¹ Marsden, P., The Roman Forum Site in London (London, 1987).Google Scholar

² The excavation was jointly directed by Simon O'Connor Thompson and Gustav Milne. All post-excavation and publication work has been supervised by G. Milne as Project Co-ordinator. The Level III reports for the excavation (site code LCT84) are located in the D.U.A. Archive, Museum of London.

³ G. Milne and P. Wootton, ‘Urban Development in Londinium, A.D. 50 to A.D. 100’, London Arch. (forthcoming); M. Samuel, ‘The 15th-century Garner and Leadenhall, London’, Antiq. Journ. (forthcoming); G. Milne (ed.) in prep., working title: The Roman Basilica and Medieval Market at Leadenhall, London (H.M.S.O.).

⁴ The archive reports for these Areas were written by the excavation supervisors: T. Brigham (S), G. Brown (W), G. and C. Milne (N), P. Wootton (D, M).

⁵ This information and all subsequent references to mortar composition are obtained from analysis by Professor John Evans of the Chemistry Department, North London Polytechnic.

⁶ Marsden, op. cit. (note 1), 52, fig. 42. In previous reconstructions, this buttress has always been shown as a cross-wall, subdividing the streetfront range (ibid., 26, fig. 26). Comparison of the 1986 excavation in the area with Hodge's plan, however, makes it clear that Hodge plotted the walls at the west end of the 1880–81 site too far to the north, probably due to their isolation from the main area of observation.

⁷ ‘4’6″ below g(eneral) l(evel). Inscribed bricks (loose) here similar to No. 12 Wall' No. 12 Wall was a brick buttress on the south wall of the Nave, which is now preserved in the basement of No. 90 Gracechurch Street. All Hodge references are taken from his original plan in the Guildhall Library (ref. 343LEA), unless stated otherwise.

⁸ The author has observed similar marks in the basilica at Caerwent.

⁹ Three sections were recorded in all, including one by Hodge (‘Blocks oversailing Bricks like an arch on red loose Mortar or Concrete’). The 1986 fragments employed different proportions of ragstone and tile, with mortar varying from yellow to red, pink and orange.

¹⁰ For this and other references regarding brick, tile and painted plaster, the author is indebted to the relevant D.U. A. report by Naomi Crowley: ‘Summary of Building Material from Excavations at Leadenhall Court: Basilica Levels’. Except where indicated, all the wall plaster from Leadenhall Court was recovered loose from material deposited during alterations to the Basilica.

¹¹ See Marsden, op. cit. (note 1), 43, fig. 28.

¹² ibid., 51, fig. 41 ‘At M Wall’ (a medieval foundation in the centre of Room 15) and 50, fig. 40 ‘At Arch C’ (against the east wall of the Apse, in the centre of the curve). The section drawings published in Marsden (pp. 50–1) are accurate reproductions of Hodge's original watercolours, which are stored with his site plan in the Guildhall Library.

¹³ Merrifield, R., The Roman City of London (London, 1965).Google Scholar Hodge described it on his plan as a ‘…Rag wall Dark brown mortar 3′3″ under g.l.'. Miller made a note in the same position ‘this like a buttress on a 5'A’ wall…’ (Marsden, op. cit. (note 1), fig. 43); he does not appear to have drawn the feature, but his measurement tallied with Hodge's plan.

¹⁴ Miller recorded 2.25″ (60 mm) of in situ plaster (Marsden, op. cit. (note 1), 55, fig. 45, Wall No. 9), and Hodge showed the same in a section (ibid., 45, fig. 31, Wall No. 8). The plaster is not mentioned in Marsden's discussion of the Apse (ibid., 52–3).

¹⁵ In situ painted plaster has also been recorded in the room immediately to the west, beneath Gracechurch Street. This had yellow panels with a black border, on a yellow ground with touches of red (ibid., 53–60).

¹⁶ On-site identification only.

¹⁷ Marsden, op. cit. (note 1), 42ff. Structural changes recorded elsewhere in the Basilica and Forum can probably be ascribed to this phase, but lie outside the scope of the present summary.

¹⁸ The brick superstructure of a second pier and the stone plinth of a third partially survived at the western end of the Nave at No. 52 Cornhill (Dunning, in ibid., 82–5).

¹⁹ Wall 9/11 was described: ‘As Q no brick 4′6″ under g(eneral) l(evel)' (but N.B. in Marsden, op. cit. (note 1), 52, fig. 42) the same note wrongly reads ‘As Q in brick …’). Q, a large mass of masonry to the east on the line of Wall 9/10, comprised ‘Black Boulder stones like flints a course of R(oman) bricks and brown mortar…’. The position of Q, halfway along Wall 9/10, would have been a reasonable place to expect a doorway.

²⁰ The fire was first recognised in a watching brief carried out by the author at Nos. 1–2 Gracechurch St in 1984 (Museum of London DUA Archive, site code GCH84). It can in retrospect be identified as a ‘Red, soft clay seam…’ in one of Hodge's sections located at the east end of the Nave (North Excavation West) and at No. 52 Cornhill in 1930, where its ‘ashes’ were redeposited as levelling material (Marsden, op. cit. (note 1), 82–5). It also appeared in some of the Gracechurch Street Tunnel sections as ‘trample’ beneath the ‘thick mortar floor’ (ibid., 58–9, figs. 49–50).

²¹ This was probably the origin of the plaster now in the British Museum, which was red with green foliage (Royal Commission on Historical Monuments, Roman London, 127); a leafy stem is also on display at the Museum of London. These pieces are presumably to be identified with a note made by Hodge on his plan in the Antechamber, referring to the collection of some loose wall plaster.

²² This feature resembles the two aediculae from Room 31, Insula XIV at Verulamium although less well-constructed. See Frere, S.S., Verulamium Excavations I (London, 1972), 57–60.Google Scholar

²³ Marsden, op. cit. (note 1), 49–50.

²⁴ ‘At M Wall’, ibid., 51, fig. 41.

²⁵ ‘At M Wall’, ibid., 51, fig. 41.

²⁶ ‘North Excavation W(est)’, ibid., 51, fig. 41.

²⁷ Part of an opus spicatum floor recorded by both Hodge and Miller at the south end of the Eastern Portico, has recently been excavated further north at 1–2 Whittington Avenue (pers. comm. G. Brown, B. Pye).

²⁸ Marsden, op. cit. (note 1), 59, fig. 50.9. The tile foundation, ifit continued, lay south of the recorded section.

²⁹ In section ‘North Excavation W(est)’.

³⁰ In section ‘At M Wall’.

³¹ In section ‘At Arch C’ (Marsden, op. cit. (note 1), 50, fig. 40).

³² Information obtained from the site notebooks of the Gracechurch Street Tunnel excavation (Museum of London, DUA site code GST77. Also Marsden, op. cit. (note 1), 59, fig. 50.9, although N.B. the layer descriptions here are at variance with the original field records).

³³ This can be confirmed from a site as far west as 68 Cornhill (summarised in Marsden, op. cit. (note 1), 87–9).

³⁴ Information from the Gracechurch Street Tunnel archive. Also Marsden, op. cit. (note 1)., 59, fig. 50.10.

³⁵ In section ‘South Excavation W(est)’, ibid., 50, fig. 40.

³⁶ ibid., 45, fig. 31 (Walls 4E, 8).

³⁷ ibid., 44, fig. 29 (Wall 12).

³⁸ The lower portion was recorded in the Gracechurch Street Tunnel in 1977, and was of standard construction (ibid., 53–60). The brickwork above comprised seven courses of tiles.

³⁹ Walls apparently postdating the Basilica, but on the same alignment were recorded at 52 Cornhill (ibid., 83, fig. 63). These walls also survived to a higher level.

⁴⁰ ibid., 73–4.

⁴¹ Neal, D.S. in Drury, P.J. (ed.), Structural Reconstruction BAR no (1982), 157.Google Scholar

⁴² Marsden, op. cit. (note 1), 27.

⁴³ Vitruvius, The Ten Books on Architecture, VII.I. 1–7.

⁴⁴ In a note next to the foundation, Hodge referred to ‘Arch stones Rag wall Dark brown mortar 3′3″ under g.l.’.

⁴⁵ Vitruvius, op. cit. (note 43), VI.VIII.7.

⁴⁶ R. Krautheimer, Early Christian and Byzantine Architecture (revised edn., 1986), 42.

⁴⁷ This room was recorded in 1848–49, 1922, and again in 1977 (Marsden, op. cit. (note 1), 53–60). It was later subdivided, one of the new sub-rooms being given a tessellated floor at a raised level. This suggests that the room may have had a higher status than normal, possibly acting as an antechamber for the aedes.

⁴⁸ T. Brigham, ‘The Late Roman Waterfront in London’, this volume, 99–183.

⁴⁹ C. Hill, M. Millett and T. Blagg, The Roman Riverside and Monumental Arch in London, L.A.M.A.S. Special Paper No. 3 (1980).

⁵⁰ A similar survival has been noted in the Baths Basilica complex at Wroxeter, where the nave and aisles were demolished, leaving the apse area standing. The street which adjoined the basilica was in that case blocked off and turned into a pedestrian area. (Barker, P. in Casey, P.J. (ed.), The End of Roman Britain BAR 71 (1979), 175–81).Google Scholar