38–40Google Scholar, fig. 13, 3–5).

^{page 62 note 1} Gloucester Corporation Records (op. cit.), no. 1218. Mr. Fullbrook-Leggatt kindly pointed out this reference.

^{page 62 note 2} Ibid.14.

^{page 62 note 3} As it obstructed the foundation of the new building, it had to be moved from its site. The Midland Bank Ltd. generously paid the cost of moving it to the City Museum.

^{page 62 note 4} Mainly by the contractors before the column's removal.

^{page 63 note 1} Contemporary accounts of these discoveries are quoted in Fullbrook-Leggatt, op. cit. 42–3. J. Clarke's suggestion [Architectural History of Gloucester (1860), p. 52) that the columns belonged to a building 180 feet long is based on the assumption that the mosaic at 22 Westgate Street was part of the same structure.

^{page 63 note 2} 16 Westgate Street: Antiq. Journ. xxix (1949), 201 ff.Google Scholar; 22 Westgate Street: Clarke, op. cit. 6.

^{page 63 note 3} Arch. Journ. ciii (1946), 71Google Scholar.

^{page 63 note 4} Counsel, G. W., History and Description of the City of Gloucester (1829), p. 208Google Scholar, quoted by Fullbrook-Leggatt, op. cit. 35–6.

^{page 63 note 5} TBGAS xix (1894–5), 142 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 63 note 6} Ibid, lxxxvii (1968), 56 ff.

^{page 63 note 7} Gloucestershire Extracts, 1880, p. 116, quoted by Fullbrook-Leggatt, op. cit. 58.

^{page 63 note 8} Fullbrook-Leggatt, op. cit. 58–9.

^{page 65 note 1} Professor F. Hodson, F.G.S., kindly analysed the metal. The head is being studied by Dr. Anne Ross and will shordy be published in detail.

^{page 65 note 2} I am indebted to Professor Donald Strong for this suggestion.

^{page 66 note 1} Op. cit. 80.

^{page 66 note 2} Observations were carried out by Messrs. A. P. Garrod and T. W. T. Tatton-Brown.

^{page 66 note 3} Recorded by Mr. J. F. Rhodes.

^{page 66 note 4} Plans of Timgad in J. Lassus, Visite à Timgad (1969).

^{page 66 note 5} I am indebted to Mr. M. W. C. Hassall for pointing this out.

^{page 67 note 1} Antiq. Journ. xliv (1964), 215 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 67 note 2} TBGAS iv (1879–1880), 91Google Scholar.

^{page 68 note 1} Antiq. Journ. li (1971), 70 ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 68 note 2} Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, anno 918.

^{page 68 note 3} e.g. Tamworth, Stafford, Warwick: Ibid. 913–14.

^{page 68 note 4} For the use of the terms globular and South Spanish see Peacock, D. P. S., ‘Roman Amphorae in Pre-Roman Britain’ in D., Hill and M., Jesson (eds.) (1972), The Iron Age and Its Hill-Forts, Southampton.Google Scholar

^{page 68 note 5} Zevi, F. and Tchernia, A., ‘Amphores de Byzacène au Bas Empire’, Antiquités Africaines, 3 (1969), 173–214CrossRef Google Scholar.

Article contents

Excavations at Gloucester, 1968–1971: First Interim Report

Summary

Access options

References

Save article to Kindle

Save article to Dropbox

Save article to Google Drive

Reply to: Submit a response

Your details

You have entered the maximum number of contributors

Conflicting interests