Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T16:58:34.464Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Recent Excavations of a Cemetery of Londinium

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 November 2011

Bruno Barber ,
David Bowsher  and
Ken Whittaker
Bruno Barber
Affiliation:
Department of Greater London Archaeology, Museum of London
David Bowsher
Affiliation:
Department of Greater London Archaeology, Museum of London
Ken Whittaker
Affiliation:
Department of Greater London Archaeology, Museum of London
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Since 1983 the Museum of London's Department of Greater London Archaeology has completed nine rescue excavations (HGS. I and 2) and numerous watching briefs in advance of redevelopment within the area of the Roman cemetery to the east of the City of London. The excavations have uncovered 104 cremations and 575 inhumations, dating from the first to the fifth centuries A.D. This article is intended to make known some of the initial results in advance of full publication.

The cemetery lay on a gravel terrace 600–700 m north of the River Thames. The geology of the area consists of sands and gravels, locally overlain by brickearth. The cemetery was typical of urban Roman cemeteries, sited beyond the city limits and adjacent to a road from the city. It extended at least 600 m to the east of the city wall and covered an area of over 16.5 ha.

Type
Articles
Information
Britannia , Volume 21 , November 1990 , pp. 1 - 12
Copyright
Copyright © Bruno Barber and David Bowsher 1990. Exclusive Licence to Publish: The Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies

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

1 Ellis, R., London Arch, v (1985), 115–21Google Scholar; Haynes, S., Archaeological excavations at 65–75 Mansell Street. Unpublished archive report, Museum of London (1988)Google Scholar

Key to site codes used in text:-

ETN88 East Tenter Street, E1

HAY86 13 Haydon Street, EC3

HOO88 Hooper Street, E1

MNL88 65–73 Mansell Street, E1

MSL87 49–55 Mansell Street, E1

MST87 7–43 Mansell Street, E1

SCS83 9 St Clare St., EC3

TTL85 The Three Lords, 27 Minones, EC3

WTN84 West Tenter Street, E1

2 Waldron, T., ‘The relative survival of the human skeleton: implications for palaeopathology’ in Boddington, A.et al. (eds.), Death, decay and reconstruction (Manchester, 1987).Google Scholar This paper refers specifically to WTN84. Other papers in this volume also deal with this complex matter.

3 Whytehead, R., ‘The excavation of an area within a Roman cemetery at West Tenter Street, London E1’, Trans. London and Middx. Arch. Soc. xxxvii (1986), 23–124Google Scholar , is the first of a series of publications planned on the cemetery area.

4 Bentley, D. and Pritchard, F., Trans. London and Middx. Arch. Soc. xxxiii (1982), 135–7.Google Scholar A similar sequence of activity was found at this site in a burial area to the north west of Londinium.

5 Barber, B. and Bowsher, D., Archaeological excavations at Hooper Street. Unpublished archive report, Museum of London (1989).Google Scholar

6 Whittaker, K., Archaeological excavations at 31–43 Mansell Street. Unpublished archive report, Museum of London (1989)Google Scholar ; Whittaker, K., Archaeological excavations at 55–59 Mansell Street. Unpublished archive report, Museum of London (forthcoming).Google Scholar

7 The chip-carved belt buckle (PL. 111) has been provisionally dated to the early fifth century.

8 Helen Rees, pers. comm.

9 Whytehead, op. cit. (note 6).

10 McWhirr, A., Viner, L. and Wells, C., The Romano-British cemetery at Cirencester (Cirencester, 1982), 99–100.Google Scholar

11 Wenham, L.P., The Romano-British cemetery at Trentholme Drive, York (London: HMSO, 1968), 21–6.Google Scholar A similar feature was found at this site.

12 Whytehead, op. cit. (note 6).

13 Whittaker, op. cit. (note 6).

14 Whytehead, op. cit. (note 6). At WTN84 analysis by J. Evans indicated that the material was recrystalised calcium carbonate, originally either quick or slaked lime, rather than ‘chalk’ or ‘plaster’. Depending on which form was used it would have the effect either of hastening the decay of soft tissue or of absorbing moisture (and odour) as the body began to putrefy. The samples from the other sites are awaiting analysis.

15 Ellis, op. cit. (note 1) and Whytehead, op. cit. (note 6).

16 Britannia xx (1989), 327, pl. xxiii.

17 Whittaker, op. cit. (note 6).

18 Whytehead, op. cit. (note 16).

19 Ellis, op. cit. (note 1).

20 Ucko, P., World Arch. i (1969), 262–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

21 Christine Jones, pers. comm.

22 Barber and Bowsher, op. cit. (note 5).

23 Wooldridge, K., Archaeological excavations at 13 Haydon Street. Unpublished archive report, Museum of London (1987).Google Scholar

24 Christine Jones, pers. comm.

25 Green, C., ‘The significance of plaster burials for the recognition of Christian cemeteries’ in Reece, R. (ed.), Burial in the Roman World, CBA Res. Rep 22 (1977).Google Scholar

26 Barber and Bowsher, op. cit. (note 5).

27 Simon James, pers. comm.

28 Simon James, pers. comm.

29 James and Whittaker (forthcoming).