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
The two centuries after the official withdrawal of the Romans from Britain are almost a blank in the history of the capital, and it is only fitting that the Society of Antiquaries of-London should discuss any new evidence of the city's condition during that period of transition. The picture has indeed been painted by a master-hand, but even John Richard Green's arguments are weakened by certain inconsistencies, and archaeology may be called in to give precision and completeness to his plan of Anglo-Saxon London. ‘That this early London’, he writes, ‘grew up on ground from which the Roman city had practically disappeared may be inferred from the change in the main line of communication which passed through the heart of each. This was the road which led from Newgate to the Bridge. In Roman London this seems to have struck through the city in a direct line from Newgate to a bridge in the neighbourhood of the present Budge Row. Of this road the two extremities survived in English London, one from the gate to the precincts of St. Paul, the other in the present Budge Row. But between these points all trace of it is lost’ For the Roman road shown in his map as crossing the Walbrook at Budge Row there is indeed more warrant than he was aware of. The road has been actually found near its middle point, and the Saxon churches along it suggest that it had not been obliterated in the centuries before the Norman Conquest.
page 229 note 1 Conquest of England(1899), ii, 169, and foot-note, p. 173Google Scholar.
page 229 note 2 Making of England(1897), i, 168Google Scholar.
page 230 note 1 London before the Conquest, p. 157.
page 231 note 1 Polychronicon (Rolls Series, vol. ii, pp. 46–7); see Proceedings, xxiii, 301Google Scholar.
page 231 note 2 For traces of the road between Shooter's Hill and Stangate, see Lethaby, , London before the Conquest, p. 57Google Scholar; and Surrey Archaeological Collections, xxviii, 147.
page 232 note 3 The latter is a recent find communicated by Mr. Lawrence, of the London Museum.
page 233 note 1 Corrected details in Proceedings, xxiii, 237Google Scholar.
page 233 note 2 Information from Mr. Lawrence, of the London Museum.
page 234 note 1 Proceedings, xxiv, 140 (map on p. 139)Google Scholar.
page 234 note 2 Whitaker, , Geology of London, i, 455Google Scholar.
page 234 note 3 According to Price, J. E., the Thames road extended via Thundersley and Hadleigh to Southend (Arch. Review, ii, 101Google Scholar), but had to run some distance inland.
page 234 note 4 According to Stow (Kingsford, i, 28; ii, 274), the Tower gate was the main exit on the east of London till 1190, when it became a postern and was superseded by Aldgate.
page 234 note 5 In view of the reputed milestones near St. Swithun's and at the Marble Arch, the suggestion may be hazarded that St. Paul's Stump, a medieval landmark at the angle of Old Change and Cannon Street, was a third survival. It is ½ mile from London Stone. For the Stump, see Simpson, W. Sparrow, St. Paul's Cathedral and Old City Life, 287Google Scholar; Leland, , Collectanea, i, p. lxxviGoogle Scholar; New Remarks of London (1732, Company of Parish Clerks), 68Google Scholar.
page 235 note 1 The Templars migrated here from Holborn in 1184, two centuries after the mention of Akeman Street in Ethelred's charter: the line might easily have been visible at the later date.
page 235 note 2 Arch. Journ., lxiii, 25Google Scholar.
page 235 note 3 Gilbert Crispin, 167 (Westminster ‘Domesday’, f. 80b).
page 235 note 4 Westminster Abbey and the Antiquities of the Coronation, 12.
page 236 note 1 Our Fellow Mr. J. G. Wood considers it a generic name, derived from gwaith-y-lleng (work of the legion), and so applicable to more than one Roman road (Proceedings, xxiv, 144).
page 236 note 2 Possibly held up by the massive walls in Laurence Pountney Lane, mentioned in Journ. Brit. Arch. Assoc, ii. 340, 345; V. C. H. London, i, 75.
page 236 note 3 The exact site of this is now known [Archaeologia, lxiii, pis. xlvii, lvi).
page 238 note 1 Conquest of England (1899), ii, 168Google Scholar.
page 238 note 2 V. C. H. London, i, 6, 22.
page 238 note 3 The north boundary touches, but does not follow, the supposed line of the Roman road; but the close-wall was not built till about 1109, just five centuries after the foundation of St. Paul's ( Simpson, W. Sparrow, History of Old St. Paul's, 62 and frontispiece)Google Scholar.
page 239 note 1 V. C. H. London, i, 168, figs. 31, 32; Arch. Journ., xlii, 252.
page 239 note 2 Though Ludgate itself may be medieval, the suggested road implies either an opening in the wall a little to the south (Pilgrim Street), or the existence of the road before the wall was built.
page 239 note 3 Possibly St. Faith's (at the east end of St. Paul's) is a fifth ( Green, J. R., Conquest of England (1899), ii, 171)Google Scholar.
page 239 note 4 Arch. Journ., li, 2.
page 239 note 5 Superimposed plan in Archaeologia, lxii, part i, pl. xiii, p. 94.
page 239 note 6 Lethaby, , London before the Conquest, 168, fig. 33Google Scholar; photographs of both faces in V. C. H. London, i, 169, fig. 19).
page 240 note 1 Mr. Page would add St. James Garlickhithe and St. Nicholas Olaf (St. Olaf). The former is on the east side of Garlick Hill, about 150 yards west of the site of St. Martin Vintry, and therefore in the same relation to the supposed Roman road. St. Nicholas stood east of St. Nicholas Cole Abbe)’, in what is now an open space in Queen Victoria Street at the south end of Friday Street and Bread Street, and not 200 yards south of the Roman road.
page 240 note 2 Conquest of England (1899), ii, 171Google Scholar.
page 240 note 3 An urn found in Nicholas Lane is incorrectly called sepulchral (Collectanea Antiqita, i, pl. xlix, fig. 3). Mr. Burkitt's account of it is as follows: ‘It was found about 16 ft. below the surface, in the immediate vicinity of some remains of Roman walls.… I removed the contents with care, and found a soft dark soapy substance, probably animal matter, with two bones of some small animal, and fragments of iron and lead, with charcoal and burnt clay.’
page 241 note 1 Journal of Roman Studies, vol. i, p. 149, note 3, commenting on V. C. H. London, i, 42, and Journ. Royal Soc. Arts, 16 Dec. 1910, p. 123Google Scholar.
page 241 note 2 Yorks. Arch, and Top. Soc. Trans., iv, 1 (plan of Ancient York); also in Arch. Journ., xxxi, 248.
page 241 note 3 Smith, H. E., Reliquiae Isurianae, pl. iiiGoogle Scholar.
page 241 note 4 A restoration is figured by Mr. Lethaby, , op. cit., p. 170, fig. 32Google Scholar, Whence V. C. H. London, i, 170, fig. 34. Mrs. J. R. Green in a note points out that St. Benet's or St. Benedict's recalls the fact that the Benedictine rule first began to make its way in England during Erkenwald's episcopate (Conquest of England(1899), ii, 171)Google Scholar.
page 241 note 5 Conquest of England(1899), ii, 178Google Scholar.
page 242 note 1 St. Augustine's at Canterbury was formerly dedicated to St. Peter and St. Paul; the change was made by Dunstan.
page 243 note 1 Vol. xlvi (1776), p. 169, ‘in one of the Wells Walks’; reproduced in Barratt's, Annals of Hampstead, p. 4Google Scholar, and in Park's, J. J.Topography and Natural History of Hampstead, p. 11Google Scholar. This site is now known as Gainsborough Gardens. Two coins of Aurelius, M. and Victorinus, have also been found on the Heath near Well Walk (Journ. Brit. Arch. Assoc, xxxviii, 216)Google Scholar.
page 243 note 2 MS. Minutes Soc. Antiq., xi, 109 (4th May 1769)Google Scholar.
page 243 note 3 The writer remembers seeing bricks made near the stream that now divides Hampstead and Highgate parishes, the clay being dug on the spot.
page 243 note 4 Wm. Howitt, Northern Heights of London, 121. When the entire depth of sand is removed, water is held up at the surface by the London clay.
page 245 note 1 Norden, John, Speculum Britanniae (edition of 1723), p. 15Google Scholar.
page 245 note 2 Walford, E., Greater London, i, 278Google Scholar.
page 245 note 3 See also London and Middlesex Arch. Soc, vi, 560. In the preparation of this and other plans much assistance has been given by our Fellow Mr. Emery Walker.
page 245 note 4 Birch, , Cartularium Saxonicum, iii, 634, no. 1309Google Scholar; Kemble, , Codex Diplomaticus, vi, 105, no. 1275Google Scholar.
page 246 note 1 Cooke, John, Map of the Manor and Parish of Hendon, 1796 (published by W. Faden)Google Scholar; and Wishaw's, FrancisMap of the whole Parish and Manor of Hendon, 1828 (with book of reference)Google Scholar.
page 247 note 1 Loftie, , History of London, vol. i; from London and Middlesex Arch. Soc. Trans., vi (1883), 272Google Scholar.
page 247 note 2 Gent. Mag., Aug. 1842, 144Google Scholar.
page 247 note 3 Collectanea Antiqua, i, 130, 135, 139, pl. xlviii A, fig. 1.Google Scholar
page 248 note 1 This idea probably arose from Roach Smith's description of the stone in his Catalogue of Roman Antiquities (1854), p. 4Google Scholar, no. 8: ‘Mr. Price could gather no information as to where it came from, but it appeared probable that it was brought from the City or near it for building purposes.’ The son of the discoverer ( Price, J. E., Safe Deposit, 11Google Scholar) states that A. J. Kempe, F.S.A., and his father were in favour of a local origin for the slab.
page 248 note 2 Archaeologia, xi, pl. ii, p. 48Google Scholar.
page 249 note 1 Catalogue, p. 107, no. 4Google ScholarPubMed; Corpus, vii, p. 21. On the retiarius, see Arch. Journ., lx, 319.Google Scholar
page 249 note 2 The tradition is not invalidated by the occurrence in Southwark of another Battle Bridge, which is known to have derived its name from the neighbouring town-house of the Abbot of Battle.
page 250 note 1 A square with sides of 200 ft. was the regulation size of a praetorium ( Jones, Stuart, Companion to Roman History, p. 227)Google Scholar.
page 250 note 2 Lewis, S. Jr, History and Topography of the Parish oj St. Mary, Islington (1842), 3, 335 (map at end)Google Scholar.
page 250 note 3 Trans. London and Middlesex Arch. Soc, i, 321.
page 250 note 4 As shown on Nelson's map of 1735.
page 250 note 5 Gent. Mag., Jan. 1824, p. 5.
page 250 note 6 This was another name of Reed Moat Field, north-west of White Conduit House ( Cough's, Camden (1806), vol. ii, p. 107Google Scholar; Bibl. Topog. Brit., ii, History and Antiquities of Canonbury, p. 3).
page 250 note 7 Gent. Mag., Jan. 1824, p. 58Google Scholar.
page 251 note 1 Hone, , Every Day Book, vol. ii, p. £1566Google Scholar; Nelson, , History of Islington (1823), £65 (with map of Islington dated 1735)Google Scholar.
page 251 note 2 Environs of London, iii, 126; for remarks on Stukeley's account of the Brill camp, see same vol., p. 343. The fortifications of 1642-3 are marked on G. Vertue's map of 1738 (Crace Collection Cat., p. 7, no. 39); see Quarterly Review, July 1880, p. 58.
page 252 note 1 Park, , History of Hampstead, p. 9Google Scholar: his authority, Dr. Gale, (Antonini Iter Britanniarum(1709), p. 64Google Scholar), says by way of comment that the military road from Brockley Hill divided into two branches below Hampstead; one entered London by Portpool and was seen clearly enough at Holborn Bridge when the Fleet channel was cleaned and widened after the Fire of 1666: it went by Watling Street (in the City) to its terminus at London Stone. The other branch ran to the west of Westminster, across the Thames and through the heart of Kent (quoting Higden but reversing his order). But Gale's reasons are insufficient. The Roman road was again seen at Holborn Bridge in 1750, and was required to continue the two roads from the east that joined at that point, but does not by any means indicate that there was a road through Portpool.
253 s1 V. C. H. London, i, 7, 126Google Scholar; Arch. Journ., lx, 204Google Scholar.
page 253 note 2 V. C. H. London, i, plan C, nos. 167–9, pp. 104, 134.Google Scholar
page 253 note 3 Proceedings, 2nd ser. ii, 352. A bridge in Wood Street is mentioned by Price, J. E. (Safe Deposit, 45)Google Scholar; but Maitland's statement cannot be traced. Vol. ii, p. 826 mentions a water-course in Cheapside.
page 253 note 4 V. C. H. London, i, 34.Google Scholar
page 254 note 1 Price, J. E., Safe Deposit (1873), 53, with planGoogle Scholar.
page 254 note 2 V.C.H. London, i, 6Google Scholar.
page 255 note 1 This interpretation was foreshadowed by Roach Smith in Archaeologia, xxix, 159Google Scholar.
page 255 note 2 Journal of Roman Studies, i, 145Google Scholar.
page 256 note 1 Archaeologia, xxiii, 118Google Scholar.
page 256 note 2 Proceedings, xxiii, 231Google Scholar.
page 258 note 1 Journal, iv, 79.Google Scholar The property of William Rhodes extended to the southern border of St. John's parish, Hackney (see map of parish, dated 1834, in British Museum).
page 257 note 2 London and Middlesex Arch. Soc. Trans., iii, 197Google Scholar.
page 257 note 3 Mr. Norman, Philip in Architectural Review, March 1917, 130Google Scholar; and Archaeologia, lx, 169. Our Fellow Mr. Clapham, in a note kindly communicated by Mr. Norman, states that near the west end of the enclosure there are traces, on the medieval superstructure of the wall, of the return of the chancel wall, marking the east end of the original church.
page 257 note 4 A minor point of some interest is the identity of Ealsegate, which Stow (Kingsford, i, 33 and ii, 274-5) took to be Cripplegate, but which Mr. W, H. Stevenson regards as Aldgate (English Historical Revieiv, xii, 491)Google Scholar. The original source, dating about 1095, is Memorials of St. Edmund's Abbey (Rolls Series, edited by Arnold, Thos.), and the editorial note on vol. i, p. 43Google Scholar is delightfully ambiguous: ‘Coming to London from Essex Egelwin would naturally enter the City by the eastern gate Aldgate.’ Did the case in question come under the rule, or was it an exception ? Another account of Egelwin's journey with Edmund's, St. body (Memorials, i, 121)Google Scholar mentions a miraculous crossing of the Lea by means of a broken bridge at Stratford. In that case Aldgate would have been the obvious gate of entry, and another legend gives Algate ( Horstman, , Nova Legenda Anglie, ii, 598Google Scholar), yet Stow and Lydgate say Cripplegate. Lives of the saints are not scientific history, and contradictions may be expected; but on the theorj’ of a Roman road all the way from Bury to London, Cripplegate would have been on the direct line. On the return journey a halt was made at Greenstead, the famous wooden church standing close to the line in question.
page 260 note 1 Other Essex roads are discussed by Price, J. E. in Archaeological Review, ii, 101Google Scholar; Journ. Brit. Arch. Assoc, iii, 318Google Scholar; Arch. Journ., xxxv, 80Google Scholar; V. C. H. Suffolk, i, 208Google Scholar, and Archaeologia, xiv, 70Google Scholar. For Stane Street, the Roman road running west from Colchester through Mark's Tey, Coggeshall, Braintree, Great Dunmow, and Bishop's Stortford, see Codrington, T., Roman Roads in Britain, 216Google Scholar.
page 261 note 1 Stow's Survey (Kingsford, ), i, 33Google Scholar. Moorgate was opened about 1415 to enable citizens to cross the marsh by means of causeways (ibid., p. 32).