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: 08 January 2012
From time to time excavations in the City of London, particularly in the region of King William Street and Lombard Street, have revealed at the base of the Roman deposits thick layers of bright red clay, containing burnt roofing-tiles, charred wood, etc., evidently the debris of timber and clay houses destroyed by fire. Hitherto little or no internal evidence for dating these layers has been forthcoming, and from their position it has usually been assumed that they result from the sack of the town by Boudicca. In recent years, however, the burnt layers have again been found in situ at a number of sites, and are now shown by the pottery contained in them to belong to two different periods, namely, the mid-first century and the early second century. It is necessary to recognize, therefore, that the Roman town suffered from extensive fires on two occasions.
page 48 note 1 R.C.H.M. Roman London, 32.
page 49 note 1 Hermet, La Graufesenque, pl. 4, 1.
page 49 note 2 Arch, lxxi, 92–6, figs. 61, 67, 69. The serrated leaves on fig. 61 occur on form 29 at Trier, stamped CRES[TIO].
page 50 note 1 Arch. Journ. lxxxvii, 287, fig. 28.
page 51 note 1 R.C.H.M. Roman London, 123.
page 51 note 2 Arch. lxxviii, 73, pl. xvi.
page 51 note 3 Ibid. lxvi, 270, fig. 25.
page 52 note 1 Arch. lxvi, 235.
page 52 note 2 J.R.S. xix, 200.
page 52 note 3 At first the pottery in this layer was kept separate according to depth, but the attempt was given up as useless, since pottery of different dates was hopelessly mixed. Early and late Samian occurred together at all depths, and in one instance late pieces were found at the base of the deposit.
page 53 note 1 Q. Waddington, Historical Notes on the Site of King William Street House, p. 6.
page 53 note 2 Part of a lamp, stamped EVCARPI on the base, probably came from this layer.
page 54 note 1 J.R.S. xxx, 173.
page 55 note 1 R.C.H.M. Roman London, 123.
page 55 note 2 Arch, lxvi, 265; lxxi, 57–60.
page 56 note 1 Arch. viii, 123–32.
page 56 note 2 J.R.S. xxvi, 255.
page 57 note 1 Ibid. xxiii, 205.
page 57 note 2 Ibid. xxvi, 255.
page 58 note 1 L.C.C. Survey of London, xv, part 2, 114; J.R.S. xxi, 239.
page 60 note 1 R.C.H.M. Roman London, 41, 127.
page 60 note 2 Arch. lxvi, 225, with reference to J.B.A.A. xxxvii, 90.
page 60 note 3 In this connexion mention may be made of the bronze head of Hadrian, recovered from the Thames near London Bridge, and fragments of statues found between the Basilica and the river (R.C.H.M. Roman London, 44, 121). The burning of the Forum and Basilica in the second century (or later) would readily account for this shattering of official statuary. Critical study of the fragments, such as Mr. I. A. Richmond has made of other bronzes (Antiq. Journ. xxiv, 5), might give interesting results.
page 60 note 4 In the early years of Hadrian's reign there was trouble in Britain, and the Ninth Legion met with disaster (Collingwood and Myres, Roman Britain and the English Settlements (1936), 129). Apparently there was a rising of the northern tribes, but the area affected may well have been far away from London. Moreover, the date (117 or a few years later) is too early, if the evidence of burnt Samian can be relied on to indicate a date for the fire within and not before the decade c. 120–30. The suggestion that the London fire may have been connected with the unsettled state of the province about this time is perhaps worth mentioning, even if only to be dismissed.
page 61 note 1 Recent evidence on the date of the Roman Town Wall is summarized by Mr. F. Cottrill in his chapter in London Wall through Eighteen Centuries (1937). In an excavation made since then the Wall is dated later than c. A.D. 115–25; Wall and fire thus belong to the same period, and it is really a case of doubt as to which came first. Interim reports on excavations of the Forum and Basilica are in J.R.S. xxi, 236; xxv, 215; xxvi, 254.
page 61 note 2 The archaeological potentialities of the reconstruction of London in the near future are vigorously urged by Dr. Wheeler, R. E. M. in ‘The Rebuilding of London’, Antiquity, xviii (1944). p. 151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
page 61 note 3 Abbreviations: B.M., British Museum; G.M., Guildhall Museum; L.M., London Museum.
In the B.M. are several fragments of burnt Samian of early date from London, but without precise localities. The numbers in Walters, Catalogue of Roman Pottery, are M 245, 296, 685, 727, 875, 1008, 1016, 1018, 1019, and 1020.
page 62 note 1 In the B.M. are about 20 fragments of burnt Samian of this date from London, but without precise localities. The numbers are M 1171, 1191, 1193, 1442, 1522, 1526, 1602, 1617, 1701, 1871, 1881, 2043, 2105, 2125, 2127, 2196, and 2229.
page 63 note 1 The majority of the figure-types are numbered after F. Oswald, Index of Figure-types on Terra Sigillata (1936–7). A few retain Déchelette's original numbers.
page 64 note 1 Knorr, Die Westpfälzischen Sigillata-Töpfereien von Blickweiler und Eschweiler Hof, textbild 23.
page 74 note 1 Knorr, Blickweiler und Eschweiler Hof, pl. xxii, 4, 5, 7.
page 76 note 1 e.g. Nassini, Grassini, and Neumann, ‘Sprechsaal’, Zeitschrift für die Keramischen, Glas- und verwandten Industrien (Coburg), lxv, 253 (1932).
page 77 note 1 Schwarz, F., Berg- u. hüttenmänn. Jahrbuch montan. Hochschule, lxxxiv, 128–31 (1936).Google Scholar
page 76 note 2 Lossen, F., Sprechsaal-Coburg, lxvi, 835 and 851 (1933)Google Scholar: also Germania, xxiii, 190 (1936).
