X.—Recent Discoveries in connexion with Roman London

Philip Norman; Francis W. Reader

doi:10.1017/S0261340900009401

X.—Recent Discoveries in connexion with Roman London

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 November 2011

Philip Norman and

Francis W. Reader

Article contents

Extract
References

Get access

Extract

Early in January, 1905, the street called London Wall was opened by the Post Office authorities for the purpose of laying telephone mains. Operations were begun at Moorgate Street and were carried in an easterly direction, a deep trench being dug in the middle of the roadway. The excavations had extended past Salisbury House as far as Circus Place, when it was noticed that among the débris thrown at the side of the road were quantities of ragstone and Roman tile, showing clearly that the city wall was being cut into.

Type: Research Article
Information: Archaeologia , Volume 60 , Issue 1 , 1906 , pp. 169 - 250

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261340900009401 [Opens in a new window]
Copyright: Copyright © The Society of Antiquaries of London 1906

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 169 note a} The present church of St. Alphage, on the opposite side of the way, is now threatened with destruction. It has special interest from the fact that the lower stage of the tower is medieval, having formed part of the chapel of Elsing 'Spital. In the Architectural Review for March, 1907, there is a note on it by Mr. Norman with measured drawings.

^{page 175 note a} Stow's, Survey of London, 1598, p. 13Google Scholar (Thoms's edition is referred to throughout this paper) Maitland's History of London (1739), 506.

^{page 175 note b} Archæological Journal, lx. 181Google Scholar.

^{page 177 note a} Anthropological Review, v. 71Google Scholar.

^{page 177 note b} Archaeologia, xxix, 152, plate xvii. fig. 7Google Scholar.

^{page 177 note c} A Descriptive Catalogue of the Antiquities found in the Excavations at the New Royal Exchange (1848), xxxiGoogle Scholar.

^{page 178 note a} Appendix I.

^{page 179 note a} Descriptio nobilissimæ civitatis Jjondoniæ.

^{page 179 note b} Stow's Survey of London, 1598.

^{page 179 note c} Stow's Chronicle, edited by E. Howes, 1615. This was originally published as Stow's Annales in 1580.

^{page 180 note a} Archæological Journal, i. 111Google Scholar.

^{page 180 note b} Archaeologia, xxix. 153Google Scholar.

^{page 180 note c} Catalogue of the Antiquities found in the Excavations at the New Royal Exchange, xxixGoogle Scholar.

^{page 181 note a} Catalogue of the Antiquities found in the Excavations at the New Royal Exchange, xxvii.Google Scholar

^{page 181 note b} Tacitus, , Annales, lib. xiv. sect, xxxiii. “Si quos imbellis sexus ant fessa ætas, vel loci dulcedo attinuerat, ab hoste opprossi sunt.”Google Scholar

^{page 183 note a} Of him it is said by Ammianus Marcellinus (lib. xxviii. c. 3): “In integrum restituit oivitates et castra, multiplicibus quidem damnis afflicta, sed ad quietem temporis longi fundata.”

^{page 185 note a} Stow's, Survey of London, 123.Google Scholar

^{page 185 note b} Ibid, 159.

^{page 185 note a} At an excavation in Capel Court, our attention has lately been called by Mr. Davies, clerk of the works there, to a remarkable footing of puddled clay under a medieval wall composed of chalk or clunch. In this case, however, no flints were associated with it. As far as we are aware, no other instance of the kind has come to light in the City.

^{page 187 note a} On a Bastion of London Wall, 11.

^{page 187 note b} This disused graveyard is on or by the site of the church of St. Augustine Papey, suppressed in the reign of King Edward VI. Stow, in 1598, says that the plot of ground was then already “letten by the chamberlain of London to the parish of St. Martin's Oteswich to be a churchyard or burying-place for the dead.” The church of that name, which stood on the south side of the juncture of Threadneedle Street with Bishopsgate Street, escaped the Great Fire, but after a rebuilding towards the end of the eighteenth century was demolished in 1874.

^{page 190 note a} Survey of London, 8.

^{page 194 note a} Journal of the British Archaeological Association, xxxvi. 163Google Scholar.

^{page 195 note a} Illustrations of Roman London, 18.

^{page 195 note b} Knight's, London, 1841 (Chapter on Roman London by Gr. L. Craik), i. 163, 164.Google Scholar

^{page 195 note c} Journal of the British Archaeological Association, xxxvi. 463, 464Google Scholar.

^{page 195 note d} Archaeologia, xl. 295.Google Scholar

^{page 196 note a} Journal of the British Archaeological Association, xxxvi. 464, and xxxvii. 280Google Scholar.

^{page 197 note a} Stow's, Survey, 62.Google Scholar

^{page 198 note a} Stow's, Survey, 62.Google Scholar

^{page 199 note a} Catalogue of the Antiquities found in the Excavations at the New Royal Exchange, xxviGoogle Scholar

^{page 200 note a} Strype's, Stow, 1720, book ii. 108.Google Scholar

^{page 200 note b} London Past and Present, i. 277.Google Scholar

^{page 201 note a} George Dance, who designed the new church, was one of the foundation members of the Royal Academy and son of the city surveyor of the same name who built the Mansion House. He himself designed the famous Newgate Prison so lately pulled down. In the winter exhibition of 1906–7 at Burlington House were twenty portraits by him in black and red chalk of early members of the Royal Academy.

^{page 202 note a} Stow's, Survey, 8.Google Scholar

^{page 203 note a} Archaeologia, lii. 615Google Scholar.

^{page 203 note b} Stow's, Survey, 8.Google Scholar

^{page 203 note c} Catalogue of the Antiquities found in the Excavations at the New Royal Exchange, xxx.Google Scholar

^{page 206 note a} Although but indirectly connected with Roman London, we hope that this contribution towards a record of the later City Ditch will not be thought superfluous.

^{page 210 note a} Archaeologia, lix. 129Google Scholar.

^{page 210 note b} Mr. Loftus Brock, in describing a piece of the City wall near Moorgate, says: “There was no pounded brick except in one part, where a mass of the concrete formed of pounded red brick and evidently taken from some other building, was built tip into the wall.” Journal of the, British Archæological Association, xxxviii. 424–26.

^{page 211 note a} The Antiquary (Dec. 1880), iii. 64.Google Scholar

^{page 212 note a} Archaeologia, lii. 615.Google Scholar

^{page 212 note b} Archæological Journal, lx. 144Google Scholar.

^{page 215 note a} Smith's, RoachCollectanea Antiqua, ii. 1–24Google Scholar; Wright's, Celt, Roman, and Saxon, 3rd edition, 199–203.Google Scholar

^{page 217 note a} Catalogue of the Antiquities found in the Excavations of the New Royal Exchange, 87.Google Scholar

^{page 217 note b} Roman Antiquities, National Safe Deposit Company's Premises, 79.Google Scholar

^{page 217 note c} Mr. H. C. Coote's Paper is in Archaeologia, xli. 283–324. It contains more than a dozen references to the use of pine-nuts by the Romans. They are mentioned in the treatise called after Apicius as flavouring the sauces of boiled fish, of boiled veal, of boiled venison, of stuffed hare, of roast boar, of stuffed pig, of boiled goose, of boiled pigeon, of guinea fowl, etc.

^{page 218 note a} Archaeological Journal, lii. 198. The Sun Office stands partly on the site of the church of St. Bartholomew by the Exchange, and was erected in 1842 from the designs of C. R. Cockerell, R.A. A story has, however, since been added. During the excavations of 1895 remains of the medieval church came to light, but of these we have no authentic record.

^{page 219 note a} Middleton, J. H., Ancient Rome in 1888, 29.Google Scholar

^{page 221 note a} Journal of the British Archæological Association, i. 45Google Scholar.

^{page 221 note b} Archaeologia, xl. 49Google Scholar.

^{page 223 note a} Catalogue of the Antiquities found in the Excavations at the New Royal Exchange, xii.Google Scholar

^{page 223 note b} Illustrations of Roman London, 14Google Scholar; London and Middlesex Archæological Society's Transactions, iii. 75 (1870)Google Scholar; Archaeologia, xxix. 157Google Scholar.

^{page 223 note c} Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of London, 2nd S. xiv. 6–8.Google Scholar

^{page 226 note a} Catalogue of the Antiquities found in the Excavations at the New Royal Exchange, xii.Google Scholar

^{page 226 note b} London and Middlesex Archæological Society's Transactions.

^{page 226 note c} The Builder (5th October, 1889), lvii. 236.Google Scholar

^{page 226 note d} Archaeologia, xxxix. 491–502Google Scholar; ibid. xxix. 145–166; Journal of the British Archæological Association, xxxvii. 84, 90, 91Google Scholar; ibid. xxiv. 75, 78; Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries, 2nd S. viii. 524, 528.Google Scholar

^{page 226 note e} Archaeologia, xxix. 154.Google Scholar

^{page 226 note f} Roman Antiquities, National Safe Deposit Company's Premises, 29.Google Scholar

^{page 227 note a} Catalogue of the Antiquities found in the Excavations at the New Royal Exchange, xii.Google Scholar

^{page 227 note b} Kelsey's, Description of the Sewers, 100.Google Scholar

^{page 228 note a} Brace's, Roman Wall, 3rd edition, 144.Google Scholar

^{page 228 note b} Archaeologia, xxviii. 38–46Google Scholar; ibid. xxix. 160–166; Illustrations of Roman London, 20, 21.Google Scholar

^{page 229 note a} It might be pointed out that in an earlier passage by Price than that already referred to, viz. in his account of the Roman Antiquities discovered on the Site of the National Safe Deposit Company's Premises, p. 19, he suggests that when the first stone bridge was finished in 1209 a new street was constructed “constituting the modern Fish Street Hill and Gracechurch Street,” and that “this new line appears to be referred to in a manuscript record of the quit-rents of London Bridge under the name of the ‘King's Road, called Brigge Street,’ and it is also called London Bridge Street in a record cited by Madox of the 52nd year of Henry III. 1268.”

^{page 229 note b} Faustina A. III. c. xliv. fo. 636.

^{page 230 note a} Catalogue of the Antiquities found in the Excavations at the New Royal Exchange, xxvii.Google Scholar

^{page 231 note a} Camden's, Britannia, edition of 1806, ii. 92.Google Scholar

^{page 234 note a} Anthropological Review, V. (1867), lxxi.Google Scholar

^{page 238 note a} The above notes have in part been kindly supplied by the editor of the Victoria County History.

^{page 240 note a} Proceedings of the Malacological Society, V. part 2 (July, 1902), 180.Google Scholar

^{page 246 note a} For further notices of these objects see Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries, 2nd S. iii. 413Google Scholar; Archæological Journal, lx. 198Google Scholar; Journal of the British Archæological Association, xxii. 94.Google Scholar

^{page 246 note b} Essex Review, xv. 182 (Oct. 1906).Google Scholar

^{page 246 note c} Trivia, i. 212 (1714).Google Scholar

Article contents

X.—Recent Discoveries in connexion with Roman London

Extract

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