No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 November 2011
In the early autumn of the year 1903 it became known that during the demolition of Newgate Prison, and while the soil was being excavated for fresh foundations, important remains of the Eoman wall of London had gradually come to light.
On the 7th of October, when I first visited the scene, a piece about 20 feet long was visible, the soil to the south of it being completely dug out at the end and on each side to a depth of some feet below the level of the foundations. The beautiful yellow sand and gravel beneath were exposed to sight, and there was a fine opportunity of studying the structure, which, being more or less isolated and standing up to a considerable height, formed a picturesque object. (See Plate XV.) What made this view of the wall exceptionally interesting was that here one could see not only a transverse section, but the inner and the outer face of the wall, the former in excellent condition.
page 127 note a Almost all the tiles were of a fine red colour, a few of them being burnt almost a blue-black in the middle. Here and there a yellowish one was observed.
page 127 note b In The Builder for October 20th, 1900, an analysis is given of two samples of mortar taken from the interior of the Roman wall found at the back of the Old Bailey. In all probability this mortar was precisely similar to that used at Newgate.
page 129 note a These remarks apply only to the structure of the wall itself. The towers, bastions, and gates need further consideration. Fitzstephen, who wrote in the reign of Henry II., speaks of a wall as having existed along the river front, which had disappeared long before. Of this wall remains seem to have been found in modern times by Mr. C. Roach Smith and others. Their accounts make itappear to have differed very much from the rest. The primitive site of London is not referred to in this paper.
page 131 note a Another measurement made it 16 feet south of the line of street. The fact that the wall was here recessed accounts for the difference.
page 131 note b A fragment of the plinth now in my possession, with pink mortar adhering to it, was compared with those specimens at the Geological Museum which it most resembled. Its structure was identical with that of the Barnack rag, but it was rather yellower. This is a lower oolite, known to have been used by the Romans.
page 135 note a Transactions of the London and Middlesex Archæological Society, N.S. i. 356Google Scholar.
page 135 note b “Pro emenda terra juxta Niwegata ad faciendam Gaiolam. lxvi.s. & viii.d. per breve Regis. Et in Operatione ejusdem Gaiole. xxxvj.li. & xi.d. per idem breve per visum Galfridi carpentarii et Ricardi carpentarii et Radulfi fabri.” (I am indebted for this extract to Mr. W. H. St. John Hope.) Ludgate and the postern of Cripplegate were also at times used as prisons.
page 135 note c See Fœdera, x. 287–88Google Scholar, and Rot. Parl. iv. 370Google Scholar.
page 136 note a Archaeologia, lii. 615Google Scholar, and Plate XV.
page 138 note a Proceedings, 2nd S. xviii. 355Google Scholar.
page 142 note a Archæological Journal, lx. 177Google Scholar.